An Email From Andrew Wakefield Today

To The Truth Barrier, regarding Tribeca Film Festival’s abrupt about-face cancellation of the film Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe:

It read:

 

“The pressure came from the Sloan Foundation in New York, that apparently has some financial ties with Tribeca Film Festival. Worth Investigating.”

 

A cursory Google reveals this orgy of tangled big money, big vaccine dreams, and big scientific bankruptcy.

 

How that AIDS vaccine coming along, Sloan Foundation?

 

It was first promised in 1984, “within two years,” by Robert Gallo. That was 32 years ago.

 

As for Sloan Foundation and The Tribeca Film Festival, there’s this.

 

“The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, in partnership with the Tribeca Film Institute, provides funding for narrative features or series that are scientifically relevant, accurate, and exciting through the TFI Sloan Filmmaker Fund.”

 

In short: A major donor to the endeavors of Tribeca Film Institute extended its reach to crush a film it neither funded, nor had anything to do with.

 

How is that reasonable, or acceptable, in a democratic society of the arts?

 

So, it was not their favorite film. Where in its contract with Tribeca does it state that they may reach across and crush films they did not fund, and do not “approve” of?

 

We shall investigate.

 

light_spectrum

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

  1. peter vithus says:

    My sincere thanks here also to you, Celia Faber for your excellent and arduous work in the field of critical investigative medical journalism over the years and for maintaining this high quality website. You’re indeed a true hero, only driven by your sense of justice and fairness and fight for the truth. You daily put yourself in the line of fire for exposing fraudulent science and abuse of powers of the BigPharma and certain areas of the medical establishment, not least in your coverage of the inferior science underlying HIV-AIDS. It is indeed a long process to reverse the effect of years of medical propaganda and so to deprogram, educate people, who have been brainwashed to believe in the truth of the paradigm of “modern” (allopathic) medicine, that sees the human body merely as a sophisticated machine, and disease merely as a sudden dysfunction, a spontaneous error in the apparatus that has to be rectified by medicine or that an infection has taken place which should then be eradicated with antibiotics. One can only wonder how we, the human being have survived 100 thousands years without medications and how wild animal rarely suffer diabetes, CVA/ heart attack, arthritis, neurological diseases, which obviously all are lifestyle diseases and most of which easily can be reversed by optimal nutrition, fresh air and sunshine, stress management and increased physical activity/exercise etc. The believe that our increased longevity is due to medical intervention is one of the biggest medical myths among the many other myth they have created to sell their synthetic, unnatural short lasting medicines/creams. e.g the cholesterol/saturated fat-CVD myth, the salt-hypertension myths, the sun-melanoma myth, etc. ! The increased in longevity seen over the last 100 years is mainly an artefact, from improved survival rate of newborn and babies mainly due to improved hygiene, improved health and safety on work places, lowered work pressure with better time to recuperate. Only, one area of medicine I believe has added to the improved longevity – better acute care from accident etc. ambulance and emergency medicine. It’s my claim that the statistic has been screwed by the high number of early deaths due to the above factors, which obviously pulls down the average lifespan of the whole population, Ups, I believe I got side-tracked here. Best regards

    • Denise Bolleter Spencer says:

      I am a retired nurse due to injury severe and can no longer lift patients. A nurse especially old ones live by do no harm. We take a Florence Nighinggale very , very seriously. This is not a new subject, it has been going on for years in the United States of America. We the people Demand Justice, and that the truth, be told.
      Many times I had watched the Conspiracy Theory show. Doctors of the US had to leave the country they resided in, due to being a Whistle Blower. I myself in the coming months will be one. I will be in Washington, DC where my beloved mother went and taught grant writing all expense paid. She was already ” Assistant Editor tor a very well known “Worldwide Journal. Frankly and candidly speaking, we the people demand that the FDA protect us. The tax dollars of the hard working people in the United States pay their salary. I am tired of this White Collar Crime. Soon I will be coming with a huge story of not one family member , not 2 family members, not ever 3 real life stories of nurses and documents to prove it. Our FDA needs to stop being wined and dined and giving grants to the Pharmaceutical Industry. There are published books on real True Life things existing now. I personally lost first my father to medical errors at age 47 a Veteran of the Korean War. Then I lost my baby brother from a dirty pharmacist that dispensed without a prescription 30 Dalmane sleeping pills. He overdosed with them to commit suicide and other prescriptions he got hold of at our beloved grandmother’s apartment occurred in the year 1988 . He was only 27years old She also was a nurse. She died the weekend of Hurricane George in 1998 due to a severe hospital error. I then lost my most prized possession in 2004, severe cover up, that is a pending appeal. I can only say that if this does not go as expected for the” Truth will Prevail.”All entities involved will be given the proper place in the book and then the movie. You just cannot make these things up. The last one not dead my father’s brother another very prized possession along with his wife at a well known hospital in a state that hides behind its mistakes, this one is quite the unreal, He is alive and that is due to my aunt also a nurse and my mother’s sister. I have to save things for the future of this book, movie, and mankind. Many people ” lay people” have no idea what things go on behind the scenes, Discovery over last 4 years of investigation to severe “WHITE COLLAR CRIME” We the people deserve to know all, and deserve the best possible care available. We do not need any PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES HIDING BEHIND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THAT IS ALL I CAN DISCLOSE FOR NOW. “THE TRUTH AND WHOLE TRUTH ” SO HELP US GOD. Our family has had it and we have been spoken to loudly by what we need to do, to help, do not harm and by God Educate. Nurses are teachers. This will blow the mind of all and no one will be able to put the book down and or be distracted by these real true life events of our loving family. The living Uncle will be doing a documentary. Our phones are tapped. This is a nightmare we are tired and ready to fight back.

