It came across my windshield via Jessica Rose’s Substack this morning; She linked to one Raphael Lataster PhD, the post is here.
Lataster’s thesis is spelled out clearly in his lede:
”It makes us all look bad, fueling the suspicions of the ‘other side’ that we are illogical and scientifically illiterate.”
In the comments section, a debate broke out:
Here are a few outtakes:
Lataster said he expected “hate mail.” The discussion is civilized, however.
I, like so many, posted about this yesterday, and wanted to give the criticism a fair shake, as a tidal wave of social media posts, if off base, can throw things off and take years to correct.
I read what Lataster wrote more than once, then went back and re-read the Fauci/Murthy/Wallensky texts.
Here they are below—the entire thread, along with my analysis:
1. Then Surgeon General Murthy asking if any of them have a clue whether a) vaccinating early vs. late in pregnancy “would be preferred.” b) Whether they have “any sense of when there will be more robust data on vaccine risk in pregnant women?” Next sentence, defies belief: “I’ve been telling pregnant women that there hasn’t been evidence of concerning adverse outcomes in the trials though the number of pregnant subjects was likely “limited.” (Subjects?)
He ‘figures’ many in the healthcare workforce are getting vaccinated and presumes “…we’ll be tracking outcomes.”
Translation: The Surgeon General of the United States says there is no “robust data” on “vaccine risk in pregnant women” prior to the CDC recommendation (August, September, 2021) but casts it as a polite matter of vaguely wondering if Fauci or Walensky have “any sense of when” such data may appear.
Flying blind, in other words.
Walensky’s reply: Opaque. “This is all a data free?”
( I don’t know what that means.)
3. Fauci replies that he “agrees” with Rochelle. (On what?)
“There are no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccinating early versus later in pregnancy would be preferred,” he says. Deep fractal spell: Ignoring entirely the damning early Pfizer studies, which Naomi Wolf’s team analyzed to the bone, he rolls in cloudy evasions, note these words: “preference,” “theoretical,” “feel concerned,” “misperception,” “somehow get into your genes,” and heightened “anxiety.”
That’s pure perception management. The man can never say yes, no, or I don’t know. Please notice how they talk. Nothing is ever concrete, and the substrate is always about what I have identified as woke-ism in Public Health, which is always opaque, stiff, moralistic, and tinged with anxious careerist fawning. (Murthy and Walensky.)
I’ll clarify though: Here, Fauci is saying “we” need to “deal with” the naughty “misperception” that mRNA “somehow” can “get into your genes.” He circles an area of a propaganda challenge to come: “When the misperception gets extended to an early developing fetus, the anxiety heightens.”
Please take note! He’s not addressing “the science.” He’s diagnosing any and all pregnant women presently afflicted with “misperception” and identifying that pregnant women in the first trimester pose a propaganda challenge. (Due to their heightened anxiety.) Can you feel the abandonment?
They’re like Ice Mothers. They don’t care what might happen to any of us, only how to pathologize whatever unreasonable anxieties may arise, in the media sphere, where they get to play the roles of caring Mommy and caring Daddy.
Between themselves, speak as individuals illiterate and uninterested in the FDA’s classification of exposure risks to human fetuses, nor the “Golden Rule of Pregnancy” established in the wake of the thalidomide disaster of the 1960s.
Let’s continue:
The second image here is the email that caused the storm of coverage:
”I asked around…”
Two additional texts: Murthy fawningly says the discussion has been “really helpful,” and that the point about cytokine storms posy second dose was “a really good point.”
Then he freaks out about WHO saying there is no data on the Moderna vaccine, and it has led to a “flurry of questions.” He imagines “…we will all get asked about this.” The Surgeon General of the United States: His concern is not with the fetuses or the mother but with the “flurry of questions,” the media may pose. Here’s the insanity: They project their entire professional raison d’être onto media and perception management, none onto the people they are hired allegedly to protect.
Here’s why I disagree with the “there is no there-there,” thing— that the huge reaction is exaggerated, and not a big story:
Lataster argues that Fauci only, responsibly, conceded to a theoretical “signal,” or “red flag,” whereupon he continued to explore the matter, and was finally, in the end, reassured there were no red flags at all.
Here’s one of his “no red flags” clips:
Clip HERE. (Side note: Both Fox and Fauci initially use the word “people” to describe those who were pregnant; Fauci later says “women.”)
Here is what Fauci concedes:
He “asked around” and admitted that said “asking around” persuaded him that “many people have significant cytokines storm” (I think he means cytokine storms) “…and fever after the second dose.” Then he writes:
“This theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the first trimester.”
Lataster focused on Fauci’s word “theoretically,” (concluding Fauci was not saying it was so, but only that it could be so, as anything may be true.) He misses the essence of Fauci-speak, which I have explained is a rare, fractal language. Fauci uses words as a master spell-caster, which is to say, deflecting all true meaning, and using responsible sounding padding words to achieve his central aim, which never changes. That aim is to hedge. The aim of authentic language is to state. Fauci’s sentences are like that spinning tea cup amusement park ride. So let’s slow it down:
What is Fauci admitting here?
“Significant cytokine storm(s) and fever after the second dose.”
What is a cytokine storm?
This is the key.
Dr. James Thorp told me repeatedly as we wrote our book Sacrifice: How The Deadliest Vaccine In History Targeted The Most Vulnerable: Pregnancy abhors inflammation, and mRNA Covid shots, he said, are the single most inflammatory agent ever injected into humans.
