Whether you’ve chosen to take Pfizer-BioNTech’s or Moderna’s mRNA vaccine, you’ve unknowingly been injected with a vaccine derived from fetal cell research, according to new information.
Although these vaccines do not contain fetal tissue themselves, the research involved to create these experimental concoctions required aborted fetal tissue cells, removed from the kidneys of the aborted fetus. Although this information was previously “available” to the public, this fact was collectively censored, and privately suppressed, in fear of disrupting the company’s vaccine sales, as well as creating more public dispute on the current mRNA vaccines.
Similar to communist regimes, the major pharmaceutical company hoped their [vaccine] propaganda would rally up enough support to suppress the deception hidden behind the origin of their intent. Their goal, to pit the citizens against eachother, desensitizing the stigma against their experimental creations.
This tactic, brainwashes enlisted citizens to willingly and unknowingly act on behalf of the state, ultimately extending the regime’s ideological influence to the majority of society.
Popular American products will pledge their honesty to the consumer when their products are derived from, or tested on, animals. In contrast, modern popular pharmaceutical manufacturers choose not to disclose when the product is derived from humans.
“Labels can be deceptive, so be careful.” warns animal activist organization PETA. Their website continues, “labels may be misleading and not fully informative” adding, “we must boycott all the companies’ products in order to pressure them into putting an end to all animal tests.”
Should Americans be provided information allowing that same individual basic right to decide against products developed using research derived from the scraps of an aborted fetus? Should pharmaceutical manufacturers be legally required to disclose when their products, or derivative research, use this form of testing? Is information suppression a form of deception?
As a result of the pandemic, the medical and scientific community have risen to give recommendations to our U.S. legislators—even the President himself. Now, these recommendations have become executive orders, imposing harsh restrictions on individual liberties and social freedoms, at the expense of total control of our health.
Has our American government, and modern society, fallen to a state of iatrarchy?
Leaked emails from Pfizer reveal the dark intent to cover up the fact that the mRNA ingredients with researching originating from fetal cell tissue from abortions. The company chose to not disclose this information in hopes of maximizing profit and sales. Now, the information has been exposed. The American population has been informed the next shocking detail of these experimental concoctions.
Pfizer publicly released this information in a report on Sept 8, 2020. These cells come from HEK293T cell line—or Human Embryonic Kidney 293—which was first established in the 1970’s using cells from a kidney of a discarded fetus.
Philip Dormitzer, Pfizer Chief Scientific Officer: “HEK293T cells, used for the IVE assay, are ultimately derived from an aborted fetus. On the other hand, the Vatican doctrinal committee has confirmed that they consider it acceptable for Pro-Life believers to be immunized. Pfizer’s official statement couches the answer well and is what should be provided in response to an outside inquiry.”
Project Veritas, received leaked emails from a Pfizer whistleblower. The email, stated “human fetal derived cell lines are not used to produce our investigational vaccine, which consists of synthetic and enzymatic alloy produced components. One or more cell lines with an origin that can be traced back to human fetal tissue has been used in laboratory tests associated with the vaccine program.”
“We want to avoid having the information on the fetal cells floating out there.” the company’s email reads, warning of the “heightened scrutiny on every detail” of their creation.
The email continues, “We would like to avoid creating an opportunity to raise an issue” exposing their plot deceive the American population. It adds “The risk of communicating this right now outweighs any potential benefit we could see” showing Pfizer’s intent to suppress information about the ingredients of their coronavirus concoctions.
The Vatican released a statement on Vaccine ethics, directly describing the mRNA “vaccines against Covid-19 that have been developed from cell lines derived from tissues obtained from two fetuses that were not spontaneously aborted.”
1. As the Instruction Dignitas Personae states, in cases where cells from aborted fetuses are employed to create cell lines for use in scientific research, “there exist differing degrees of responsibility” of cooperation in evil. For example,“in organizations where cell lines of illicit origin are being utilized, the responsibility of those who make the decision to use them is not the same as that of those who have no voice in such a decision”.
2. In this sense, when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available (e.g. in countries where vaccines without ethical problems are not made available to physicians and patients, or where their distribution is more difficult due to special storage and transport conditions, or when various types of vaccines are distributed in the same country but health authorities do not allow citizens to choose the vaccine with which to be inoculated) it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.
3. “The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent–in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.”
4. “In fact, the licit use of such vaccines does not and should not in any way imply that there is a moral endorsement of the use of cell lines proceeding from aborted fetuses. Both pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies are therefore encouraged to produce, approve, distribute and offer ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for either health care providers or the people to be vaccinated.”
5. “At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one’s own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.”
6. “Finally, there is also a moral imperative for the pharmaceutical industry, governments and international organizations to ensure that vaccines, which are effective and safe from a medical point of view, as well as ethically acceptable, are also accessible to the poorest countries in a manner that is not costly for them. The lack of access to vaccines, otherwise, would become another sign of discrimination and injustice that condemns poor countries to continue living in health, economic and social poverty.”
Project Veritas is also the organization responsible for recording Nick Karl, Pfizer Scientist who stated “When somebody is naturally immune — like they got COVID — they probably have more antibodies against the virus…When you actually get the virus, you’re going to start producing antibodies against multiple pieces of the virus…So, your antibodies are probably better at that point than the [COVID] vaccination.”
This detail [of fetal cell origin] is something that should have been disclosed to our country’s citizens willing to participate in this experimental implementation.
In addition, this information should have been disclosed to other nations around the world, who may view this in a very negative light, especially after receiving it. The controversial information was muted by Big Pharma to maximize vaccine sales, which additionally encourages regressive segregation of America [for the unvaccinated].
Major Pharmaceutical companies suppressed controversial vaccine derivatives from the entire world, simply for profit. Were these Vaccine designed to protect humanity against the virus, or were there other sinister forces at play? If Pfizer chose to suppress the ingredients of their concoction, what other information is being withheld?