  2. peter vithus says:

    @Redpill1, @Estellea Banes. Thank you, Redpill1 for the excellent, detailed and well referenced exploration into the ugly and conspired Wakefield case. Thanks also to the BigPharma troll, Estelela Banes, who prompted you to put together this reply, which we others now can use as a reference, which I hope you don’t mind to.
    Estrella Banes, although, she is either completely brainwashed into the belief of the pure wonders of vaccinations or simply is just paid to do what she does – attempting to discredit anti-vacciners, she do point out that it’s only a reasonable right of a sponsor/ contributor to interfere/intervene with here the festivals program and object to have films shown that they believe potentially could undermine their business ! That, however also shows that their business, vaccination IS only that – a business. That it have absolutely nothing to do with advancing medicine, and improving people’s health. If not so, why would they not dare to look into observations/evidence that can possible elucidate the adverse effects of vaccines in certain people and find ways to identify these more susceptible individuals with higher risk of adverse effect and so finding better ways to immunise against the most virulent viruses.
    Therefore, in my opinion the main responsibility is the Festival owners themselves, they should never be so dependant on one or few sponsors that they would bow to them and so let them act as a censorship. Lastly, it’s about time we have open discussion based on scientific evidence on the safety and efficiency of vaccination – does it saved more lives, and if so, does the number of saved lives justify the number of individuals and their families, whose lives have been severely compromised by the adverse effect of one or more vaccine e.g. autistic children and their families. ! Does the benefits really outweighs the risk ! A scary realisation should be that the adverse effects of vaccines are surely highly UNDER-reported as it will obviously be when it’s the doctor, nurse or other biased healthcare individuals, who are responsible for the reporting., instead of an independent institution ! Lastly, as Pasteur admitted on his deathbed, “the environment is everything, the microorganism nothing” – illustrating his realisation that a strong health immune system will be able to naturally combat any invading microorganism, bacteria, virus etc. The nutritional status, adequate levels of a an individual, their level vitamin and minerals has immense importance for the immune system, where low status of certain nutrients, especially vitamin D, vitamin C, Selenium, Zinc etc. severely compromises the compatibility of the WBC’s, etc. to which there’s hundreds of scientific references for. In nutritional compromised individuals the strong and unnatural immune stimulus of a vaccine (bypassing the mucous membranes) may very likely lead to an aberrant immune response and possible be a factor in the adverse effects beside the obvious inflammation inducing toxins contained in mist vaccines e.g. formaldehyde, mercury, aluminium etc.

  3. stephanie christian says:

    Censorship has no part in a Republic of the people, by the people for the people. We want clear answers! We want transparent Science. The first rule of Science must be continued exploration and the understanding that what we once believed to be definite is many times NOT! I am disgusted at my City for this lack of backbone! Shame to any who blindly believe……. the facts have not been heard!

  4. Lesly says:

    I thought that name sounded familiar……the Arthur P Sloan Foundation – yep – i used to hear that name “funded by the Arthur P Sloan foundation” back when i used to watch PBS before it became so apparent that PBS was just a shill for Big Pharma. Oh its all making sense now!! Dropped PBS from the lineup. Dropping Tribeca Film Festival (I’m a new yorker and always supported it) Anyone else you want to alert me to drop, Arthur P Sloan? I’ll just go to your website and see who else is on your massive payroll. They’ve paid over 100 million to the CDC – what on earth could their agenda be?!?! Anyway – my deepest gratitude for your massive fuck up – you’ve helped our cause in ways unimaginable!! The viewing of the film at your lame ass festival wouldn’t have even touched the tip of this iceberg you’ve unleashed. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!!!!!!!!!!

  5. Maz says:

    Looks like there is something to hide and I want to decide for myself……..

  6. Anonymous says:

    All great truths were once blasphemies. I can’t get over how well the govt has programmed ppl. It’s quite shocking.

  7. Brother Strawberry says:

    First they ignore you,
    Then they laugh at you,
    Then they fight you,
    Then you win.
    Mahatma Gandhi

    They are desperate to silence you!!
    Prepare for your victory lap.
    Brother Strawberry

    • Fruitbat says:

      First they ignore you.
      Then they shout it from the rooftops.
      Then people catch diseases.
      Some die.
      Meanwhile, money better spent on real research is wasted.
      Happy now?

      • a river says:

        First they fake research
        Then they force vaccines on trusting public
        Then people get sick from vaccines
        Some die

  8. Edward Lieb says:

    This the most disgusting abuse of power I have ever seen. It is unimaginable that they believe they can get away with it.

  9. Estellea Banes says:

    “The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, in partnership with the Tribeca Film Institute, provides funding for narrative features or series that are scientifically relevant, accurate, and exciting through the TFI Sloan Filmmaker Fund.”

    Perhaps the words “scientifically relevant” and “accurate” have escaped your attention. Vaxxed is anything but. If the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is a major donor to the Tribeca Film Festival then it seems perfectly appropriate for them to have a say in what is featured there.

    • Ginko says:

      Hey Estella- So you saw the movie? You must have if you know that it is “unscientific”! How did you get a chance to see it?

      A CDC scientist recently came forward and said they faked loads of data to hide the fact that the MMR vax given too early greatly increases autism in Afro-American kids. Look it up his name is Thompson.

      • Matt says:

        Wakefield was involved, of course it isn’t accurate. He was stripped of his license for lying and falsifying data. And he hasn’t learned his lesson.

        • Redpill1 says:

          Hmm, lets see. Dr. Wakefield “Report” was so egregious that it took the British Medical community 12 years to discover it?????

          Here is the story without all the lies and hyperbola:
          -First lie in your comment: “Wakefield’s study”
          It wasn’t a study—-it was a one page report. Since you don’t know the name of the REPORT I will provide:
          The Lancet, Volume 375, Issue 9713, Page 445, 6 February 2010
          Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children”
          Volume 351, Number 9103 28 February 1998 A J Wakefield, S H Murch, A Anthony, J Linnell, D M Casson, M Malik, M Berelowitz, A P Dhillon, M A Thomson, P Harvey, A Valentine, S E Davies, J A Walker-Smith
          CONCLUSION
          “We did not prove an association between measles,mumps, and rubella vaccine
          and the syndrome described.Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve
          this issue.”
          ******Read the conclusion again and again and again. It stated: “We did not prove an association between measles,mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described. Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue.”******

          Did you know that there are 13 authors on this report?

          The paper was retracted, ALTHOUGH THE ACCURACY HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED and still isn’t to this day. Brian Deer accusation have been scrutinized and this is what happened:
          “When the Deer/BMJ findings came under the scrutiny of Dr David Lewis in November 2011 they were forced to re-trench (reported in Nature):

          “But he (Bjarnason) says that the forms don’t clearly support charges that Wakefield deliberately misinterpreted the records.
          “The data are subjective. It’s different to say it’s deliberate falsification,” he says.
          “Deer notes that he never accused Wakefield of fraud over his interpretation of pathology records… (WHAT???????)

