Anti-vaxx people are really Russian bots

by Jon Rappoport

August 27, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

Well, well. The virulently pro-vax forces have just discovered their opponents are really, wait for it, Russian bots, launched to promote societal discord and polarize conflict.

That settles it. Nothing to see, move along. The arguments rejecting vaccine safety and efficacy were just bot-nonsense. No need to understand what they were saying. It was all a sham. Vaccines are wonderful. Everybody knows that.

On California Senator Richard Pan’s website—Pan sponsored the mandatory childhood vaccination bill in CA that became law—we find this:

“Dr. Richard Pan, a pediatrician and state senator representing the Sacramento region, responded to the study, ‘Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate’, published in the American Journal of Public Health.”

[Senator Pan states] “This research provides evidence that foreign and domestic agents are manipulating social media through bots to discourage vaccination to promote their own agendas; Russian trolls for sowing political discord and commercial and malware distributors for marketing. In addition, the researchers concluded that a significant proportion of anti-vaccination messages are organized ‘astroturf.’ Manipulation of social media to promote anti-vaccine messages by outside agents poses a serious threat to the health and safety of Americans…”

The devious implication? There is no serious anti-vaccine research, it’s all bots and Russians.

I know at least a dozen serious independent vaccine researchers who have found huge holes in conventional vaccine mythology—but guess what? It turns out they’re non-human bots. Who knew I was sitting having coffee with a bot? Wow. Amazing what you learn when you listen to Authorities.

Senator Pan is pushing the envelope by sponsoring a new bill in the CA senate. Here is what I recently wrote about that:

California used to be trumpeted as the cutting edge of American culture.

It still is, except the culture is now all about censoring free speech.

California Senator Richard Pan, who was behind the infamous 2015 law mandating vaccinations for schoolchildren (SB277), has stepped up to the plate and introduced another bill.

This one would clamp down on criticism of ANY Official Story.

The bill is titled “SB1424 Internet: social media: false information: strategic plan.”

It targets social media based in California. But as you read the bill, you see it appears to define social media as any Internet blog, website, or communication.

SB1424 is brief. Read it:

This bill would require any person who operates a social media, as defined, Internet Web site with a physical presence in California to develop a strategic plan to verify news stories shared on its Web site. The bill would require the plan to include, among other things, a plan to mitigate the spread of false information through news stories, the utilization of fact-checkers to verify news stories, providing outreach to social media users, and placing a warning on a news story containing false information.

(a) Any person who operates a social media Internet Web site with physical presence in California shall develop a strategic plan to verify news stories shared on its Internet Web site.

(b) The strategic plan shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following:

(1) A plan to mitigate the spread of false information through news stories.

(2) The utilization of fact-checkers to verify news stories.

(3) Providing outreach to social media users regarding news stories containing false information.

(4) Placing a warning on a news story containing false information.

(c) As used in this section, “social media” means an electronic service or account, or electronic content, including, but not limited to, videos, still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, instant and text messages, email, online services or accounts, or Internet Web site profiles or locations.

Getting the picture?

It’s a free speech killer.

If it passes, agencies of the California government will develop numerous regulations for enforcement, including penalties for “speech criminals.”

Saying this bill violates the 1st Amendment of the Constitution is a vast understatement. The last time I looked, the Founders mentioned nothing about fact checkers or warnings attached to speech.

Can we look forward to this?

“Open borders and a flood of immigration into California are destructive to—wait. My statement has been precluded by warnings and fact-checker overrides…”

Or: “VACCINES ARE DANGEROUS. Ahem, I am making a debatable assertion and I must warn you that official experts strenuously disagree with me, and furthermore, the California Fact Checkers United, a division of Merck-Snopes Thought Police, has determined that my assertion is groundless and harmful to children’s health…”

There needs to be a relentless tsunami of protest in California over this Orwellian bill. I know of a number of Internet news operations in the state. They must jump in and lead the way.

In case you believe there are too many websites and blogs based in California to enforce a new draconian law, let me explain how the game works. Behind closed doors, the state government would decide to focus on a few big issues. For example, gun control, vaccines, and immigration. Enforcement agencies would go after the biggest Internet operations expressing politically unacceptable points of view on those subjects. At first. A spread of smaller operations would feel the heat later.

