AP article filled with outright lies & ad hominem attacks

Sections

We typically don’t "feed the trolls" by responding to fake news articles about us, but the recent editorial written by Michelle R. Smith with the Associated Press was so full of inaccuracies that we wanted to respond to a few of the false allegations and outright lies.

(Article by Ty & Charlene Bollinger republished from TheTruthAboutVaccines.com)

Before we get into the details, always remember that the mainstream media (MSM) is beholden to their funders to influence viewers, readers, and listeners. And outside election cycles, the #1 source of funding for the MSM is Big Pharma, which explains why much of the news has been weaponized against those exercising their Constitutionally protected health freedoms and attempting to protect their children.

This being so, it’s not surprising that the AP would publish a highly biased, opinionated editorial titled “Inside One Network Cashing in on Vaccine Disinformation” (disguised as an actual investigative journalism article) attacking us. When I attended Baylor University, I took a class on journalism, where it was pounded into our heads that “our opinions and perspectives” should never be introduced into a story, and back in those days, most newspapers honored that journalistic tradition. The only place in a newspaper that that opinion and personal perspectives were ever condoned was in the Editorial Pages. Sadly, that’s not the case any longer, as is evidenced by this denigrating “hit piece” attack.

The title of the AP article is highly biased as it contains a misleading term – “vaccine disinformation.” In this instance, we take issue with this term for two main reasons. First of all, with the title of the article allegedly discussing “vaccine disinformation,” one would think that there would be specific examples of the disinformation cited. But there are none. Just personal criticism and ad hominem attacks.

Secondly, we have written extensively on the adverse effects of vaccines, linking to the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). We have produced documentaries that reveal “behind-closed-door” meetings of the WHO in which they openly admit that they do not have good vaccine safety monitoring systems and they aren’t sure whether vaccines are actually safe. We recently published an article on the adverse events reported from the COVID-19 vaccine, which has dozens of references to the VAERS database and other peer-reviewed studies. No speculation, just facts. So using the term “vaccine disinformation” in the title is actually, itself, disinformation.

So let’s get to the actual article itself. In the grey boxes are screenshots from the article, followed by our responses.

Smith doesn’t name any facts to support her (implicit) position that COVID vaccines are safe and should be trusted. She relies on an argument from authority (also called an appeal to authority) in which she insinuates that the “medical experts” are to be believed because they are “medical experts.”

After all, “medical experts” have never been wrong about anything in the past…

Smith cites the opinion of an ambiguous group of “medical experts” as “evidence” that we are somehow “stoking fear” when we share the facts about the dangers of the coronavirus vaccines. Again, here is an article that pretty much shreds this illogical fallacy and cites multiple studies that indicate COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous and untested. We invite Smith to actually read the article, although we’re not holding our breath.

No “investigation” was needed to obtain this information – it’s on our website. And the majority of online companies generate revenue via affiliate marketing, so that’s a “nothing burger.”

It’s interesting that Smith (who later in the article seems obsessed with “credentials”) attempts to support her editorial position by quoting Dorit Reiss, who apparently has never taken the bar exam or practiced law and doesn’t have a “juris doctor” degree. Nevertheless, Reiss has been held out by the vaccine industry as the “go to legal mind” on vaccines.

Reiss mistakenly asserts that our industry is full of “multi-level marketing” (MLM) businesses. This is false. We aren’t aware of any MLM businesses in the “anti-vaccination industry,” as she puts it. Perhaps she doesn’t understand what MLM is.

Also interesting is her position that “a strong immune system isn’t necessarily a good thing. It’s your immune system that leads to symptoms of infection and fever. There is no substitute to the flu vaccine to protect against influenza.” (Emphasis added.)

That’s not exactly what the package insert for FLULAVAL vaccine says… “there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza after vaccination with FLULAVAL.”

Despite the harm that has clearly been inflicted by vaccines, with over $4.5 billion in damages paid since 1986, Reiss believes that forced vaccination is constitutional. Mind you, not just coerced vaccination for school entry or employment, she is referencing door to door vaccination by police with guns.

https://youtu.be/Y0XlxE6DF5Q

Reiss is on the Parent Advisory Board of “Voices for Vaccines” — the Scientific Advisory Board which includes Alan R. Hinman, Paul A. Offit, Stanley A. Plotkin, and Deborah L. Wexler. The website states that Voices for Vaccines was re-launched in 2013 and is “an administrative project” of the Task Force for Global Health.

