“New Vaccines Will Permanently Alter Human DNA”

Image: http://www.abc.net.au

We the individuals are being ruled by a minority of psychopaths who seem to be suffering from some form of Dr. Frankenstein disorder:

New vaccines will permanently alter human DNA

Why is the government so maniacal about injecting vaccines?

by Jon Rappoport

May 17, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Consider this article in light of the accelerating push to mandate and enforce vaccination across the planet.

The reference is the New York Times, 3/9/2015, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.”

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.” Alteration of the human genetic makeup. Permanent alteration.

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

Let’s take this further. Under the cover of preventing disease (and all good covert ops float a laudatory goal to conceal their true intent), vaccines are ideal carriers for all sorts of genes that would be permanently incorporated into the human structure.

The enormous tonnage of propaganda about vaccines, and the resultant mandatory laws that enforce vaccination, create a powerful channel along which re-engineering is eminently possible.

Synthetic genes injected into billions of humans would form a grand experiment to create an altered species.

This grand experiment could be compartmentalized. For example, secretly, genes 1-6 would be injected into Group A in geo-location I. Genes 7-12 would be injected into Group B in location II. And so on.

Vaccine recipients will be subjected to ongoing surveillance to gauge the results. On various pretexts, members of these groups will be brought into clinics for exams and tests, to discover markers that purportedly reveal their bodies’ responses to the genetic alterations.

Are these people stronger or weaker? Do they exhibit signs of illness? Do they report behavioral changes? Through surveillance and testing, all sorts of information can be compiled.

Of course, there is no informed consent. The human guinea pigs have no knowledge of what is being done to them.

And what would be the objectives of this lunatic research program? They would vary. On a simplified level, there would be two. Create weaker and more docile and more obedient and more dependent humans. On the other side, create stronger and healthier and more intelligent and more talented humans. Obviously, the results of the latter experiments would be applied to the “chosen few.” And clearly, some of this research will be carried on inside the military. Secrecy is easier to maintain, and the aim to produce “better soldiers” is a long-standing goal of the Pentagon and its research arm, DARPA.

A global vaccine experiment of the type I’m describing here has another bonus for the planners: those people who fall ill or die can be written off as having suffered from various diseases and disorders which “have nothing to do with vaccines.” This is already SOP for the medical cartel.

The numbers of casualties, in this grand experiment, would be of no concern to the Brave New World shapers. As I’ve documented extensively, the US medical system is already killing 2.25 million people per decade (a conservative estimate), as a result of FDA-approved drugs and mistreatment in hospitals. Major media and government leaders, aware of this fact, have done nothing about it.

Here is a quote from Princeton molecular biologist, Lee Silver, the author of Remaking Eden. It gives you a window into how important geneticists are thinking about an engineered future:

“The GenRich–who account for ten percent of the American population–[will] all carry synthetic genes. All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class…

“Naturals [unaltered humans] work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. [Eventually] the GenRich class and the Natural class will become entirely separate species with no ability to crossbreed, and with as much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a chimpanzee.

“Many think that it is inherently unfair for some people to have access to technologies that can provide advantages while others, less well-off, are forced to depend on chance alone, [but] American society adheres to the principle that personal liberty and personal fortune are the primary determinants of what individuals are allowed and able to do.

“Indeed, in a society that values individual freedom above all else, it is hard to find any legitimate basis for restricting the use of repro[grammed]-genetics. I will argue [that] the use of reprogenetic technologies is inevitable. [W]hether we like it or not, the global marketplace will reign supreme.”

Here is another gem, from Gregory Stock, former director of the program in Medicine, Technology, and Society at the UCLA School of Medicine:

“Even if half the world’s species were lost [during genetic experiments], enormous diversity would still remain. When those in the distant future look back on this period of history, they will likely see it not as the era when the natural environment was impoverished, but as the age when a plethora of new forms—some biological, some technological, some a combination of the two—burst onto the scene. We best serve ourselves, as well as future generations, by focusing on the short-term consequences of our actions rather than our vague notions about the needs of the distant future.”

Notice that these two well-known scientists are speaking about “ethics.” A significant number of such experts have their own lunatic version of what is right and wrong.

With vaccines that permanently alter human genetic makeup on the horizon, and given the corporate and government-agency penchant for secrecy, we are already inhabiting the Brave New World. It’s not a distant prospect.

Every genetic innovation is aimed at bringing us closer to a stimulus-response world, and further away from freedom.

Which is why the defense of freedom becomes ever more vital.

That struggle comes down to who controls, yes, the philosophy, not the science. Is each human merely and only a system waiting to be re-engineered, or is he something far more, inhabiting a physical form?

We already know what the vast majority of brain researchers and geneticists believe, as well as the governments and corporations and universities and foundations that make important decisions.

Of course, these days, the college faculty department considered to be the least important, the most useless, a mere appendage waiting for those with wisdom to put it out of its misery and kill it off…is the philosophy department.

That leaves us to take up the argument and the resistance.

Not Lee Silver at Princeton or Gregory Stock or Bill Gates or George Soros or David Rockefeller or the Pope or Stephen Hawking or Obama or the Clintons or Monsanto or Dow or the Bush family or PBS or FOX or socialists or Communists or liberals or conservatives or some wackadoodle at Harvard or MIT or UCLA.


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe…

Source: New vaccines will permanently alter human DNA « Jon Rappoport’s Blog


Not convinced that something like this is really happening? Then check this out:

Nurse Whistleblower: Hospitals Force Vaccinating Patients Without Their Knowledge – Zen Gardner

6 thoughts on ““New Vaccines Will Permanently Alter Human DNA”

  1. “Synthetic genes injected into billions of humans would form a grand experiment to create an altered species.”