          “Fiona Godlee, the editor of the BMJ, says that the journal’s conclusion of fraud was not based on the “pathology” but on a number of discrepancies between the children’s records and the claims in the Lancet paper…”

          Although Godlee had previously stated in February 2011:
          “The case we presented against Andrew Wakefield that the1998 Lancet paper was intended to mislead was not critically reliant on GP records”. It is primarily based on Royal Free hospital records, including histories taken by clinicians, and letters and other documents received at the Royal Free from GPs and consultants.”

          But it is clear that the judge who presided over Walker-Smith’s exoneration and reviewed the Lancet paper in detail could not find any evidence of this. His one major quibble was over the statement about ethical approval in the paper which Walker-Smith says he did not see – however this is accurate too.

          “Ethical approval and consent:
          “Investigations were approved by the Ethical Practices Committee of the Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust, and parents gave informed consent.”

          The paper did not have ethical approval and consent, and *****did not need it***** because it was simply a review of patient data (which was what was on the tin). The procedures needed ethical approval and consent and had them.
          *Court finding are posted below with a link to the actual documents.*

          This is what Brian Deer has to say today: “Who Can Say?” — Journalist Who Alleged Wakefield Committed Fraud Backs Off Key Claim: http://www.ageofautism (dot) com/dr-andrew-wakefield/. “Brian Deer finally admitted he filed the complaint”. Not the parents of the children, not another doctor-a journalist-and not a very good one. He currently trolls the comment boards looking for his name so he can explain his part in the Wakefield witch hunt.

          So this is what the British High Court adjudicated in 2012 when Professor Dr. Walker Smith filed an appeal on the paper (name above)
          “But following the successful appeal of the paper’s senior clinical investigator – John Walker-Smith – THE GMC FINDINGS THAT SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR LANCET RETRACTION HAVE SINCE BEEN OVERTURNED.

          With regard to the GMC’s false claims that the patients in the paper were not “consecutively referred”:
          “157. …Thus construed, this paper does not bear the meaning put upon it by the [GMC] panel. The phrase “consecutively referred” means no more than that the children were referred successively, rather than as a single batch, to the Department of Paediatric Gastroenterology.”

          Similarly, the GMC’s rulings that the children in the Lancet paper were subjects of a research project that did not gain ethical approval ALSO PROVED UNFOUNDED:

          “158. …The [GMC] panel’s finding that the description of the patient population in the Lancet paper was misleading would only have been justified if its primary finding that all of the Lancet children were referred for the purposes of research as part of Project 172-96 is sustainable. Because, for the reasons which I have given, it was not, this aspect of its findings must also fall.”

          *England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court)
          Decision Between: PROFESSOR JOHN WALKER-SMITH Appellant- and – GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL- Respondent.
          MR STEPHEN MILLER QC AND MS ANDREA LINDSAY-STRUGO
          (instructed by EASTWOODS SOLICITORS) for the Appellant MISS JOANNA GLYNN QC AND MR CHRISTOPHER MELLOR (instructed by FIELD FISHER WATERHOUSE LLP) for the Respondent
          Hearing dates: 13th. 14th, 15th, 16th & 17th February 2012
          http://www.bailii(dot)org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/503.html

          The judge found only one misleading statement in the paper, but it was not because investigations undertaken were unethical experiments described as gaining ethical approval in the paper according to the now-overturned findings on which the paper’s retraction was based. On the contrary, it was because investigations in the paper were described as being ethically approved when most were clinically indicated and required no such approval, although a few investigations were ethically approved. This may require an erratum, but it does not justify keeping the paper fully retracted. Reinstatement of the paper would literally expose the industries fraudulent activities. It would be a game over for the vaccine industry because it would not be able to financially pay off the lawsuits-at least outside of the US.

          -Judge Lord Justice Mitting, was scathing about the GMC’s ‘superficial and inadequate’ examining of Deer’s evidence, and stated much of it was just plain WRONG!! The Judge stopped short of accusing Deer of making things up, but we can draw our own conclusions. Deer’s response on his web page and on Matt Carey’s LB/RB blog was to accuse the Judge of ‘inexperience’ – VERY unwise!! In the UK, Judges are inviolate. Deer plainly regards himself as an expert on the law, as well as an expert on
          histopathology, science, medicine and anything else you can think of. Walter Mitty comes to mind.

          Dr. Wakefield was not developing a vaccine. It’s just another one of the MSM/CDC/pharma-trolldom lie/. Back Story you never bother to investigate:

          Professor Mark Pepyps admitted on that BBC Radio interview, he effectively got rid of Dr Wakefield, by asking him to leave his research position. (Refusal would have meant a sacking). Prof Pepys then withdrew all UCL support for Dr Wakefield’s patented Transfer Factor,****** NOT a vaccine*****, as Deer claimed, but designed to ameliorate the effects of measles, particularly in children who could not be vaccinated due to their immune systems being compromised. (ie children with cancer undergoing chemotherapy). Dr Wakefield was working on a hypothesis, vaccine derived measles virus, could be causing gut problems in autistic children. This research was deliberately stopped and denigrated, in my opinion a chance to understand and treat both gut disorders and autism was deliberately and shamefully prevented. Prof Pepys linked up with MMR vaccine manufacturers GSK (what a coincidence),to produce a new company Pentraxin Therapeutics, and produced a plethora of patents of his own. At the last count he was going ‘cap in hand’ to the UK Medical Research Council for funding to research the benefits of …..guess what? ‘immunotherapy’…yes the same therapies Dr Wakefield was working on. As Deer says:- ‘You couldn’t make it up!’

          Why hasn’t Dr. Wakefield tried to clear his name like Professor Walker-Smith. To launch an appeal in the British Courts of this magnitude it would take a minimum of 8 million dollars British or 12 million US. Walker-Smith appeals process was funded.

          My opinion here:
          Rather than launch a campaign or a Go Fund page as they are now called I believe that Dr. Wakefield having been abused severely by the very profession he was part of until he actually tried to fulfill his Hippocratic oath of FIRST DO NO HARM, made the decision to have money to fund information campaigns such as this film. He was a researcher, not a practicing physician so he was not seeing patients as some have outright stated. Unhindered now by the restraints put on him previously by the white wall of silence and the mafia style intimidation of big pharma-he can now go where the research leads him and his team. After all in CSI the meme is Follow The Evidence.