But despite Dr. Thorp’s vast experience in high risk maternal fetal medicine, let’s take this cytokine matter to a more “neutral” source, with no dog in the fight.
I asked Codex whether a cytokine storm would threaten an early pregnancy.
Hence, Fauci was in fact admitting to a very bad cloud in the sky he was publicly calling trouble free. He was not merely saying it was theoretical. For once in his life he was saying it was.
Here’s the distortion, as I see it, in the correction:
Fauci’s text exchange with Murthy and Wallensky did not say:
“We know it’s causing miscarriages but let’s cover it up guys.”
Agreed.
One must learn to read between the lines of the lines, and read what they do not say, but should be saying.
These people operate as vaccine faith pastors. Their “job” is to quash “vaccine hesitancy.” Hence, like all their exchanges, this one had the underpinning of: “Reality is dirtying our windows like pigeon droppings. The annoying media will be annoying us about this, with “questions.” We therefore need to be aware and prepared—for our next press runs. So what’s our play?”
Yet cytokine storms in early pregnancy are miscarriages. (Thorp.)
Second bombshell, Murthy blithely writes that he has been “…hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well.”
Mutations in the developing fetus?
This is like a pilot of a commercial jet discovering a fire in one of the engines, and radioing back that he co-pilot has some kind of concern. Yawn.
Failure to react swiftly with utmost gravity would be unthinkable.
Unless the pilot likes plane crashes.
So, did they? (React swiftly and with utmost gravity.)
Or was their sense of emergency limited to a “fire” in the media, that sacred membrane that accords them their god-like statuses?
They care only, clearly, about the public’s perception and about “vaccine hesitancy,” their obsession—the thing they fear way, way more than a vast massacre of unborn and born babies.
What did they not say to one another? (Always include what is not said in a truth measure.)
They did not say: “We must press a STOP button—and investigate immediately. Commission high priority studies.”
(I mean, of course they didn’t.)
Compare to this, quoted in our book, Sacrifice: JFK on thalidomide, which our FDA famously did not approve, thanks to Frances Kelsey, and yet President Kennedy, went to this length to buffer catastrophe: (Top quote)
So, is it a distortion to say Fauci “knew?” Or “they” knew?
No.
Anthony Fauci knew cytokine storms were real. (His words.)
I ask a question to the people who feel the story was a nothing burger.
You (who feel Fauci, though guilty in general, is wrongly accused here) would allow him to not “know” that cytokine storms are to an early pregnancy, essentially as engine fire is to an airborne plane, ie a code red emergency? You let him slip the net there—
He’s “America’s Doctor,” leading the country essentially, during Covid, but you would allow him to admit early pregnancy cytokine storms but not conflate that with knowing that yes, this is catastrophic to early pregnancy?
Hair-splitting is not always in vain—I respect a good, sober correction. There is nothing specious about insisting “our side” hold high standards of reportage.
That said, I’ve notice something over the years,
In persecuted groups, you often see a stress response which is somebody standing up and stating: “Our side was erroneous…I must in good conscience stand up and call a spade a spade. This kind of mistake makes all of us look bad.”
How many versions of this have I witnessed over the decades?
Countless.
It feels itself to be a devotion to accuracy and fairness—and this one was expressed in good faith I believe.
But I find, more often than not, these kinds of corrections fail to assess or address the fuller body of truth, when they zoom in. They correct the one hair, as we all know our hair must be flawless.
But sometimes, even the one hair is actually not incorrect.
I also question the notion that we must all at all times be flawless or else we all go down in flames. If that sounds like I don’t care about errors, that is not what I mean.
In this instance, I argue we were not wrong.
This is just the beginning, and this is going to dwarf Thalidomide, DES, Watergate, ContraGate, Russia-Gate and every other gate, combined, in my opinion.
Most of the mothers who fell victim to this horror have thus far been too devastated to speak up. But they will come out of the woodworks now, and those who didn’t realize why they lost their babies, now will realize. They will need a lot of support.
Clip HERE.
’Brandon Is Not Your Bro,’ a laborist, via Sage’s Newsletter, quoted in Sacrifice:
Please notice the graphics. They began in the Covid era: The people have no fingers, no faces. This is significant.
Which OB/GYN Organizations Were Supposed To Protect Women, But Instead Sold Out? Follow The Money. The Covid “Pandemic Spending Budget was $5 trillion.
Dr. James Thorp and his wife Maggie, an attorney, also exposed via FOIA requests, (it’s all in the book) the three pillar organizations that got bought out with colossal money to push covid shots onto women:
Those organizations are never mentioned, while Anthony Fauci is constantly mentioned. This is unfortunate.
Jim Thorp and his wife found the smoking gun. (See pages above.)
Entire US media complicit.
Link HERE to the angry media scold, reading the script of lies with thunderous conviction.
CNN, in 2021, stalked Dr. Jospeph Mercola, in a hysterical segment:
When the gates of hell opened:
I asked Codex a question, as I noticed that “pregnant people” was clear code for mRNA fascism, which fuses with the transgender agenda.
Clip HERE.
This is the kind of thing that is relegated to “anecdotal evidence:”
The pain of all this is literally infinite. This is an impossible to fathom story, that even gets obscured, somewhat, within the medical freedom movement.
I hope that changes now.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.