Excerpts from Jon Rappoport's "The Matrix Revealed"

[Aragorn]

Who documented it?

Court cases are always documented. So are the records of the UK Medical Register. Much of it can be read in the pertinent Wikipedia article ─ and yes, the article is factual, even though it does not mention that Wakefield did at some point admit to foul play.

A brief summary of the article follows...

---

Source: Wikipedia

Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1957) is a discredited former British doctor who became an anti-vaccine activist. He was a gastroenterologist until he was struck off the UK medical register for unethical behaviour, misconduct and dishonesty. In 1998 he was the lead author of a fraudulent research paper claiming that there was a link between the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism and bowel disease.

After the publication of the paper, other researchers were unable to reproduce Wakefield's findings or confirm his hypothesis of an association between the MMR vaccine and autism, or autism and gastrointestinal disease. A 2004 investigation by Sunday Times reporter Brian Deer identified undisclosed financial conflicts of interest on Wakefield's part, and most of his co-authors then withdrew their support for the study's interpretations. The British General Medical Council (GMC) conducted an inquiry into allegations of misconduct against Wakefield and two former colleagues. The investigation centred on Deer's numerous findings, including that children with autism were subjected to unnecessary invasive medical procedures such as colonoscopies and lumbar punctures, and that Wakefield acted without the required ethical approval from an institutional review board.

On 28 January 2010, a five-member statutory tribunal of the GMC found three dozen charges proved, including four counts of dishonesty and 12 counts involving the abuse of developmentally delayed children. The panel ruled that Wakefield had "failed in his duties as a responsible consultant", acted both against the interests of his patients, and "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in his published research. The Lancet fully retracted the 1998 publication on the basis of the GMC's findings, noting that elements of the manuscript had been falsified. The Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton said the paper was "utterly false" and that the journal had been "deceived". Three months following The Lancet's retraction, Wakefield was struck off the UK medical register, with a statement identifying deliberate falsification in the research published in The Lancet, and was thereby barred from practising medicine in the UK.

In January 2011, an editorial accompanying an article by Brian Deer in BMJ described Wakefield's work as an "elaborate fraud". In a follow-up article, Deer said that Wakefield had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing". In November 2011, another report in BMJ revealed original raw data indicating that, contrary to Wakefield's claims in The Lancet, children in his research did not have inflammatory bowel disease.

Wakefield's study and his claim that the MMR vaccine might cause autism led to a decline in vaccination rates in the United States, United Kingdom and Ireland and a corresponding rise in measles and mumps, resulting in serious illness and deaths, and his continued claims that the vaccine is harmful have contributed to a climate of distrust of all vaccines and the reemergence of other previously controlled diseases. Wakefield has continued to defend his research and conclusions, saying there was no fraud, hoax or profit motive. In February 2015, he publicly repeated his denials and refused to back down from his assertions, even though—as stated by a British Administrative Court Justice in a related decision—"There is now no respectable body of opinion which supports (Dr. Wakefield's) hypothesis, that MMR vaccine and autism/enterocolitis are causally linked".

[ continue reading here ]

Source: Wikipedia

---

Be sure to check out the footnotes, all of which lead to the various information sources. Also, please take note of...

• the fact that Robert de Niro has retracted his support for Wakefield's "VAXXED" documentary; and

• the fact that true scientific research has confirmed that Wakefield's claims were either way false, and that autism is only one manifestation of a broader underlying and genetically predisposed neurological structure.

[WantDisclosure]

Court cases are always documented. So are the records of the UK Medical Register.

This is from the website Age of Autism:

All of the documented evidence and testimonies submitted to the General Medical Council, upon which GMC issued its guilty verdicts against Dr. Wakefield and his two co-defendants in 2010, were subsequently forensically assessed by the UK High Court in March 2012, in the appeal of Professor John Walker-Smith, the senior clinician and senior author of the Lancet case series. The High Court determined that the verdicts of professional misconduct and ethics violations were unsupported by the evidence.

https://www.ageofautism.com/dr-andrew-wakefield/

In my opinion, Wikipedia is a goldmine of well-written articles that are reliable only if the topic is not controversial.

[palooka's revenge]

There is no overwhelming evidence.