          The censoring and and the removal of the film from the festival has probably gave it more publicity than it otherwise would have had. At the end of the day this is a violation of the First Amendment and it is already being questioned by pro-vax parents who don’t understand why this issue is not allowed to be discussed in a free country. I think it’s hitting people that we are not free and the government is hiding something. 40% of parents in a recent poll have stopped vaccinating. I believe others are not looking at this situation with more clarity.

          Since you believe in censoring and suppression of free speech–Seig Hail Comrade.

          • peter vithus says:

            @Redpill1, @Estellea Banes. Thank you, Redpill1 for the excellent, detailed and well referenced exploration into the ugly and conspired Wakefield case. Thanks also to the BigPharma troll, Estelela Banes, who prompted you to put together this reply, which we others now can use as a reference, which I hope you don’t mind to.
            Estrella Banes, although, she is either completely brainwashed into the belief of the pure wonders of vaccinations or simply is just paid to do what she does – attempting to discredit anti-vacciners, she do point out that it’s only a reasonable right of a sponsor/ contributor to interfere/intervene with here the festivals program and object to have films shown that they believe potentially could undermine their business ! That, however also shows that their business, vaccination IS only that – a business. That it have absolutely nothing to do with advancing medicine, and improving people’s health. If not so, why would they not dare to look into observations/evidence that can possible elucidate the adverse effects of vaccines in certain people and find ways to identify these more susceptible individuals with higher risk of adverse effect and so finding better ways to immunise against the most virulent viruses.
            Therefore, in my opinion the main responsibility is the Festival owners themselves, they should never be so dependant on one or few sponsors that they would bow to them and so let them act as a censorship. Lastly, it’s about time we have open discussion based on scientific evidence on the safety and efficiency of vaccination – does it saved more lives, and if so, does the number of saved lives justify the number of individuals and their families, whose lives have been severely compromised by the adverse effect of one or more vaccine e.g. autistic children and their families. ! Does the benefits really outweighs the risk ! A scary realisation should be that the adverse effects of vaccines are surely highly UNDER-reported as it will obviously be when it’s the doctor, nurse or other biased healthcare individuals, who are responsible for the reporting., instead of an independent institution ! Lastly, as Pasteur admitted on his deathbed, “the environment is everything, the microorganism nothing” – illustrating his realisation that a strong health immune system will be able to naturally combat any invading microorganism, bacteria, virus etc. The nutritional status, adequate levels of a an individual, their level vitamin and minerals has immense importance for the immune system, where low status of certain nutrients, especially vitamin D, vitamin C, Selenium, Zinc etc. severely compromises the compatibility of the WBC’s, etc. to which there’s hundreds of scientific references for. In nutritional compromised individuals the strong and unnatural immune stimulus of a vaccine (bypassing the mucous membranes) may very likely lead to an aberrant immune response and possible be a factor in the adverse effects beside the obvious inflammation inducing toxins contained in mist vaccines e.g. formaldehyde, mercury, aluminium etc.

        • Jen says:

          All those charges were dropped look it up

        • Jen says:
          • Estellea Banes says:

            No Jen, that was Walker-Smith, not Wakefield.

            • Redpill1 says:

              The retraction was about the paper. The paper you don’t even know the name of. Walker Smith was the actual person who did the intake and documentation. Let’s be clear:
              THE ACCURACY HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED and still isn’t to this day.

              “Fiona Godlee, the editor of the BMJ, says that the journal’s conclusion of fraud was not based on the pathology but on a number of discrepancies between the children’s records and the claims in the Lancet paper…”

              It is clear that the judge who presided over Walker-Smith’s exoneration and reviewed the Lancet paper in detail could not find any evidence of this. His one major quibble was over the statement about ethical approval in the paper which Walker-Smith says he did not see – however this is accurate too.

              “Ethical approval and consent
              “Investigations were approved by the Ethical Practices Committee of the Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust, and parents gave informed consent.”

              The paper did not have ethical approval and consent, and did not need it because it was simply a review of patient data (which was what was on the tin). The procedures needed ethical approval and consent and had them.

              Are you familiar with this:
              One month after Wakefield’s original Lancet paper, a study of vaccine injury claims by US government scientists in the journal Pediatrics found that 48 claimants developed encephalopathy within 15 days after receiving an attenuated measles vaccine, resulting in severe neurological sequelae or death. This happened in “a nonrandom, statistically significant distribution of cases on days 8 and 9.” The authors concluded:

              This clustering suggests that a causal relationship between measles vaccine and encephalopathy may exist as a rare complication of measles immunization.
              Pediatrics. 1998 Mar;101(3 Pt 1):383-7.

              Look up this paper. It says the exact same thing as the retracted Lancet paper. Yet, the medical mafia hasn’t gone after these authors. The just made sure the paper was buried.
              They would have had to split their resources and exposed two paper that say the same thing-one in the UK and one in the US. It was a chance they would not take. Their best option was to utilize the services of Rupert Murdoch, who has substantial financial investment in the pharmaceutical industry, and his MSM ties, hire a troll like Brian Deer to create such a world wide campaign of terror and lies that other media outlets would follow suit and they did.

              BMJ & Lancet Wedded to Merck CME Partnership
              http://ahrp(dot)org/bmj-lancet-wedded-to-merck-cme-partnership/

              So who is the fanatic?
              http://www(dot)beyondconformity.co.nz/hilarys-desk/so_who_is_the_fanatic

              On 6th February 2001, I wrote an article called More Motives Reviewed based on a publication WHO had put out in 1997 called “The CVI Strategic Plan Managing Opportunity and Change: A vision of Vaccination for the 21st Century.” (PDF is 5.23 mb) 1997 was the year that I realised that Henry Gadsden, Chief executive of vaccine manufacturer Merck was right, and that the plan was bigger than any one drug but encompassed as much of the drug list as feasible – including vaccines. I was shocked at the “reach” laid out by the WHO. And not surprised that “consumers” were never considered. This was all about conditioning people to accept vaccines, and demand them. This was all about getting the pretty, the famous, billboard names, media and the politicians to promote Henry Gadsden et al’s vaccine dream.

              Plainly, Wakefield had never read that plan, for if he had, and if he had had his pulse on the new vaccine development in the pipeline, he would have known that the CVI Strategic Plan was only possible, if the record of both the DPT and the MMR remained utterly unblemished, so that layer upon layer of other vaccines could be added into both of them to eventually result in super vaccines containing many antigens.

              Whether his article was right or wrong was immaterial, because no doubts can be allowed to exist.