Interestingly, according to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation website, in January 2013, $52,063,406 was committed to fund the Task Force for Global Health, whose current list of “donors and funding partners” includes Abbott Labs, Bayer, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CDC, the CDC Foundation, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, The Rockefeller Foundation, and the WHO.

There’s no conflict of interest here… nothing to see … move along!

Isn’t it interesting that Smith doesn’t point out a single statement about vaccines that we’ve made that is “disinformation” or inaccurate. Not one. She just makes a blanket claim that we are in the “business of selling vaccine disinformation.” That would be the equivalent of us stating “the AP is in the business of peddling lies and slander” without delineating any lies. Of course, we are actually pointing out the lies and slander. Touché!

Finally! Smith makes a statement that is accurate! Well, at least the first part of the statement… We did establish the United Medical Freedom Super PAC and below is our mission statement.

And, yes, our mission is to maintain medical freedom, which apparently Smith believes is a bad thing. It certainly appears that her personal vendetta against us is aimed at “pushing” medical tyranny and silencing dissenters.

Concerning her absurd statement about us promoting “lies” like the assertion that the election was stolen from Trump … ummm …. yeah …. the election was clearly stolen.

There is absolute evidence there was foreign interference in our election, with vote switching through the machines in addition to unlawful ballots. This evidence has never been examined or even allowed to be presented in the state supreme courts or the federal Supreme Court. When the sellouts in the MSM say the courts have said there is no evidence to support the allegations of fraud, it’s because they refuse to review said evidence. Their rulings of lack of standing have nothing to do with the evidence.

How can someone actually believe that Biden got more Democratic voters than charismatic Barack Obama in his 2008 landslide? How can someone swallow the assertion that Joe Biden, a man whose largest pre-election “rally” had about 250 people, received more votes for a President than anyone in U.S. election history, while winning a record low 17% of counties (524 in total), as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008? Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes? Seriously?

Everybody knows that the election was stolen. Those who still believe the “fairy tale” that Biden legitimately won the election are willfully ignoring too many paradoxes and strange but convenient coincidences, too many vote analyses, and too much sworn testimony.

When something seems fishy, that’s because it is. When something smells like B.S., that’s because it’s B.S.

Since Smith did mention NewsGuard and The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), here is some interesting information to help you “connect the dots.”

Public deception is now being carried out at a mass scale, and it appears to be organized by a major PR firm called the Publicis Groupe, self-described as “one of the world’s largest communications groups,” which has manipulated what people think about commercial products for nearly a century.

NewsGuard received a large chunk of its startup capital from Publicis (which represents most of the major pharmaceutical companies in the world) and since so much of its revenue comes from the drug industry, it’s not far-fetched to assume Publicis may influence NewsGuard’s “fairness” as they rate the websites of Pharma’s competitors, such as “anti-vaxx” websites.

NewsGuard’s health-related service called HealthGuard is also partnered with an organization calling itself the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a London-based center which says on its website that it seeks to “disrupt the architecture of online hate and misinformation.” The statement is quite ironic in light of the fact that they recently published a digital “hit list” which included us and several of our colleagues.

CCDH even managed to promote their defamatory propaganda about us to influence a recent Congressional hearing, with Senator Mike Doyle grilling “inquisition-style” all three CEOs of the world’s most powerful Big Tech companies to censor everyone on the list.

The CCDH is a small organization, with only a few employees and six board members. Aside from her role as Director of the Board of CCDH, Kirsty McNeill is a member of the European Council of Foreign Relations (ECFR). As a member of the ECFR, she represents an organization which is funded, not only by governments, but by the Atlantic Council (NATO), the Open Society Foundation (George Soros), the UN, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. CCDH Board Director, Lord Jonny Oats, is the former Chief of Staff to former UK deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. Clegg is currently the Head of Global Affairs for Facebook.

He’s a spin doctor.

This should be a wake up call to everyone, including those in the MSM who are attacking us. They aren’t just deplatforming health freedom advocates anymore; now they are singling us out, lining us up and digitally assassinating us with impunity. Who’s next? It could be you…

This is not true. I accepted the interview request, with the caveat that I would be able to ask Smith a question for every question she asked us. It was Smith that declined because apparently she didn’t want to have to answer any questions from me. Her exact words were, “I can’t agree to the terms you proposed about going back and forth, taking turns and asking each other questions.”