This thread is about the free-lance investigative reporter Jon Rappoport's extensive work.

That's what it takes in this world to get at the truth. Free-lance investigation.

When the truth is genuinely sought, it is found.

Years ago there was some other free-lance investigator who interviewed Wakefield. As I recall, I did not view the interview on YouTube. There was some website that posted it. I tried to re-locate the interview but couldn't find it. That's where I learned about what actually happened to Wakefield.

One major part of his saga that is important is that step one was that he was contacted by the parent of an autistic child who had stomach problems. Wakefield suggested that not getting three vaccinations in one dose was indicated.

That's it. That started the firestorm.

There is an international medical mafia on planet Earth.

I highly recommend Jon Rappoport's The Matrix Revealed to learn about it.

When the truth is genuinely sought, it is found.

That's highly debatable... mostly... as a result of the truth meter within having been severely compromised over eons of time thru the unseen role of denial... to put that another way... we are, literally, missin' half the recipe for discernment...

no... i need to rephrase that... it's not so much that it's missin'... it is because it has been made toxic as a result of not being allowed to evolve like the other half of the recipe has been accepted for what it is and, consequently, allowed to evolve...

consequently... the truth meter is responding but the info is skewed relative to the issue at hand... influenced, instead, by original cause events...

which is, admittedly, a collection of rather cryptic statements... but i'm workin' on the upackin'... for whatever it might be worth...

WD... I'm doin' my best to try to see where your comin' from 'n where yer tryin' to go.

For one thing... because, I'm well aware...

There is an international medical mafia on planet Earth.

The bones of many victims litter the landscape... some have survived and risen from the ashes... catherine austin fitts comes to mind... though it was the mafia, it wasn't the medical mafia in her case...

are U claiming the court case was a smack down designed to cover the truth and discredit the 'truth bearer'??? the part I find hard to square with in the case of wakefield is this...

why then, did he cop to it?? under oath, in court??

others have asked with direct question... i'm not sure i've seen a direct answer... except for...

Wakefield suggested that not getting three vaccinations in one dose was indicated.

That's it. That started the firestorm.

so, let me ask U this....

what am i'm missin' from your point of view?

[WantDisclosure]

When the truth is genuinely sought, it is found.

That's highly debatable... mostly... as a result of the truth meter within having been severely compromised over eons of time thru the unseen role of denial... to put that another way... we are, literally, missin' half the recipe for discernment...

no... i need to rephrase that... it's not so much that it's missin'... it is because it has been made toxic as a result of not being allowed to evolve like the other half of the recipe has been accepted for what it is and, consequently, allowed to evolve...

consequently... the truth meter is responding but the info is skewed relative to the issue at hand... influenced, instead, by original cause events...

which is, admittedly, a collection of rather cryptic statements... but i'm workin' on the upackin'... for whatever it might be worth...

WD... I'm doin' my best to try to see where your comin' from 'n where yer tryin' to go.

For one thing... because, I'm well aware...

There is an international medical mafia on planet Earth.

The bones of many victims litter the landscape... some have survived and risen from the ashes... catherine austin fitts comes to mind... though it was the mafia, it wasn't the medical mafia in her case...

are U claiming the court case was a smack down designed to cover the truth and discredit the 'truth bearer'??? the part I find hard to square with in the case of wakefield is this...

why then, did he cop to it?? under oath, in court??

others have asked with direct question... i'm not sure i've seen a direct answer... except for...

Wakefield suggested that not getting three vaccinations in one dose was indicated.

That's it. That started the firestorm.

so, let me ask U this....

what am i'm missin' from your point of view?

I'm watching a documentary The Pathological Optimist right now. I put it on pause to take a break.

Before I put it on pause, Brian Deer appeared on the screen.

I suspect that Brian Deer fits into the same category as propagandist Ellis Medavoy (pseudonym), the person interviewed and the subject of this thread so far.

Here is the YouTube trailer for the documentary:

The Film Arcade
Published on Aug 30, 2017

The Pathological Optimist explores the controversial Andrew Wakefield, who was stripped of his medical license for his infamous study suggesting a link between vaccines and autism that sparked one of the biggest firestorms in modern medicine.