So-called fact checkers would come from government supported groups who agree with Official Positions. In other words, they wouldn’t be fact checkers at all. They would be prime news fakers.

When it comes to the issue of vaccines, for example, they would cite the notoriously biased “experts” at the Centers for Disease Control, never mentioning that the CDC buys and sells $4 billion of vaccines a year.

If, 10 or 15 years ago, someone told you a bill like SB1424 was going to come before a state legislature for a vote, you would have thought you were listening to a Hollywood pitch for a sci-fi movie script.

But now it’s real. It’s here. Believe it.


The Matrix Revealed

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

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. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

14 comments on “Anti-vaxx people are really Russian bots

  1. Eliza Ayres says:

    Reblogged this on Blue Dragon Journal and commented:
    I left California in the ’70’s and have never regretted my choice…

  2. brackenkaren says:

    Seems to me there should be a deep dig on who contributes $$$ to this “Dr.” Pan.

  3. Sherlock says:

    I always suspected I was a Russian bot. Now it’s confirmed! Thank you Jon.
    There’s a lot of Russian bots that can’t enter Australia these days.

  4. robertwachsmuth says:

    GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals manufacturing the hepatitis B vaccine for infants and newborn is manufactured in a dirty third-world Muslim Nation.
    Isis Muslim militants posing as healthcare workers contaminating the hepatitis B vaccine for the American Market.
    The FDA knows that the hepatitis B vaccine for newborn and infants contaminated and they will not do a recall. Please contact the FDA to do an immediate recall of the contaminated hepatitis B vaccine for newborns.
    Health care Killing my Family.

    National Security

  5. MrDuncmck says:

    To laugh or cry? that is the question .Who watches the watchers? funny = authority ? “here we have a great authority on baby sitting” he served on the board union for better baby sitting coalition..He has credibility since he served on the board..his name is Jeffry Dahmer.. he also sat on the board of the association for the handicapped one legged ass kicking competition cry? how do and where do SPLC and the likes get any form of credibility? = zero critical thinking skills brought to you by P C social engineering cabal where zero tolerance for intolerance is divine .

  6. Larry says:

    LaLa Land – the movie title – springs to mind.
    And by the way, who will check the fact- checkers?

    PS – The Russians ate my homework.

  7. Linsa Diesslin says:

    The reality that is now unfolding is incredibly sad. I think I’m speechless. This is just what we were told Russia was like. The arrogance of the social media giants and the hysteria of the “left” seems to be increasing by several orders of magnitude. To be banned from reading, writing or speaking one’s opinion seems like a form of death. How can this be stopped. Everyday seems to bring a new atrocity. A very good book to understand what is happening is Political Ponerology by Andrew M’ Lobaczewski.

  8. From Quebec says:

    Glad to find out that the Russian bots care so much about our health..

  9. From Quebec says:

    Snopes is a Hoax

    Tis youtube video says:
    Snopes has been revealed to be a hoax after all. Website owners Barbara and David P. Mikkelson finally admitted the website was a joke.

    • honestliberty says:

      Quebec, that was a parody and was put out to make fun of people who are not shallow and pedantic leftists. It was a purposefully placed mockery of those who realized Snopes is not credible. We can agree here that yes, these “fact checking” websites, such as Snopes, have verifiable collectivist bias, and verifiable bias towards defending modern Democratic party talking points and actions.

      However, this claim was pure bunkum.

      For a thinking mind, (let’s assume with knowing nothing else for sake of argument) the collaboration with Facebook and legacy media bestowing Snopes as the darling to be trusted, go to force for credibility, ought to be sufficient to discredit them as either reliable or credible.

      I hope you recognize the difference between that stupid video (the purpose of which was to expose un-thinking minds naturally opposed to Snopes as the straw man to poison the well for Lookers on) and an honest, internal dissection of the material that website puts out. When people like you submit this, the people who made it to insult you, we’re effective.

  10. Tony says:

    I’m no legal mind, but I would have thought there’s enough scope there for some pretty creative workarounds. ‘To develop a strategic plan to verify news stories […] the utilization of fact-checkers…’

    “Here’s my strategic plan, I drew it on the back of a beer mat. Yep, that’s right, my mum’s a fact checker. Problem?”

    Any legislation that dips its toe into the muddy waters of online verification really will be opening the proverbial hornets nest in a can of worms stored in Pandora’s box.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *