Vaccine Rag or Vaccine Tango

October, 31, 2022 | 6 Comments


  1. Tom Lehrer – Poisoning Pigeons in the Park…


    Tuesday, November 1, 2022



    A year ago Bourla tweeted his glee following a supposed 100% efficacy result for the Pfizer COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ after ‘Phase 3’ trials in South Africa. According to Bourla’s tweet, the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ had been 100% effective in preventing COVID-19 cases.

    It’s now common knowledge that the Pfizer mRNA injection does not prevent transmission. Large numbers of the vaxxed population, whether double, triple, or quadruple jabbed have nevertheless contracted COVID.

    Independent Australian journalist Avi Yemini questioned why Bourla’s Twitter account could still remain active after this blatant misinformation.

    Yemini’s tweet received strong support, with followers criticising the micro-blogging platform for permitting Bourla’s misinformation, as well as Pfizer. Pfizer’s has a well-documented long track record of misinformation and corruption, which has resulted in significant harm to millions of people.

    WATCH: A quick 10 month scientific trip with Pfizer.

    Daily Telegraph NZ
    April 23, 2022
    ‘Imagine, if you will, an industry that is hated even more than government. Within that industry, there is a corporation that has a reputation so low that even among their peers, they were ranked as the worst in 2016, 2017, and 2018. Now imagine you are told if you do not let that company inject an experimental drug into you, using a never before tried delivery system, you will lose your livelihood, freedom, and possibly your life. You are not in the twilight zone. It is 2021 and that corporation is Pfizer.’

    WATCH: Pfizer’s Shocking Cover-Up of Maddie De Garay


    Two sites stand out from the #pfizerdocuments randomization log as major anomalies….

    Site 1231 and Site 4444

    You are not going to believe this…..

    @AaronSiriSG @fynn_fan @ClareCraigPath @profnfenton

    WATCH: My video explaining the thread (Sites 1231 and 4444)

    “It’s the same guy!

    Was there fraud in the Pfizer trial? Without a doubt. The story of Maddie de Garay is a clear case of that. Brook Jackson has evidence of fraud; she has 17 lawyers working for her. If there wasn’t fraud, these lawyers wouldn’t be wasting their time.

    This new data on Site 1231/4444 looks suspicious to me. It looks too good to be true. But we can’t make the call without more information. Undoubtedly, the mainstream media will not look into this, Pfizer will remain silent, and Polack will be unreachable for comment.

    The lack of transparency should be troubling to everyone. That is the one thing we can say for sure.

    O Bio…

  2. Brook Jackson 

    Paging Fernando Polack. Fernando Polack He’s in really BIG BIG trouble!

    @VUMChealth @NEJM @pfizer

    Transcript (part)

    Radio Rivadavia interview, Argentina, conducted on May 25, 2022, the other woman speaking is the journalist Cristina Pérez, Pfizer Fraud Trial and Dr. Claudio Zin,

    Those who criticize Dr. Fernando Polack referring to corrupt practices Dr. Claudio Zin: I tell you that there is a dark plot behind this story, because in many cases of side effects during the research protocol, many cases, the side effects were not reported, so the Pfizer vaccine came out of the research protocols unscathed, research protocols made in phase three in Argentina for example, and now there is a deep investigation in the world of science about whether there were as many cases as suspected, if these cases were not reported as suspected, and if in that lack of reports personal is involved who is very marketer of the pfizer vaccine, Polack for example, there is an investigation in the making on a couple of cases of side effects that were not intentionally reported, I’ve been behind this issue for many months, you know, I once commented on it, but there will be very dark stories behind the pfizer vaccine.

    Enormous victory for Augusto Roux!

    Brook Jackson 

    The details of the clinical trial of the COVID-19 vaccine led by scientist Fernando Polack at the Military Hospital

    In dialogue with Infobae, Argentine Army Colonel Sergio Maldonado, director of the hospital in charge of carrying out the tests of the vaccine of the Pfizer and BioNTech laboratories against the coronavirus in Argentina, referred to the important study

    The infectologist Fernando Polack with Infobae: “Today it is no longer impossible to prevent or stop the coronavirus”

    ‘Polack in a red shirt with Pérez Marc and Libster toasting the results of the study.’