Release Date: September 29, 2017
Director: Miranda Bailey


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRA0w1pvFLk

There is no question in my mind that Andrew Wakefield is a man of utmost integrity and an absolute hero.

[palooka's revenge]

There is no question in my mind that Andrew Wakefield is a man of utmost integrity and an absolute hero.

is that your answer to my question? tell me something goin' on in yer mind i don't already know...

oh... so maybe it's buried somewhere in the vid? another one... thx... but... no thx.

frankly, i won't take the time or invest the energy to chase down who is the bad guy(s) in this one... bad guys are everywhere.... instead.. maybe you'll do me the favor of splainin' to me why his admission to the court was him lying to the court alon with some explanation of why he would do that... take yer best shot while i'm still willin' to be open minded....

edit to add... maybe the answer to that is in one of these vids? i admit, i quit watchin.... and... i quit readin trasncript awhile ago...

i like rappaport... mostly... but that don't mean he ain't on my shit list...

[WantDisclosure]

is that your answer to my question? tell me something goin' on in yer mind i don't already know...

I guess you don't know his story from an interview where the interrogator was free-lance and therefore, independent from the Deep State controllers?

Have you read my excerpts in this thread?

If you have, you'll know how evil the man behind the curtain is, and how pervasive propaganda is in the world we live in. That is, if you believe the two people in the excerpts.

There are 7 basic cartels according to Medavoy: money, government, military, intelligence, media, medical, and energy. Medavoy calls the medical cartel "the prince of the cartels" because it ultimately results in the control of the human brain.

frankly, i won't take the time or invest the energy to chase down who is the bad guy(s) in this one... bad guys are everywhere.... instead.. maybe you'll do me the favor of splainin' to me why his admission to the court was him lying to the court alon with some explanation of why he would do that... take yer best shot while i'm still willin' to be open minded....

The only thing I can glean from listening to his side of the story is that there was some blood drawn for lab work using his son's friends at a birthday party, which was ethical, but he failed to formally submit the plan to do this to a committee for approval ahead of time, and he regrets that.

That's it.

There is much corruption everywhere we look. Luckily, there are exceptions. Luckily, we have some honest journalists. But the vast majority of talking heads are beholden to the corporate controllers behind them, so we're inundated with their propaganda.

That's what we're up against.

[palooka's revenge]

If you have, you'll know how evil the man behind the curtain is, and how pervasive propaganda is in the world we live in. That is, if you believe the two people in the excerpts.

i don't BELIEVE anything in this case. and though i have read some of your excerpts i don't need them to know there's an evil man behind the curtain or how pervasive propaganda is.

all i WAS trying to do was get a straight, direct answer from you....

[WantDisclosure]

i don't BELIEVE anything in this case. and though i have read some of your excerpts i don't need them to know there's an evil man behind the curtain or how pervasive propaganda is.

all i WAS trying to do was get a straight, direct answer from you....

Well, I tried to answer your question in what I said about his admission that he didn't put before an ethics committee the technique of drawing blood from his son's friends, with permission and voluntarily, for lab work.

That's the only thing I know of that Wakefield admitted to.

I understand that that incident was used to claim he abused children.

From everything I've listened to and read, I believe Wakefield is the victim of the medical cartel's use of propaganda (lies) to protect their precious profits from pharmaceuticals.

[Aragorn]

This is from the website Age of Autism:

All of the documented evidence and testimonies submitted to the General Medical Council, upon which GMC issued its guilty verdicts against Dr. Wakefield and his two co-defendants in 2010, were subsequently forensically assessed by the UK High Court in March 2012, in the appeal of Professor John Walker-Smith, the senior clinician and senior author of the Lancet case series. The High Court determined that the verdicts of professional misconduct and ethics violations were unsupported by the evidence.

https://www.ageofautism.com/dr-andrew-wakefield/

The Age of Autism website was created by a so-called "autism mom", which is a generic term for the mother of an autistic child, but which has in the meantime come to mean "the mother of an autistic child who cannot accept her child's autism and is angrily seeking a culprit she can blame and sue."