Again, this is not true. I didn’t decline to answer questions. Smith wouldn’t agree to my terms because she didn’t want to have to answer my questions.. And a “medical researcher” is defined as “someone who conducts medical research,” which I do every day.

Smith claims that “decades of research” have shown that vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children. This is not true. Notice she doesn’t cite any of the studies performed during the “decades of research”… because there aren’t any!

Unvaccinated children are much healthier than vaccinated children, according to a recent study published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. The study (by James Lyons-Weiler, PhD and Paul Thomas, MD) was conducted among 3,300 patients at Dr. Thomas’ Oregon pediatrics practice, Integrative Pediatrics.

This study adds to a growing list of published peer-reviewed papers (Mawson, 2017; Hooker and Miller, 2020) that compare the health of vaccinated children to the health of unvaccinated children. These studies indicate that unvaccinated children are healthier than those who are vaccinated, suggesting we have long underestimated the scope of vaccine damage.

“No data to support that”? “Unsubstantiated claims”? Seriously?!?

Norwegian and British vaccine scientists have published unequivocal evidence that SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, is man-made. The authors state two conclusions: (1) The mutations that would normally be seen in the course of animal to human transmission have not occurred in SARS-CoV-2, indicating that it was fully “pre-adapted” for human infection and; (2) SARS-CoV-2 has insertions in its protein sequence that have never been detected in nature and contribute to its infectivity and pathogenicity.

If that’s not enough, here’s an interview with a Chinese virologist who says unequivocally that the virus was man-made. France’s Luc Montagnier, a Nobel winning scientist, says SARS-CoV-2 virus was made in a laboratory. He says Covid-19’s genetics reveal “manipulation” and that “someone added sequences … it’s the work of professionals, of molecular biologists…a very meticulous work.”

There are dozens of other experts who also have evidence that the coronavirus was cooked up in a lab. The assertion that “there’s no data to support” the claim that COVID-19 is “man-made” is false.

In the USA, adverse events are reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). The adverse events reported in the table below, including 4,057 deaths, are through May 7, 2021.

The European database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines” (which are actually gene therapy). Their report through May 8, 2021 lists 10,570 deaths and 405,259 injuries following injections of four experimental COVID-19 vaccines.

Anyone who says the COVID-19 vaccines are not killing people is actually spreading disinformation.

Apparently, Smith isn’t aware of the fact that COVID-19 vaccines have only gone through preliminary clinical trials for 2 months. These vaccines have been granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) status, but not FDA approval.

COVID-19 vaccine phase 3 clinical trials are currently “in progress.” This means that anyone who receives a COVID-19 vaccine is participating in an experimental clinical trial without any liability from the vaccine manufacturers.

The completion date of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine trial is April 6, 2023! In other words, we are the guinea pigs! These vaccines are still being tested and have never been proven “safe” nor “effective at preventing severe disease and death.”

COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers define “effectiveness” as “reduction in risk of symptoms such as a fever, cough or sore throat.” On the CDC’s own website, they state “There is some evidence that vaccination may make illness less severe.” (emphasis added)

The term “effective” is not defined as preventing viral infection or spread of the (SARS-CoV-2) virus to others. This is the reason why vaccinated individuals are still recommended to wear facemasks, socially distance, and avoid large crowds.

None of the vaccine trials showed that the vaccine prevented people from getting COVID-19. The only difference between those that were vaccinated versus unvaccinated were their severity of symptoms.

Case in point: A New York Yankees player, Gleyber Torres, three coaches, and four staff members have tested positive for the coronavirus since Sunday, despite the fact that all eight had received the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine.

Previous coronavirus vaccines were never approved because of serious safety concerns in animal studies. In the past, during animal testing, when animals were exposed to the virus after vaccination, many got extremely sick or died. Animals in these studies ended up getting what is now being defined as Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease (VAED).

VAED occurs when a vaccine primes the recipient’s immune system and then at some later time, when exposed to a similar virus, the immune system overreacts. This immune system amplification could potentially cause the body to attack itself, which could possibly lead to severe disease, organ damage and even death. This phenomenon has long been known from various studies with coronavirus vaccines in cats. All cats that initially tolerated the vaccine, later died after being exposed to and catching the SARS virus.