    Well, good luck with that. Genetic mutations already happen all the time and randomly.

    Furthermore, each individual is already genetically unique, that is, quite literally a kind of species in his own right. So such ‘genetic engineering’ might yield seemingly predictable results, but the results would be more imaginary than real, kind of like what those of seasonal flu vaccines are currently.

    In addition, given the incredibly crude or ‘brute force’ mode of delivery, that is, through viruses haphazardly transferring genetic material (synthetic or otherwise) — which, by the way, is something that happens naturally and perhaps not all that infrequently, a phenomenon known as horizontal gene transfer ( a – http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/03/humans-may-harbor-more-100-genes-other-organisms ; & b – http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150619-there-is-alien-dna-inside-you) — it is highly unlikely that such tampering will any time soon yield either predictable or even “desirable” results.

    And then . . . and then . . . changing an individual’s genetic makeup does not automatically make that change heritable, which would have to involve alterations to germ cells (ovaries and sperm). These alterations would be either dominant or recessive mutations. If recessive, they would then have to be carried by paired alleles, or inherited simultaneously from both parents. Consequently, there are a lot and a lot of “ifs” at hand even far beyond mastering a reliable means of delivering a genetic payload.

    So the vaccine program at hand isn’t likely at all or ever to “create” a species that isn’t already being altered in countless and unexpected ways.

    Of course, I don’t question or underestimate the level of venality and immorality that Jon’s article actually highlights. The vaccine pushers and the geneticists are above all selling a product and a promise, and yes, most certainly, they are quite prepared to conduct trials on unsuspecting individuals with reckless disregard for any risks or consequences to anyone.

    And then what is one to say about a person like Lee Silver? Nothing sufficiently derogatory comes to mind, but a whore he most certainly is.

    And then this guy: Gregory Stock?

    “Even if half the world’s species were lost [during genetic experiments], enormous diversity would still remain.”

    Is that so? Yeah, well I hope that if or when that half of the world’s species ever does disappear on account of the kind of genetic tinkering you have in mind, Mr. Stock, the likes of your phenotype will go with it.

    You would think that this sort of lunacy (brain damage, really) was incompatible with technological and scientific prowess, but apparently not. We have incontrovertible proof, then, that clever can also be obtuse, and unfortunately for the rest of us, dangerously so because clever. At times like this it is nice to know that all things will pass, including and especially Mr. Stock.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Norm, you wrote,

    “We have incontrovertible proof, then, that clever can also be obtuse, and unfortunately for the rest of us, dangerously so because clever. At times like this it is nice to know that all things will pass, including and especially Mr. Stock.”

    Yes sir, we have an overabundance, these days, of obtusely clever types who are dangerous, needless to say. The lunatics are, indeed, running this asylum.

    Since I know very little about genetics, except for the minimal amount of info I was made privy to in high school biology, this kind of article speaks to me more about the political aspect than the scientific. It is the idea that these low-life criminals believe they can do with us as they please, when they please, and get away with it; after all, they do have the support, in all ways, of their elite owners and operators, who have given them the go ahead.

    You also wrote,

    “You would think that this sort of lunacy (brain damage, really) was incompatible with technological and scientific prowess, but apparently not.”

    What happened to the notion that knowledge made people more empathetic and caring? Perhaps, this is still true, but the minute money and fifteen minutes of fame are added to the mix, out goes the person’s humanity?

    Did you see the article I added to the end of the post?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Yes, exactly: as soon as ‘pofit,’ especially of a monopolistic kind, is involved, you can kiss your ethics a good farewell.

    I also agree that the article speaks more to the political than the scientific aspect, which is by far the more important matter.

    No, I didn’t notice the article you added. I’ll have a look as soon as I can make time.

    Reading another couple of Kropotkin pieces that I’m about to post. The one is titled: “Communism and Anarchy.” The other: “The Wage System.”

    Liked by 1 person

  4. The article I added just backs Rappoport’s article up. You can gloss over it. No need to read the entire article. Whistleblowers seem to be making a difference, especially in this area!

    I’ll look forward to reading and rebloging them!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Norm, just read your latest post. I could not stop reading.

    It is amazing to me how I was lead to buy into this system. And yet it is not amazing, since I am but a mortal, just like everyone else, and I was conditioned, programmed, to accept this horrific lie as truth, as life itself, from a child on.

    I feel a bit saner by having read both of these pieces. It is, and has been, the warped, criminal mindset of the minority that has enslaved we the majority for far too long. And this is why I am drawn to anarchism. I would love to know that some day soon, all of humanity will be living a life that is worth living, and not just existing from one paycheck to the next to buy and have this thing and that until they drop dead.

    And this is also where my personal beliefs come into play, since I can make no sense, whatsoever, of a ‘life’ that proceeds in this manner, and without ever a consideration for life being worth much more than this. Or in other words, I don’t believe we are an accident that has been condemned to a lifetime of toil and misery, while awaiting death. We and all of creation must exist for some other reason than just this existence.

    Maybe it’s because I spent my life pursuing music that I feel this way? But I made up my mind, at an early age, that I did not value the ‘life’ my parents, and their parents, had experienced. To coin an old 70’s refrain, which became a mantra to me, “I’m not going to spend the rest of my life quietly fading away.” And for the most part, I lived my life with this mantra leading me. And in most ways, I have no regrets for doing so.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Here it is, what I wish could be once again:

    “…Or the destruction of States, and new life starting again in thousands of centers on the principles of the lively initiative of the individual and groups and that of free agreement.”

    Millions upon millions of self-governing/sustaining communities, and yet, connected together, as in the past, and without a state in charge.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.