I have personally been confronted with such people and their denial-driven agendas for several years. It was one of the reasons ─ not the only reason but one of the reasons nevertheless ─ why I left Facebook behind me in 2010. They are all in denial, they are all vicious and full of rage, and they are all looking for someone to blame. You cannot even reason with these people, because you will be insulted and falsely accused right away.

I for one was accused of being a shill for Big Pharma, simply for trying to point out the science to these people. It's not that they couldn't accept my explanation ─ they didn't even want to hear me out. Rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth knee-jerking is all it was. One of them even rebutted my explanation with "You lost me at 'hi'." These people are just about as fanatic and as intransigent as the Flat Earth believers, if not more so.

Anyway, here's a pertinent Wikipedia snippet about the website...:

---

The Age of Autism

---

From 2005 to July 2007, Olmsted wrote about his investigative findings concerning the apparent global epidemic of autism in a series of columns titled The Age of Autism. Though some scientific research suggests that autism is a primarily genetic disorder and that reported increases are mainly due to changes in diagnostic practices, Olmsted, claimed that the increases are due to mercury poisoning, particularly from vaccines, and that the genetics is mostly secondary. Though Olmsted continued to make this claim, thimerosal, the mercury-containing preservative blamed by Olmsted, was removed from most vaccines as a precaution beginning in the late 1990s, with no effect on autism diagnosis rates.

---

I will also add that this Wikipedia article carefully uses the words "Though some scientific research suggests that autism is a primarily genetic disorder", but it must once again be said that this is the Anglo-Saxon interpretation of things ─ this particular Wikipedia article was written by a US American contributor, and articles in other languages are (commonly) written by people who natively speak those languages, and completely independently from any other articles on the same subject in other languages. In the rest of the world, it is a known and indisputable fact that autism is an exclusively genetic condition.

Another thing I will point out is that Age of Autism is not the only such website/organization. There are several more, among which Autism Speaks, which ─ contrary to what its name suggests ─ does not allow autistic individuals to speak up, but instead focuses on feeding into the "vaccines cause autism" myth. Furthermore, the managing director of Autism Speaks is earning himself a very royal six-figure annual income. So much for an alleged non-profit organization.

Either way, Age of Autism is not a neutral source of information. It has an agenda.

[palooka's revenge]

The Age of Autism website was created by a so-called "autism mom", which is a generic term for the mother of an autistic child, but which has in the meantime come to mean "the mother of an autistic child who cannot accept her child's autism and is angrily seeking a culprit she can blame and sue."

I have personally been confronted with such people and their denial-driven agendas for several years. It was one of the reasons ─ not the only reason but one of the reasons nevertheless ─ why I left Facebook behind me in 2010. They are all in denial, they are all vicious and full of rage, and they are all looking for someone to blame. You cannot even reason with these people, because you will be insulted and falsely accused right away.

I for one was accused of being a shill for Big Pharma, simply for trying to point out the science to these people. It's not that they couldn't accept my explanation ─ they didn't even want to hear me out. Rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth knee-jerking is all it was. One of them even rebutted my explanation with "You lost me at 'hi'." These people are just about as fanatic and as intransigent as the Flat Earth believers, if not more so.

Anyway, here's a pertinent Wikipedia snippet about the website...:

---

The Age of Autism

---

From 2005 to July 2007, Olmsted wrote about his investigative findings concerning the apparent global epidemic of autism in a series of columns titled The Age of Autism. Though some scientific research suggests that autism is a primarily genetic disorder and that reported increases are mainly due to changes in diagnostic practices, Olmsted, claimed that the increases are due to mercury poisoning, particularly from vaccines, and that the genetics is mostly secondary. Though Olmsted continued to make this claim, thimerosal, the mercury-containing preservative blamed by Olmsted, was removed from most vaccines as a precaution beginning in the late 1990s, with no effect on autism diagnosis rates.

---

I will also add that this Wikipedia article carefully uses the words "Though some scientific research suggests that autism is a primarily genetic disorder", but it must once again be said that this is the Anglo-Saxon interpretation of things ─ this particular Wikipedia article was written by a US American contributor, and articles in other languages are (commonly) written by people who natively speak those languages, and completely independently from any other articles on the same subject in other languages. In the rest of the world, it is a known and indisputable fact that autism is an exclusively genetic condition.