Just a few days ago, on May 13, The Defender reported that officials with the CDC acknowledged a “plausible causal association” between J&J’s COVID-19 vaccine and potentially life-threatening blood clot disorders after identifying 28 cases — including three deaths — among people who received the vaccine. Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, deputy director of the CDC’s immunization safety office, identified 28 cases of rare blood clots in VAERS among people vaccinated with the J&J shot. Shimabukuro said four of the 28 people remained in the hospital as of May 7th, one of whom was in the ICU. According to Shimabukuro, current evidence “suggests a plausible causal association” with the J&J vaccine and cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.

Also, a recent study titled: “SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Impairs Endothelial Function via Downregulation of ACE 2” indicates that the spike proteins (created by the mRNA vaccines) are literally blowing up mitochondria, which are our energy power plants that produce ATP, and that’s why people have no energy! They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to the mitochondria causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented.

An “advocate” is a person who publicly supports a particular cause. That’s exactly what we are. Advocates. An advocate can also refer to a professional in the field of law (i.e. attorney). Last time we checked, being an attorney is a pretty lucrative “for-profit business.”

“Super-spreaders of vaccine disinformation”….

Again: using pejoratives and calling names is all they can do.

Again: not a single iota of specific “vaccine disinformation” was mentioned in the entire article.

It is curious, however, that Smith again refers to the opinions of CCDH to support her editorial opinions. Comically, they claim they are a non governmental organization (NGO), while their network of links to government, globalist think tanks and private corporations is extensive.

Imran Ahmed, the CEO, would like to see people who disagree with him imprisoned under anti-terrorist legislation. In the summer of 2020, he stated: “I would go beyond calling anti-vaxxers conspiracy theorists to say they are an extremist group that pose a national security risk.” (emphasis added)

Were Ahmed’s desire to see “anti-vaxxers” incarcerated for disagreeing with him not so dangerous, the irony that the CEO of The Center for Countering Digital Hate is brimming with quite staggering levels of hate would be hilarious.

The truth is that tens of thousands of “anti-vaxxers” were formerly “pro-vaxxers” until their child was damaged from the vaccines. Using manipulative neuro-linguistic programming techniques to denigrate those who have suffered from vaccines, painting them as vile, hateful, and subhuman, while claiming that they are a “national security risk” is truly disgusting.

Clearly, the ultimate goal of the CCDH is to create the ludicrous, fake bogeyman of the “public health terrorist” while being careful not to mention any of the scientific or historical evidence which indicates that vaccines have never been proven to be “safe and effective.” Instead, they label all who do cite this evidence as “radical extremists.”

While the CCDH blithely claim all vaccines are “safe,” they are the only medical intervention where the manufacturers have blanket indemnification against any loss from injury claims. It is not an act of “hate” to ask why this needs to be the case if they are so “safe.”

The CCDH itself is actually one of the main purveyors of vaccine propaganda and disinformation. Like many propagandists before them, they deal in inaccurate, empty generalizations in an attempt to convince the masses that anyone who ever questions any vaccine must be an “anti-vaxx, tinfoil hat, looney, conspiracy theorist” who is driven by hate and is therefore an extremist who threatens public health.

It’s apparent why the CCDH itself has been identified as a “hate group” by a reporter from OffGuadian, who stated that CCDH “….meet(s) the Commission on Countering Extremism’s definition of so called hateful extremists.”

That’s patently absurd. We haven’t “targeted” any particular group. Based on our internal analytics, over 20% of our newsletter subscribers are “left-leaning” and certainly not MAGA supporters or “far right.” Ahmed is just making stuff up….

Yes, we do support Roger Stone. He is an American hero, a true patriot, and a good man.

More name-calling and pejoratives, but not a smidgeon of evidence to support the assertion that Plandemic is a “conspiracy movie.” Plandemic tells the story of expert virologist Dr. Judy Mikovits, who was jailed for not destroying evidence that vaccines had been universally contaminated with retroviruses. It discusses Dr. Anthony Fauci’s efforts to combat the AIDS epidemic during the 1980s as well as Bill Gates’ support of vaccination efforts around the world. No conspiracies, just facts.

