That story, principally unknown till now, ought to at an absolute minimal require the approval of any worker’s request for conscience-based spiritual exemptions from employer or authorities vaccination mandates.
On October 6, with the assistance of James O’Keefe’s Venture Veritas (PV), a whistleblower at Pfizer revealed, in leaked inner emails, that firm executives have been, in PV’s phrases, “telling staff to be secretive about the use of human fetal tissue in laboratory testing of the COVID vaccine.”
The video cites an e-mail from the corporate’s senior director of worldwide analysis admitting that “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.” The agency’s chief scientific officer particularly identifies the cell line concerned as “HEK293T cells … (which) are ultimately derived from an aborted fetus.”
Pfizer’s resistance to disclosing the roots of its vaccine’s origins appears inexplicable for at the least three causes.
First, In December, the Catholic Church’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Religion, in mild of the diploma of perceived emergency introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic, indicated that “it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.” In non-emergency circumstances, such an motion can be thought of mortally sinful “cooperation in evil,” however the Congregation indicated that Pope Francis “examined” their work and “ordered its publication.”
Second, human fetal tissue analysis, although controversial (as simply famous), has been performed because the Thirties, and is said to have “helped to develop vaccines for a wide range of diseases, including polio, measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis A and B, shingles and rabies.”
Third, HEK293, the cell line Pfizer cited, has existed for almost a half-century, and has been extensively used. To quote simply one among many examples, HEK293 cells are credited with “many of the antipsychotic drugs used to treat mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.”
One would assume that these three elements, particularly the Pontiff’s de facto blessing, would have induced Pfizer to promote, or at the least strongly defend, its use of the HEK293 cell line as one other shining instance of scientific development ensuing from human fetal tissue analysis.
The main points of HEK293’s brutal – and from all appearances, till very not too long ago, largely undisclosed – origins clarify the corporate’s deep discomfort. Opposite to just about a half-century of misrepresentation and obfuscation, HEK293’s creation did NOT come up from an “abortion” as on a regular basis folks perceive it.
A really current growth serves to verify this.
In August, the College of Pittsburgh successfully made a horrifying admission. The Middle for Medical Progress, which needed to enlist the assistance of Judicial Watch earlier than the college would reply to its Freedom of Data Act request, explained that the college’s GUDMAP program (full identify: GenitoUrinary Growth Molecular Anatomy Venture), with the assistance of space Deliberate Parenthood abortion suppliers, was “allowing babies, some of the age of viability, to be delivered alive, and then killing them by cutting their kidneys out.”
Everybody studying this text ought to certainly agree that after a child is delivered alive, killing it ought to now not be thought of an abortion. Killing a delivered-alive child is textbook infanticide.
Pitt’s researchers and Deliberate Parenthood needed to resort to this ugly butchery as a result of it’s the finest and certain the one option to harvest sure usable physique elements, notably kidneys. Harvesting viable kidneys requires steady blood stream, which in flip requires a beating coronary heart, which in flip requires that the child be alive (or on the very least nearly at all times) exterior the womb when the kidneys are eliminated.
The HEK293 line was created within the early Seventies. Months earlier than the College of Pittsburgh’s admissions, AnnaMaria Cardinalli, a very perceptive and conscientious author, detailed the damning truth about its origins at Disaster Journal in January:
… To reap a viable embryonic kidney … sufficiently wholesome youngsters sufficiently old to have adequately-developed kidneys should be faraway from the womb, alive, sometimes by cesarean part, and have their kidneys lower out. This should happen with out anesthesia for the kid, which might reduce the viability of the organs.
… The deliberate killing of an undesirable youngster (a little woman, within the case of HEK 293) passed off within the tortuous method it did exactly to acquire her organs for analysis. The harvest of her organs was the direct explanation for her demise, previous to which, she was a residing youngster, exterior the womb.
In e-mail correspondence, Ms. Cardinalli indicated, based mostly on her personal discussions with medical consultants and “the test of reason,” that in her view, “we are genuinely speaking of clear infanticide, not abortion.” In her article, she additionally indicated that she fears that “Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict may not have had this information when they received the vaccines.”
Within the a long time since HEK293’s creation, its two most immediately concerned scientists, Drs. Alex van der Eb and Franklin Graham, have been imprecise in explaining the cell line’s origins.
As seen in a draft transcript from a 2006 FDA conference (on Web page 81), Dr. van der Eb claims that “The kidney of the fetus was obtained in 1972, probably. The precise data is not known anymore. The fetus, as far as I can remember, was completely normal. Nothing was wrong. The reasons for the abortion were unknown to me. I probably knew it at the time, but it got lost, all this information.”
Graham says that “the exact origin of the HEK293 fetal cells is unclear. They could have come from either a spontaneous miscarriage or an elective abortion.”
Cardinalli, who was not conscious of Graham’s potential “miscarriage” hypothesis when she wrote her article, asserted that “There is no way that a spontaneous abortion could result in the cell line (as the kidneys cannot remain viable past the brief window in which they must be harvested).” It’s fairly revealing that Dr. Graham speculated about one thing which appears so clearly inconceivable.
No matter whether or not both scientist’s reminiscence improves, it’s arduous to think about how they’d be capable of describe their work as something apart from what Cardinalli described, and what the College of Pittsburgh’s assertion confirmed.
They’re, in fact, welcome to attempt.
Within the meantime, it’s indefensible that an employer or authorities entity ought to try to power people to get jabbed or lose their jobs or forfeit different privileges based mostly on a vaccine whose growth originated in infanticide.