              His article put a monkey wrench in the CVI Strategic Plan, as well as those of MMR II’s maker, Merck, Pfizer, SKF, Sanofi Pasteur, Chiron – whoever else thinks that their stability on wall street will be funded through vaccine sales. You can’t split a triple vaccine back to singles, (designed that way for ease of administration and to stop parents actively chosing what they will and won’t have) and achieve the ultimate long term aim of super-vaccines containing maybe even 30 vaccines in one needle.

              “The CVI Strategic Plan” makes no bones about how high the future cost of “managing opportunity” would be, and what a challenge that would become as the “cost” took up an ever increasing slice of government money…. In New Zealand vernacular, WHO’s vision was “THINK-BIG” and “THINK LOTS OF MONEY”.

              This “vaccines are a gold mine” attitude, was echoed in another WHO publication called “Vaccine & Immunisation News” dated March 1998 which on page 3, in a sidebar signed by Jong Wook Lee MD… said, “… unlike El Dorado, vaccines are for real.” Know your history? What’s “El Dorado”? Jong Wook Lee went on to talk about how WHO must make new and better vaccines and “find ways of ensuring they are fully used.” The mantra was, and still is, “full steam ahead and be damned Jeeves”. To that end, anyone who gets in the way of those opportunities will be character assassinated or smeared in any way possible. Never will the real issues be addressed.

              Read the remainder at the link. Enough Said!

              • Estellea Banes says:

                I’m afraid you are conflating two separate but related issues, the GMC proceeding and the Lancet retraction. While there is overlapping materials/evidence, each entity decided on their own. Wakefield has been struck off the GMC and remains so and the Lancet study has been retracted and remains so.

                Pediatrics. 1998 Mar;101(3 Pt 1):383-7.

                Look up this paper. It says the exact same thing as the retracted Lancet paper. Yet, the medical mafia hasn’t gone after these authors. The just made sure the paper was buried.

                I just don’t see how the Pediatrics study “says the exact same thing” as Wakefield’s retracted Lancet study. Wakefield’s hypothesis has been that the MMR vaccine replicates in the gut and then “leaks” to the brain. Now we know that is absolutely not the case. The Pediatrics study reported on encephalopathy cases putatively caused by MMR. Some of those cases were perhaps caused by MMR vaccination but even if you take it at face value, that’s 0.64cases/1,000,000 doses compared to wild-type measles which has a rate of 1/1000 cases. Autism is not encephalopathy.

                • Shawn Siegel says:

                  Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief of the Lancet, testified at the GMC hearing that the science of the retracted paper was good; that the Lancet paper was an excellent example of a ‘case series’; that this was a standard and entirely reputable way of reporting on a possible new syndrome. He said unequivocally that the science reported in the 1998 Lancet paper ‘still stands’ and that he ‘wished, wished, wished’ that the clock could be turned back and the paper be considered in the light it was first presented, without everything that followed.

                  More importantly, for parents in particular, is the strong support for Wakefield – for the whole Royal Free Hospital team – shown by the parents of the Lancet kids. After discovering what they did in the examination, testing and treatment of the kids, any scientist with integrity would have come to the same conclusion: a direct correlation between the MMR vaccine, the novel bowel disease they’d discovered and autism had not been shown, but further research was necessary.

                  • Estellea Banes says:

                    Aside from reporting that a case series was a perfectly standard and acceptable way of presenting preliminary evidence, I don’t see any of the statements you attribute to Dr. Horton in his testimony at the GMC proceeding. Can you please give me the day, page and paragraph?

                  • Estellea Banes says:

                    Heh, now I see where you are getting this, your own FB page. Horton did not say this in the GMC proceedings. You are merely copying and pasting what (a most interesting and creative) observer Martin Walker said Horton said. I have every day of the GMC, Horton testified over three days and he didn’t make those statements.

                • Redpill1 says:

                  Wow, for someone who comments as if they are on top of this issue you don’t know how to find the information Shawn provided. I found it in 5 minutes. If you really are looking for the truth and not just blowing smoke—you would have found it already.

                  • Estellea Banes says:

                    Then you won’t mind providing me with the day, page and paragraph that has that particular testimony. I have the GMC transcripts and perfectly willing to read what you both claim.

                • Redpill1 says:

                  Don’t think that “eliminating any doubts” is some new agenda. It has always been the underlying motto of vaccine defenders, as was stated on Friday June 1st 1984, in the FDA’s Federal Register (justifying new laws legalising sloppy Polio vaccine manufacturing processes) on page 23607. The FDA said,

                  “…any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.”

                  There’s enough information you can look that one up for yourself.
                  While you’re looking up the above FDA transcript you can than read this transcript:

                  -FDA Meeting. Human Tumors for Vaccine Manufacture
                  https://www.scribd(dot)com/doc/246682536/FDA-Meeting-Human-Tumors-for-Vaccine-Manufacture#scribd.

                  The Vaccine industry has been doing this for decades according to to research by Janine Roberts and documented in her two book: “Fear of the Invisible” and “The Vaccine Papers”. At this meeting the FDA formally endorsed the practice. A few of the comments:

                  Statements directly from transcript are in quotation:
                  -FDA is there to help vaccine manufacturers (not the public)
                  “… but we are here to consider the issues that we would like to advise the agency to consider in helping the company continue the manufacturing process, what should they be concerned about, what should they be watching for.” (Dr. D, leader of the meeting)

                  -The vaccines may cause tumors in recipients
                  “We have really identified three major factors that could potentially convey risk from tumor derived cells. And these include the cells themselves … and if they were tumor-derived cells then maybe they themselves could form tumors in a vaccine recipient.” (Dr. K)

                  -A fact: tumor cell lines can cause tumors
                  “What I think is qualitatively different about the tumor cell lines is the fact that they can cause tumors.” (Dr.L)

                  -Tumors may occur decades after vaccinations
                  “But certainly, if you are going to address this question about tumor risk of vaccines made in tumor cell lines, it’s going to have to be a decade’s question.” (Dr.C)

                  -Doctors and the public may say “Oh, my God”!
                  “How is this group (of vaccines) going to be able to be accepted by the consumers … As soon as you hear “a tumor-derived cell line”, how do you explain that, put the public at ease?” (Dr.B)
                  “… the practicing medical community and also the lay public. They are going to hear that we are recommending or that the manufacturers are making vaccines with tumorigenic cell lines and say, oh, my God, even if there’s no scientific basis to say, oh, my God.” (Dr.D)