Or perhaps the AP and other sellout MSM channels show the convergence of “left-wing ideology with vaccine-pushing, needle-wielding propaganda and health tyranny all in one.” Just proving the point that name-calling and pejorative phrases really mean nothing unless they are supported with facts.

FYI, according to the UCR website, Carpiano is a “medical sociologist and population health scientist who studies how social factors, such as socioeconomic status, race-ethnicity, social connections, and community conditions, contribute to the physical and mental health of adults and children.” We were unable to uncover any specific medical training, but he did receive a sociology degree from Baylor University, so … “Sic’em Bears!”

That’s amazing! A sociology professor from California, whom we have never met, knows our innermost motivation for doing what we do.

Not only is he dead wrong, it’s offensive that Carpiano unequivocally states that our motivation is “money-making.”

For us, it all started in 1996, six months after we were married, when we took my 52 year old father, Graham Bollinger, to the hospital with severe stomach pains. Over the course of less than a day, the prognosis morphed from “gallstones” to “advanced stomach cancer” and the doctors removed over 75% of his stomach.

The doctors told us that Dad would have about 2 years to live if we didn’t do chemotherapy.

He only lived another 25 days.

He died from the surgery.

He bled to death.

After Dad died, we embarked on a mission to discover all we could about cancer treatments and therapies that might have helped prolong his life. We were shocked to learn that there were multiple effective cancer treatments that may have helped him, but due to censorship, we didn’t have the freedom to access them in the USA.

Over the course of the next several years, we lost 6 other close family members to cancer (and its ineffective treatments), culminating with the loss of our precious mother, Jerry Bollinger, in 2004.

We’ve now been on our “mission” for over 2 decades. During that time, we’ve uncovered some shocking information – doctors are being persecuted, successful treatments are being “censored” and “banned,” and people are dying because they do not have the freedom to choose the best treatment protocol for their particular condition… and they have been coerced into taking dangerous vaccines without being given informed consent.

We firmly believe that if Mom, Dad, and all our other family members had access to “advanced” cancer treatments (many of which are not “allowed” in the USA), they might still be alive today. It’s now our mission to share the TRUTH about cancer and the TRUTH about vaccines with the world.

And the truth is that we should all have the freedom to choose!

… freedom to choose the best cancer treatment protocol

… freedom to say “yes” or “no” to chemotherapy

… freedom to “try” a treatment that hasn’t been “approved” by the FDA

… freedom to vaccinate

… freedom NOT to vaccinate

… freedom to travel without “showing your (vaccination) papers”

Without freedom, we are no different from any of the many totalitarian dictatorships across the globe. We will NEVER STOP fighting to protect our health freedom!

Here are a couple of brief videos which the MSM won’t show you, since they are bound and determined to lie, slander, and impugn our motives.

https://youtu.be/8MdnXulsLiw

https://youtu.be/kbFgJ_jrnUo

In conclusion, we are pro-choice, pro-parental rights, pro-informed consent, and pro-transparency when it comes to vaccines. Feel free to visit the TTAV website if you want to see for yourselves why they are labeling “disinformation” and attempting to deplatform us.

Calling us “anti-vaxxers” is a clever and manipulative method to both dehumanize and vilify us, all in order to distract from what we really are. It is hate speech, plain and simple. It is a bigoted epithet. Some bigoted smears are based on racism and some are based on choices that people have made. The “anti-vaxxer” term falls into the latter category… and the hateful rhetoric has gotten out of hand. For instance, a recent article in the Washington Post is titled, “Anti-vaxxers are dangerous. Make them face isolation, fines, arrests.”

Even more egregious, a 2017 Boston Herald op-ed suggested that anti-vaxxers should be hanged. Amazingly, they still haven’t taken their post down, even though it encourages hatred and violence against a minority group. Outlets like the Boston Globe continued onward with their violent rhetoric, including the more recent story headline: “Mounting a ground war against anti-vaxxers.”

Below is one of Smith’s many Tweets from last week, posted right after the attack article was published. Feel free to comment.

https://twitter.com/MRSmithAP/status/1392914262650130435

Also, below is her publicly-available contact information published on the internet. We insist that if you choose to contact Smith, be polite. Unlike the mainstream media, we are not willing to launch personal attacks or threaten other human beings over philosophical differences. We do not have to stoop to such lows, as we have truth, justice and God on our side. ?