  3. “Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty”—Not

    Michael P Senger from The New Normal
    Mon, Oct 31, 8:21 PM (16 hours ago)
    Open in app or online

    Let’s not declare a pandemic amnesty. Let’s declare a real pandemic inquiry.
    OCT 31

    I’ll admit, I nearly spit out my coffee when I saw Brown Professor Emily Oster’s new headline in The Atlantic this morning. It’s the headline we’ve been waiting to see—and, in the revisionist, gaslighting style that’s become the journalistic norm on the response to Covid—it’s about the closest thing to an outright admission of guilt that we’ve seen since Covid began.
    Let’s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty
    We need to forgive one another for what we did and said when we were in the dark about COVID….
    10:41 AM ∙ Oct 31, 2022
    The article is about as pathetically transparent as it is self-serving. Gee, I wonder what Oster did and said during Covid for which she might want amnesty…

    There’s a lot wrong here. First, no, you don’t get to advocate policies that do extraordinary harm to others, against their wishes, then say “We didn’t know any better at the time!” Ignorance doesn’t work as an excuse when the policies involved abrogating your fellow citizens’ rights under an indefinite state of emergency, while censoring and canceling those who weren’t as ignorant. The inevitable result would be a society in which ignorance and obedience to the opinion of the mob would be the only safe position.

    Second, “amnesty,” being an act of forgiveness for past offenses, first requires an apology or act of repentance on the part of those who committed the offense. Not only has no such act of repentance been forthcoming, but in most cases, establishment voices like Oster’s have yet to stop advocating these same policies, much less admit they were wrong. With no accompanying act of contrition, these calls for “amnesty” in light of rapidly-shifting public opinion have a real ring of fascist leaders calling for “amnesty” after losing the War.

    Third, there’s some question as to whether Oster herself really did know better at the time. Like many other mainstream Covid voices, Oster had long been closely attuned to Covid data showing that these mandates did not work, yet she often seemed reluctant to share that data insofar as it contradicted the mainstream orthodoxy that mandates were necessary. In that sense, the policy prescriptions of Oster and those like her may have had less to do with ignorance than with cowardice, tribalism, and “following orders,” which can’t be considered acting “in good faith.”

    And that leads to the ultimate problem, from a legal perspective, with Oster’s call for “amnesty” for the advocacy of totalitarian policies during Covid: The implicit assumption that all those who advocated lockdowns, mandates, censorship, and an indefinite state of emergency, all the way up the chain of command, did so in good faith. If those who advocated these policies are simply presumed to have done so out of well-meaning ignorance, then any inquiry into the many oustanding questions as to the origin of these policies—and the underlying motivations of highest-level officials who promulgated them—is foreclosed.

    The implicit assumption is that, owing to their socioeconomic status, the superficial cutesiness of public health, and the panic surrounding the pandemic, all those who advocated these mandates must have done so in good faith. But this argument presupposes that the “pandemic” was a natural phenomenon, like a tsunami, which would have inevitably led to panic. On the contrary, studies have long shown that it was the mandates themselves that caused the public to panic, making them believe their chances of dying of Covid—which never had an overall infection fatality rate much higher than 0.2%—were hundreds of times greater than they really were. Further, there’s a growing mountain of evidence that the handful of key officials who led the initial push for unprecedented lockdowns and mandates did not, in fact, do so in good faith.

    Our institutions are in serious need of restoration after the incalculable damage that’s been done to them durig the response to Covid. But we forget, at our peril, that those institutions weren’t built with flowery words and good intentions. They were built with blood, sweat, and tears, by those who fought for them with their lives. Let’s not declare a pandemic amnesty. Let’s declare a real pandemic inquiry.

    Michael P Senger is an attorney and author of Snake Oil: How Xi Jinping Shut Down the World. Want to support my work? Get the book. Already got the book? Leave a quick review.