                  -Framing information to convince doctors and the public
                  “… because it’s a discussion of how one communicates these issues and how the public will perceive them. But I’m not completely sure that we have a complete answer on the fundamental scientific question. So how can you communicate a scientific concensus that the product is safe unless we’re sure that you, the experts we are asking to advise us are convinced that it’s safe?” (Dr.K)

                  *****Plan to hide information and omit it from package inserts*****
                  “The minute you describe something in the package insert in terms of potential clinical safety concerns, I think that really precludes using these cell substrates.” (Dr. G)

                  “When it gets right down to what’s in the vial and what the patient is going to ask me about, whether it’s safe, I’m not going to say, well, you know, HeLa cells kill nude mice.” (Dr. C)

                  “I don’t know that our charge is to micromanage the package insert today. I think that’s a new discussion, with lots of issues that we haven’t really aired completely.” ( Dr.D)
                  (micromanage….the new word for HIDE FROM THE PUBLIC)

                  -The committee formally approves the method of making vaccines from human cancer tumors
                  “To come back to the agency’s question of whether this Committee believes it’s correct scientifically to go forward with the development of these vaccines, our answer is yes.” (Dr.D)

                  Conclusion
                  -Making vaccines with cells that are directly derived from human cancer tumors is faster and cheaper than breeding animals for the culture media.
                  -Millions of potentially cancer-causing vaccines will be produced.
                  -The vaccines may possibly cause genetic mutations.
                  -Millions of dollars will be made by vaccine promoters.
                  -The health of millions of consumers may be jeopardized.
                  -Information about how these vaccines are made will be hidden from doctors and consumers.

                  It all ties into the earlier comments I posted.

              • Anonymous says:

                And that’s why the moon landings were faked.

      • Estellea Banes says:

        No I did not see the movie but I have read “CDC Whistleblower” by Kevin Barry and all of the documents that Dr. William Thompson gave to Rep. Bill Posey, Brian Hooker’s retracted re-analysis of the DeStefano et. al. (2004) study and of course DeStefano et. al. Age at First Measles-Mumps-Rubella in Children with Autism and Age-Matched Control Subjects: A Population-Based Study in Metropolitan Atlanta (2004). How about you? Dr. Thompson has never said that “they faked loads of data…” and furthermore, the spurious correlation was in African-American children vaccinated after 18 months old, not too early for who no correlation was found in the raw statistical analysis which incidentally, Wakefield is basing this whole manufactroversy on.

        • Ginko says:

          I didn’t judge the movie without seeing it. You did. Let people make up their own mind.

          There are thousands of parents with kids who became autistic after reactions to MMR shots. They deserve to be heard and Thompson should be heard. And Wakefield should also be allowed to speak rather than you speaking for him.

          There are lots of other very scientific opinions from very credible scientists that deserve to be heard on this issue. Science is not a monoculture. Lots of horrible mistakes have been made by science that were covered up for decades. All opinions on this issue should be allowed to be heard. I think it is in the constitution.

          • Estellea Banes says:

            I didn’t judge the movie without seeing it. You did. Let people make up their own mind.

            The trailer contains glaring inaccuracies as evidenced here: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/03/22/andrew-wakefield-releases-the-trailer-for-his-william-thompson-video-slick-production-and-dishonesty/ And people can see this and “make up their own mind.” No one has disappeared Wakefield’s film; he’s free to show it on YouTube or any venue that is willing to host it. In fact, it would have a wider audience so what’s the fuss about the Tribeca Film Festival refusing to show it?

            There are thousands of parents with kids who became autistic after reactions to MMR shots. They deserve to be heard and Thompson should be heard. And Wakefield should also be allowed to speak rather than you speaking for him.

            I’m hardly speaking for anyone now am I? I am merely pointing out the appropriateness of the Tribeca Film Festival and it’s associates for changing their minds especially since Wakefield’s film seems to have gotten in without the normal vetting process. I am also responding to your inaccurate claims that data were “faked”. Strangely, Dr. Thompson appears no where in this film, just the same recorded phone conversations with Brian Hooker we have heard over a year ago. Thompson hasn’t said a word since this surfaced in August 2014. Don’t you find it rather odd that a “documentary” featuring a so-called whistleblower doesn’t even have the so-called whistleblower in it? Now whom is speaking for whom I wonder.

            • Redpill1 says:

              Don’t you find it rather odd that a “documentary” featuring a so-called whistleblower doesn’t even have the so-called whistleblower in it?

              He continues to work for the CDC protected by the Federal Whistle Blowers Act which prohibits him from discussion or speaking about the information he has provided to congress publicly with the exception of testifying in a legal proceeding such as testifying for others or lawfully assisting others exercise any appeal, complaint, or grievance right- The Whistle blower Protection Act.

              Since he has been granted whistle blower status he is legally forbidden to speak beyond the terms states. This is why he wasn’t in the film. There are youtube videos he made before he was granted whistle blower status:

              -Whistleblower Thompson’s Call to Congress
              https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=8697rSvIqhg

              CDC Whistleblower Dr. Thompson on Thimerosal and Pregnant Women
              https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=3EK4ZE-SPIc

              CDC Whistleblower Revealed
              https://www.youtube(dot)com/watch?v=sGOtDVilkUc

            • Ginko says:

              You are speaking for Wakefield and Thompson while advocating censorship. That is clear. You still claim to know what’s in the film without seeing it!

              Say it to the thousands of parents with autistic kids. Vaccines can be sometimes helpful and be incredibly dangerous at the same time, like almost all medicines. Having a one size fits all mandatory policy is madness. The history of science and medicine bears this out. Mercury was once a mainstream treatment for multiple health problems for decades. Thousands of lives were ruined.

              There is a massive amount of scientific evidence indicating that vaccines are dangerous and often cause harm.

              Ignore the evidence if you wish. Others should know all the evidence.

              If fact millions of dollars in damages are paid out every year for vaccine damages. Let the facts speak.

              • Estellea Banes says:

                I’m afraid you are mistaken; I am not advocating censorship at all. Wakefield is free to show his film at whatever venue is willing. A private film festival does not have to adhere to your first amendment you know. This conversation seems to surround every vaccines-are-bad film that comes out yet what do any of them really do to change anything? I don’t ignore the evidence, on the contrary I read all the literature I can on the subject and I have come to a vastly different conclusion, that’s all. It’s rather arrogant of you to assume otherwise.

