The Propaganda of ‘Safety Testing’

Be on alert for Propganda in the news cycle, as we are in a S-election year.

In the article, Curb Your Enthusiasm, the propaganda of “Safety Testing” for toxic metals in vaccines is featured:

…to challenge the use of “toxic metals” in vaccines…. at a time where vaccine science has finally advanced enough that said metals – used as “adjuvants” to stimulate a stronger immune response – are no longer required.

By focusing only on the use of “toxic metals” in vaccines… ensures ultimately the integrity the vaccine programme remains in tact.

But look at the timing: the damage has already been done.

The establishment now has little to lose by allowing the whistle to be formally blown, now the aims of the vaccination programme (to subdue fertility, to lower IQ, to create lifelong customers for Big Phama) have been completed for so many millions – and now that they have an alternative that doesn’t require these adjuvants.

Under the subject heading vaccine Safety Testing, the concept of “safe vaccines” is propaganda.

Why? Because there is no such thing as a “safe vaccine.”

Moreover, the technology of mercury and aluminum in childhood CDC-approved injections has been long superseded by mRNA technology, i.e., nanotechnology, which was developed in the 1970s.

The development of vaccines and the lack of safety testing is tied to politics.

Politics and Propaganda

As we approach a new S-election, we have an opportunity to question the status quo and pick apart the Propaganda being fed to the masses. As hindsight is 20/20, let’s return to that year.

In 2020, The CDC and FDA rushed experimental EUA mRNA injections to market without requisite testing.

At the time, people were unaware that that stage had already been set to prevent ‘safety testing.’ The Emergency Use Authorized (EUA) C19 injections would be exempt from any clinical testing under statute 21 USC 360bbb-3(k), Authorization for emergency use of medical products, Relation to other provisions.

Four years later, after the fact, celebrity politicians claim that all vaccines (many more now mRNA) must be ‘safety tested.’

However, under the amended PAHPR Act, all EUA-Medical Countermeasures (vaccines) are “non-investigational,” exempt from all testing, monitoring and enforcement, outside current regulations.

All candidates are pro-vaccine. Yet one made his platform about safety testing, knowing full well that it would never happen. In fact, the 2022 FDA Modernization Act 2.0 exempts animal testing, and instead, uses “cell-based assays, computer models” i.e., the Personal Digital Twin.

I believe vaccines should be safety-tested. I don’t think we ought to be mandating vaccines for unwilling Americans unless we know precisely that that vaccine is helping people rather than hurting them.- Presidential Candidate 2024

Does this statement make sense knowing that: 1) all mandates are illegal; 2) under any emergency, no EUA vaccine can ever be tested; and 3) testing will be done using your Digital Twin?

Are people who refuse a digital ID considered “unwilling Americans?”

In an immoral game of propaganda, choosing the lesser of two evils has been made acceptable. Just play along.

The Politics of Acting

Hollywood and government are connected by a revolving door where actors become presidents (Ronald Regan), and presidents become film producers (Barak Obama).

From the article Curb Your Enthusiasm:

we can draw extensive parallels between acting and politics – between Hollywood and The White House – because these are essentially the same people doing the same jobs (hence why so many politicians have a theatrical background).

They are skilled professional deceivers, embodying scripted characters on the world stage in order to captivate public attention and powerfully shape behaviour.

Hollywood and D.C. are joined at the hip. They work together to promote the propaganda of Social Engineering. The father of Social Engineering is Ed Bernays who wrote his book, Propaganda in 1928. [This 120-page book can be read here].

Propaganda pushes a point of view (and behavior) of the Establishment, to control “public opinion.” If it’s propaganda, the elite will take on a burden for you because you are too dumb. Bernays false assertion that a group mind (hive mind) is more easily influenced and controlled, is found in this quote from Bernays’ book:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.
― Edward Bernays, Propaganda

The Art of Propaganda

In the Art of Propaganda, a controversial ploy by manufacturers uses doctors to promote their products. If a physician claimed smoking tobacco was safe and beneficial to health, then who was anyone to question it?

From 1946-1964, doctors promoted smoking Marlboro’s, Winstons, and Camels, among others, as “safe” and “beneficial.”

As a sign of masculinity and health, no testing was ever required. No one mentioned carcinogens, or that Philip Morris and other tobacco companies had been using ammonia in their products for addiction.

The 1950s brought fears about smoking and health.

Then, in 1964, a report was released, meant to turn things around: Smoking and Health—Report of the Advisory Committee of the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service.

the findings of the 14-month study by the 10-member committee were blunt and unequivocal. Principal among the conclusions: “Cigarette smoking is causally related to lung cancer in men; the magnitude of the effect of cigarette smoking far outweighs all other factors,” and “it is a health hazard of sufficient importance to warrant appropriate remedial action.

The damage had been done, the addiction taken hold.

Today, masculinity, like the cigarette, is a thing of the past, because propagandists, have moved on to other products, such as those promoted by the CDC, (i.e., mRNA technology).