    The New Normal is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

  4. 1 of 1
    Hot off the presses! “Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics”

    Josh Guetzkow from Jackanapes Junction
    4:28 PM (31 minutes ago)

    Open in app or online
    Hot off the presses! “Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics”
    Our Paper Was Just Published in Minerva, A Springer Journal in Social Studies of Science
    NOV 1

    Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics
    Here’s a link to the paper, and a pdf is embedded down below. (But if you want to read it, please go to the link and download a pdf to show them how popular the article is.)


    “The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.”

    The paper was published in Minerva: A Review of Science, Learning and Policy. It is a well-respected journal in the sociological and historical study of science and knowledge, currently published by Springer.

    The paper was co-authored by myself, Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ety Elisha, Brian Martin and Natti Ronnel. (In some ways it is a follow-up piece to the past research we’ve done on censorship and suppression in vaccine science that I wrote about here.)

    It is based on in-depth interviews with scientists and doctors around the world who have faced censorship and suppression due to their views on COVID-19. Many of the people we interviewed for the study are undoubtedly familiar to anyone reading this post, but we maintain their anonymity in the paper. Although the current stark reality of censorship and suppression is also undoubtedly familiar to most people reading this, it will be news to many outside our circles, and we felt there would be value in having it documented and discussed in the peer-reviewed academic literature.

    Upgrade to paid

    Here is a pdf of the paper:

    Shir Raz Et Al 2022 Censorship And Suppr…
    612KB ∙ PDF File
    You can contrast this paper to a recent paper that was just published in the flagship journal of sociology, The American Sociological Review, to see what counts as cutting-edge sociology these days: “Online Conspiracy Groups: Micro-Bloggers, Bots, and Coronavirus Conspiracy Talk on Twitter”


    “Conspiracies are consequential and social, yet online conspiracy groups that consist of individuals (and bots) seeking to explain events or a system have been neglected in sociology. We extract conspiracy talk about the COVID-19 pandemic on Twitter and use the biterm topic model (BTM) to provide a descriptive baseline for the discursive and social structure of online conspiracy groups. We find that individuals enter these communities through a gateway conspiracy theory before proceeding to extreme theories, and humans adopt more diverse conspiracy theories than do bots. Event-history analyses show that individuals tweet new conspiracy theories, and tweet inconsistent theories simultaneously, when they face a threat posed by a rising COVID-19 case rate and receive attention from others via retweets. By contrast, bots are less responsive to rising case rates, but they are more consistent, as they mainly tweet about how COVID-19 was deliberately created by sinister agents. These findings suggest human beings are bricoleurs who use conspiracy theories to make sense of COVID-19, whereas bots are designed to create moral panic. Our findings suggest that conspiracy talk by individuals is defensive in nature, whereas bots engage in offense.”

    By the way, the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association was held in L.A. in August of this year. They required proof of having had original + booster vaccination (no exemptions) and indoor mask wearing, even though L.A. did not have a mask mandate at that time. Both of these were apparently enforced by police who were hired by the ASA.

    And the kicker? The theme of this year’s meeting was “Bureaucracies of Displacement.” I wonder how many of us were displaced from the conference by their absurd, anti-science bureaucratic rules. I am so deeply disappointed. Sociologists are supposed to be such critical thinkers.

    You’re a free subscriber to Jackanapes Junction. For the full experience, become a paid subscriber.

  5. Brook Jackson 

    Fernando Polack, principal study doctor in Pfizer’s Clinical Trial in Argentina (Site #1231/#4444) said, “Pfizer vaccine is kind of miraculous! When we waited for the results, I did not even remotely expect what happened.”

    Infectologist Fernando Polack said Pfizer’s vaccine was 97% effective in clinical trials in Argentina

    “It is half miraculous,” emphasized the director of the Infant Foundation about its effectiveness.

    The United States may already authorize Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine.-

    In statements toMarcelo Longobardi’s “Cada Mañana” program onRadio Mitre, the director of the Infant Foundation where the clinical studies were carried out said that it is even “half miraculous”, because of the effectiveness it demonstrated.

    Polack spoke with the journalist of a document that was published last week in a health magazine about the Pfizer vaccine that “is the report of the44,000 volunteers who participated in the study, including the five thousand seven hundred and something ofArgentines.”