                • Ginko says:

                  You’ve resorted to name calling. I wondered how long that would take. What would you call advocating censorship while denying that it is censorship?

                  Why can’t Sloan just make a statement that they don’t agree. They didn’t make the film.

                  You haven’t even seen it so you have no idea if what you are saying is true or not.

                  Vaccines cause serious damage to many children. That’s a Fact.

                  • Estellea Banes says:

                    I characterised one of your actions; that’s not name-calling. I am not advocating censorship while denying it’s censorship. This isn’t a censorship issue; it’s a private film festival, not a government entity. If the Sloan Foundation was, in fact, in strong opposition they still don’t owe Wakefield anything even though they didn’t fund it; it’s a private festival.

                    I don’t need to see the film although I will if Wakefield decides to make it publicly-available. I have read all of the supporting, original literature on the subject along with dozens of blogposts and scientific discussions. Thompson has not provided any additional substance so I don’t need Wakefield’s spin to know what is going on.

                    • Ginko says:

                      Not seeing the film is NOT seeing the film. Not knowing the vetting process is not knowing. Not knowing the full extent of damage from vaccines is not knowing. Mandating others to be subjected to a lack of knowledge is unethical. Wakefield was supposed to speak after the film. He is being censored and you are supporting censorship which is very unscientific. The science says that vaccines can and often do cause serious damage. And that is the truth that everyone knows. And some are afraid to say it. And some want to keep others from saying it. That’s not science. That’s some weird religion or some deep corruption.

                  • Lesly says:

                    They ALWAYS resort to name calling because there is no substance to their argument – duck —— here comes the obligatory Jenny McArthy comment! Oh yeah, and my personal favorite – we are somehow insulting the autistic community by demanding the truth about vaccines. That one always gets me!

        • Redpill1 says:

          Read: Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information June 7-8, 2000 Simpsonwood Retreat Center Norcross, Georgia. http://www.putchildrenfirst(dot)org/media/2.9.pdf

          At this website there are emails obtained from the CDC and other agencies under the FOIA that confirms that confirms Dr. Thompson’s accusations that the CDC and the pharmaceutical agencies consciously without hesitation committed fraud. Here are a few comments that are revealing but I don’t want to be accused of cherry picking information the website link is about for your reading pleasure:

          Verstraeten CDC Internal Email: “It Just Won’t Go Away”
          http://putchildrenfirst.org/media/2.7.pdf
          December 17, 1999
          Written by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, CDC, and sent to Dr. Robert Davis and Dr. Frank Destefano, title, CDC.
          Dr. Verstraeten was responsible for the preliminary analysis of the CDC’s Vaccine Safety Datalink to determine if a relationship existed between Thimerosal and autism. The “It” in Dr. Verstraeten’s subject line of “It just won’t go away” is the correlation between Thimerosal and autism. Dr. Verstraten also notes that “all the harm is done in the first month.”
          Dr. Verstraeten’s email is a working email describing the analysis he is doing with references to spreadsheets that contain specific data. Not until a recent FOIA was that data available which you can now see here. This new information, through the data known as “Generation Zero”, highlights just how extreme the correlations were between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders.
          As one example, on the first page of the spreadsheet, if you look under the “2990” category for autism, it shows a 7.62 incidence for children who receive the largest mercury dose in month 1, called “HgCat1 (3)”, a highly statistically-significant correlation.
          Source: FOIA filing by parents.

          Some of the most revealing comments at this meeting (Simpson wood) are:

          Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 40-41: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposure and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays, which are two separate ICD9 codes. Exposures at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders.”

          Dr. Verstraeten, pg. 166: “When I saw this, and I went back through the literature, I was actually stunned by what I saw because I thought it is plausible. First of all there is the Faeroe study, which I think people have dismissed too easily, and there is a new article in the same Journal that was presented here, the Journal of Pediatrics, where they have looked at PCB. They have looked at other contaminants in seafood and they have adjusted for that, and still mercury comes out. That is one point. Another point is that in many of the studies with animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals were exposed. Now, I don’t know how much you can extrapolate that from animals to humans, but that tells me mercury at one month of age is not the same as mercury at three months, at 12 months, prenatal mercury, later mercury. There is a whole range of plausible outcomes from mercury. On top of that, I think that we cannot so easily compare the U.S. population to Faeroe or Seychelles populations. We have different mean levels of exposure. We are comparing high to high I the Seychelles, high to high in the Faeroe and low to low in the U.S., so I am not sure how easily you can transpose one finding to another one. So basically to me that leaves all the options open, and that means I can not exclude such a possible effect.”

          Dr. Weil of the AAP, pg. 207: “The number of dose related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant. The positive relationships are those that one might expect from the Faroe Islands studies. They are also related to those data we do have on experimental animal data and similar to the neurodevelopmental tox data on other substances, so that I think you can’t accept that this is out of the ordinary. It isn’t out of the ordinary.”

          Dr. Weil, pg. 208: “The rise in the frequency of neurobehavioral disorders whether it is ascertainment or real, is not too bad. It is much too graphic. We don’t see that kind of genetic change in 30 years.”

          My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998. I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.
          Remainder of the confession here: http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/
          Follow up with these letters:
          February 2nd, 2004 letter to Dr. Julie Gerberding: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CDC-Gerberding-warning-vaccines-autism.JPG

          October 18, 2002 letter to Melinda Wharton, Colleen Boyle and others, where William Thompson announces he is hiring his own lawyer and implies a CDC cover-up of a D.O.J. investigation: http://www.naturalnews.com/images/CDC-DOJ-Investigation-MMR-Vaccine-Autism-NN-Watermark.jpg.
          CDC Whistleblower: Mercury in Vaccines Given to Pregnant Women Linked to Autism http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cdc-whistle-blower-mercury-in-vaccines-given-to-pregnant-women-causes-autism/
          CDC Whistleblower revealed Senior government scientist breaks 13 years of silence on cdc’s vaccine-autism fraud:

          review/103711143/91f7d3d4d8
          CDC Whistleblower Dr. Thompson on Thimerosal and Pregnant Women
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EK4ZE-SPIc#t=11
          Here is the study where the data was manipulated:
          Pediatrics. 2004 Feb;113(2):259-66. Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan Atlanta. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14754936

        • Anonymous says:

          Well I want to make up my own mind. Did not ask you for advice….