Another thing I will point out is that Age of Autism is not the only such website/organization. There are several more, among which Autism Speaks, which ─ contrary to what its name suggests ─ does not allow autistic individuals to speak up, but instead focuses on feeding into the "vaccines cause autism" myth. Furthermore, the managing director of Autism Speaks is earning himself a very royal six-figure annual income. So much for an alleged non-profit organization.

Either way, Age of Autism is not a neutral source of information. It has an agenda.

as.....

an exclusively genetic condition

then this...

"the mother of an autistic child who cannot accept her child's autism and is angrily seeking
a culprit she can blame and sue."

makes alotta sense...

cuzz momma... or daddy... or both...
is GUILTY!!!

[WantDisclosure]

cuzz momma... or daddy... or both...
is GUILTY!!!

Sarcasm?

(Sorry, but I often have to be told things directly because jokes or sarcasm have gone over my head.)

Do you personally think people who think vaccinations and autism are linked are way out of line?

[Aragorn]

Sarcasm?

(Sorry, but I often have to be told things directly because jokes or sarcasm have gone over my head.)

Do you personally think people who think vaccinations and autism are linked are way out of line?

He is stating the opinion that people refuse to accept the genetic origins of autism because it means that their own genes are responsible for the autism in their children, and that they thus rather seek to blame someone else ─ someone they can sue.

As for the link between autism and vaccines, I have explained into detail what this link is in post #44 of this thread, and that it is not a causal link but an interaction. That is the cold, hard science, but you dismissed it as a personal opinion and you continue to champion Andrew Wakefield. So what else is there to say?

[tarka the duck]

I guess you don't know his story from an interview where the interrogator was free-lance and therefore, independent from the Deep State controllers?

To whom are you referring in this statement?

The only thing I can glean from listening to his side of the story is that there was some blood drawn for lab work using his son's friends at a birthday party, which was ethical, but he failed to formally submit the plan to do this to a committee for approval ahead of time, and he regrets that.

Where did you get that idea from? Paying children to take a blood sample is ethical??! Don't tell me ... let me guess. Wakefield told you that

You seem to be confused about medical ethics: blood is not bought or sold in the UK.
To educate yourself, read these Guidelines for Ethical Conduct of Medical Research Involving Children, Royal College of Paediatrics Ethics Advisory Committee
https://adc.bmj.com/content/82/2/177

Here are the charges placed before Wakefield by the General Medical Council regarding that "blood buying" incident:-

The Birthday Party

'42. a. On a date unknown prior to 20 March 1999 at your son’s birthday party you,
i. took blood from a group of children to use for research purposes,
ii. paid those children who gave blood £5 each for doing so,

b. On 20 March 1999 you gave a presentation to the
MIND Institute, in California, USA in the course of which you,
Admitted and found proved to the words ‘California, USA’
i. described the incident referred to in 42.a. above in humorous terms,
ii. expressed an intention to obtain research samples in similar circumstances in the future;

‘43. a. Your conduct as set out in paragraph 42.a. above was unethical in that,
i. you did not have ethics committee approval for your actions,
ii. you took blood from children in an inappropriate social setting,
iii. you offered financial inducement to children in order to obtain blood samples,
iv. you showed a callous disregard for the distress and pain that you knew or ought to have known the children involved might suffer,
v. in the circumstances you abused your position of trust as a medical practitioner,
b. Your conduct set out in paragraph 42.b. was such as to bring the medical profession into disrepute;’

[palooka's revenge]

Sarcasm?

NO... what Aragorn said... and... what it is to me is fucking SAD!!!

Do you personally think people who think vaccinations and autism are linked are way out of line?

i don't consider myself qualified to make that call...

[tarka the duck]

I really appreciate your question here, tarka. I share your fascination.

Unfortunately, I don't think any of us are going to get an answer ...

Let's just agree to disagree.

Nope. Can't do that . If we were discussing whether straight chips or crinkle cut chips are best, we could
agree to disagree cos that's all about opinion. But we're not dealing with opinions when it comes to this topic
and all its implications, I will never agree to disagree, I'm afraid. I'm stubborn that way ...

This is from the website Age of Autism:

What is the point you are making by posting that paragraph about Walker-Smith?