    “These were 128 sites in the world. We were a place that particularly summoned many volunteers. We were the one that contributed the most patients and detected the most cases of Covid-19. A study is only as large as the number of cases it detects. And in Argentina the vaccine had an efficacy of 97%.

    There was only one patient among all those vaccinated, that is, it worked phenomenally well,” explained the infectologist.

    However, he clarified that the Foundation is “totally outside” the regulatory processes of the vaccine. “Our task is to bring the vaccine opportunity closer to the government in terms of bringing the trial,” Polack explained.

    As for whether this could be the beginning of the end of the disease, he said it is likely, but that “it does not mean that it is the end of the pandemic today.”
    “Imagine the scenario if this study had failed. We would be in the hands of the virus as in the beginning, and now this very clear opportunity appears that also, in some way, can multiply infinitely, “he said.

    As exemplified by the expert, if in CABA “you vaccinate the 700 thousand people of legal age and you could clear the risk of people dying of coronavirus, you are left with people who are going to be a little in bed and the disease is going to be different”.

    In addition, he said that in this way “you create an arsenal of treatment, plasma bags for those who develop the disease, and essentially generate an umbrella where the pandemic begins to lose strength.”

    As for the conservation of the vaccine, he corroborated that the Pfizer “needs to be stored at a very low temperature” which today is “at 70 degrees below zero.”

    However, he explained that this is not a problem. “When you say that and you’re not in this environment you think, ‘It’s impossible.’ No? But all research freezers are at minus 70 degrees. It’s not a thing that doesn’t exist. So, there are a lot of resources where you can anchor them for use in the big cities of the world.”

    “It is true that with the Pfizer vaccine you will not be able to vaccinate easily in a remote place in some province, but that is not the objective of that vaccine today,” he clarified.

    “When you get on a plane, what you want is for there to be experts in the mechanics and operation of the whole plane, who have checked them. The issue of vaccines is that there are experts who know very well what is inside the vaccine, who have checked the whole process so that one is calm, “he said.

    “We had two ANMAT visits of 11 days each. Four experts from ANMAT came and spent all these days reviewing everything we do from top to bottom. Which not only makes me proud but gives me peace of mind because I know that in other processes they do the same thing they did with us,” he continued.

    He then said the Pfizer vaccine “is half a miracle.” “When we waited for the results, I didn’t even remotely expect what happened. I think Moderna is going to have the same effectiveness because it’s very similar, it’s like the twin sister.

    And AstraZeneca, although less effective than these, is a good vaccine at 60%. A 40% vaccine is a good vaccine,” the infectologist said.

    Pfizer CEO says people who spread misinformation on Covid vaccines are ‘criminals’

    “People make money, some of them, by playing with the emotions of these people by creating a whole conspiracy theory and they are basically trying to profit from this fear of the people and this is who are the criminals”

    “Pfizer vaccine is kind of miraculous! When we waited for the results, I did not even remotely expect what happened.”

    ‘People make money’

    ‘a little in bed’

    If Not For You…

  6. Albert Bourla

    I’m pleased to share data from our trial indicating that our Omicron BA.4/ 5-adapted #COVID19 vaccine continues to generate a strong immune response in adults 30 days after they receive it:

    Albert Bourla
    Oct 13

    Early data from our trial evaluating our Omicron BA.4/BA.5-adapted #COVID19 vaccine show increased neutralizing antibodies compared to our Original monovalent vaccine, suggesting it could potentially provide better protection against Omicron BA.4/BA.5:

    Albert Bourla

    Emergency uses of the bivalent vaccine have not been approved or licensed by US FDA but have been authorized to prevent COVID-19 in ages 5yrs+. See Fact Sheets:

    Albert Bourla

    Last week, Prevnar 13 received the Silver Medal for Best Vaccine at the 2022 Prix Galien Golden Jubilee Awards. What an amazing recognition for our global team, who have spent decades developing and distributing this vaccine. Congratulations! I am so #PfizerProud of you!

    Brook Jackson 

    Pfizer’s inside man is Fernando Polack.


    “I investigated Fernando Polack”
    “they refuse to look at the players”

    Pfernando Polack

    I am so #PfizerProud of you!


Leave a Reply