        • Anonymous says:

          So it is okay to see movies with soft porn, blowing people up etc., but it is not okay for people to see a movie questioning vaccines? Do you think people are so stupid as they would be unable to see the truth if this movie was full of lies and misinformation? Please don’t assume that people are to stupid to make up their own minds.

          • Estellea Banes says:

            It’s not for me to decide; it’s not my festival. And yes, after reading several responses about this film (elsewhere), I do question the ability of those supporting it without having even read the supporting documents to critically-assess it.

            • Simone says:

              He said ” movies with soft porn, blowing people up etc., but it is not okay for people to see a movie questioning vaccines?” Let people make up their own minds. This is censorship whether it is Tribeca, any other film festival, the news, or mainstream media in any form. The many scientists, medical doctors, alternative doctors etc. that believe there is reason for concern about the vaccines are never given a chance to speak or present data. If they dare, they are labelled, and degraded and shut up, because they threaten profits.

    • Joe says:

      “provides funding for narrative features or series”
      Has the fact that they DID NOT provide funding for Wakefield’s production completely escaped you or are you not interested in honesty as much as your agenda?

      • Estellea Banes says:

        The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation is a major donor to the Tribeca Film Festival and has an intrinsic partnership with them. It is also their reputation on the line and not at all inappropriate for them to have a serious concern with the inclusion of Wakefield’s film, which again, bypassed the normal vetting process. It was an error corrected.

        • Joe says:

          What, are people going to stop accepting their donations if Vaxxed airs at Tribeca?
          I might be tempted to believe your whole ” Sloan Foundation reputation on the line” thing if I wasn’t already familiar with some of the other titles that have aired at this little festival in recent years.
          As of December 31, 2011, the Sloan Foundation’s assets totaled $1.65 billion. Rather than trying to suppress the film, seems they should just produce their own documentary to counter Wakefield’s.

          • Estellea Banes says:

            I think your characterisation of the (possible) involvement of the Sloan Foundation is far too simplistic. I don’t profess to know what transpired, none of us can really. But if a film bypassed the vetting process of a reputable film festival that they are heavily invested in and that film did not meet the normal criteria of submission (regardless of whether we agree with the topic or not) then it certainly is their good reputation at stake. And like it or not, many don’t want to be associated with Wakefield. They are not suppressing this film; once again Wakefield isn’t being hindered from blaring this on YouTube.

            • Joe says:

              I’m curious, on the one hand you don’t profess to know what transpired.
              On the other, you claim that the film “bypassed the vetting process”
              Can you tell me, since I haven’t seen this claim elsewhere, how do you know it bypassed the vetting process? And what is the vetting process?
              And, what are the potential repercussions to the Sloan Foundation if their “good” reputation is sullied by being associated with a festival that airs this film?
              thanks for your insight.

              • Estellea Banes says:

                Thanks Joe. Mr. DeNiro made this statement which is on the Tribeca Facebook page (and I would imagine all over the place by now) https://www.facebook.com/Tribeca/posts/10154153954489758

                “Grace and I have a child with autism and we believe it is critical that all of the issues surrounding the causes of autism be openly discussed and examined. In the 15 years since the Tribeca Film Festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming. However this is very personal to me and my family and I want there to be a discussion, which is why we will be screening VAXXED. I am not personally endorsing the film, nor am I anti-vaccination; I am only providing the opportunity for a conversation around the issue.”

                As for the actual vetting process, I think there is a bit of voodoo there. I can only say that from speaking to some with experience that there is a committee, other than that it’s a black-box to me and probably most.

                While you’re probably not off-the-mark with your remark about who would refuse a donation from the Sloan Foundation, it comes down to reputation and they have a stellar one. They are a very prestigious private organisation and if they feel as though Wakefield’s ventures don’t align with their mission it is within their purview to protect their interests. Or it could be as simple as they didn’t approve of the way Wakefield’s film got into the festival or a combination.

                • Joe says:

                  Thanks for your reply and for your uncommon civility. I have read the statement from De Niro and although he says it’s personal, he doesn’t say it bypassed the vetting process (if there even is one? “Ticked off Trannies” passed it?) – is this statement the only reason for your belief that it did bypass whatever vetting process they have, am I missing something?
                  Thanks again and good night, catch your reply tomorrow.
                  -Joe

                  • Estellea Banes says:

                    De Niro’s statement:

                    In the 15 years since the Tribeca Film Festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming.

                    It is clear that Mr. De Niro got involved with the programming and asked for Wakefield’s film to be screened instead of letting the normal selection process take place. There is a vetting process; film festivals receive far more submissions than they can screen. Of course this was after the fact but Wakefield even got Rep. Bill Posey to try and persuade Mr. De Niro to keep the film on the roster. Who does that?

    • Lesly says:

      I love all these people discrediting a film they’ve never seen.

    • Linda says:

      HMMM… “scientifically relevant”? If there was anything more scientifically relevant it is this important question and the CDC study’s evidence that was apparently trashed. It’s too bad Tribeca has chosen to not screen this documentary, good has come from other documentaries aired in their venue; think orcas and Seaworld.

      If there is something wrong here then a thinking person will see it for what it is. Ah well, I will keep researching as there are far too many questions to just leave this important subject alone. I for one intend to see “VAXXED-From Cover-up to Catastrophe” no matter where it is screened. If Dr. Thompson, the CDC whistleblower, was brave enough to step forward then I want to be sure to examine his side of the story. Shouldn’t everyone. Tribeca would have just made access to this documentary more accessible. I applaud producer Bigtree’s appreciation expressed to the Tribeca organization.

  10. Paul Murray says:

    Bill and Melinda Gates? Gee, what a surprise….

Trackbacks

  1. […] led me to connect the dots on this is a short piece from Celia Farber of The Turth Barrier, who originally noticed the Sloan Foundation […]

  2. […] led me to connect the dots on this is a short piece from Celia Farber of The Turth Barrier, who originally noticed the Sloan Foundation […]

  3. […] led me to connect the dots that this is a short piece of Celia Farber of turth Barrera , which initially realized the Sloan Foundation […]

  4. […] led me to connect the dots on this is a short piece from Celia Farber of The Turth Barrier, who originally noticed the Sloan Foundation […]

  5. […] led me to connect the dots on this is a short piece from Celia Farber of The Turth Barrier, who originally noticed the Sloan Foundation […]

  6. […] led me to connect the dots on this is a short piece from Celia Farber of The Turth Barrier, who originally noticed the Sloan Foundation […]

Speak Your Mind