Tuesday, June 25, 2019


Senator Cruz Grills Google Executive 

Over Insider Story

Ted Cruz Grills Google Executives In Hearing Following Explosive Report By Project Veritas

Image: Google whistleblower bombshell: Search engine used social justice warriors to train its AI systems to suppress all conservatives views (and block “another Trump” from happening)
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
(Natural News) In yet another bombshell report from Project Veritas and James O’Keefe, a Google whistleblower has come forth with damning information that reveals how Google uses “social justice warriors” to train its AI systems to suppress all conservative, independent views on literally everything.
According to documents acquired by Project Veritas, Google’s goal is to “…establish a ‘single point of truth’ for definition of ‘news’ across Google products.”
This means all non-establishment, non-“progressive” views are being systematically silenced by Google, YouTube and all other Google products.
The whistleblower who worked at Google says — see the full video below — “They’re not an objective source of information. They’re a highly biased political machine that is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump to come to power again.”
“Fairness” is a dog whistle, he explains. “They have to manipulate their search results so that it gives them the political agenda they want. They have to re-bias their algorithms so they can get their agenda across.”
Natural News has been blacklisted by YouTube since March of 2018 and banned by Google since June of 2017. We have been calling Google a techno-fascist dictatorship for at least three years. Today, whistleblowers proved us right yet again.
More Google whistleblowers are coming forward to reveal the shocking truth about Google’s blatant fraud, dishonesty and election meddling, according to Infowars, which has also been blacklisted across all Google products.
Google is a clear and present danger to our democracy, and it is abusing its power to alter the outcome of all future elections while suppressing important independent journalism and speech. Google must be stopped.
“The report includes undercover footage featuring a top Google executive, Jen Gennai, discussing how Google might prevent an electoral outcome like 2016 from happening again,” says
Gennai also declared that no amount of soft pressure from Congress or the White House will make Google change its ways. In other words, talk won’t help — if politicians want to change Google’s behavior, they’ll have to go beyond committee hearings and actually change the law.
Watch the video here, or visit for more details.
Google Executive Admits Election Meddling to Prevent Trump Winning in 2020

Project Veritas Nails Google/Youtube Over Election Tampering


Brags: Congress “can pressure us but we’re not changing”

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A Google executive has been caught on camera admitting that the search giant is manipulating its algorithm to prevent Trump winning re-election in 2020.
Jen Gennai, head of responsible innovation at Google, was filmed by Project Veritas admitting that Google is using AI and algorithmic manipulation to meddle in the next presidential election.
She speaks of “putting that line in the sand” to ensure “fairness,” before acknowledging there are, “People who voted for the current president who do not agree with our definition of fairness.”
“We’re also training our algorithms if 2016 happened again….would the outcome having been different?” asked Gennai, adding, “We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’re rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again.”
Speaking about the 2020 presidential election, Gennai said “they’ve been working on it since 2016 to make sure we’re ready for 2020,” with the implication clearly being to prevent Trump from winning re-election.
Gennai even dismissed the power of Congress to keep Google in check, bragging, “We got called in front of Congress multiple times….like they can pressure us but we’re not changing.”
Gennai then challenges any attempt to break up Google by explaining, “It will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.”
“There’s this facade about what they’re doing, but what they’re actually doing, what the employees are actually seeing inside the company is different,” a separate anonymous whistleblower told Project Veritas.
According to the whistleblower, Google is a “highly biased political machine that is bent on never letting someone like Donald Trump come to power again.”
According to Robert Epstein, Google algorithmic manipulation can shift millions of votes in national elections.
Google is clearly engaging in massive election meddling and should be investigated by lawmakers immediately.

Google Is Gearing Up To Defeat Trump In 2020

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
A new exposé from Project Veritas shows that Google is working to defeat Donald Trump in 2020.
Project Veritas published documents from Google that demonstrated its anti-conservative bias, as well as video of a top Google executive who admitted the globe-straddling tech behemoth will use its Artificial Intelligence technology to stop Trump’s re-election.
And yet another whistleblower told Project Veritas that what Google means by “fairness” isn’t what users mean, and the anti-Trump work at the company includes rigging the auto-complete feature of its search engine to favor the hard left.
AI Attack
Project Veritas’ key revelation comes from Jen Gennai, Google’s chief of “Responsible Innovation,” a title itself that telegraphs what her job is: deep-sixing Trump and going to war against conservatives.
“We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’re rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again,” Gennai said.
As well, “we’re also training our algorithms, like, if 2016 happened again, would we have, would the outcome be different?”
Apparently, Americans who voted for Trump don’t understand “fairness,” and so Google was forced to step in to rectify that failing and ensure his defeat.
“The reason we launched our AI principles is because people were not putting that line in the sand,” Gennai said. “They were not saying what’s fair and what’s equitable, so we’re like, well we are a big company, we’re going to say it.”
Unsurprisingly, Gennai thinks fairness is about pushing victim ideology:
My definition of fairness and bias specifically talks about historically marginalized communities.
And that’s who I care about. Communities who are in power and have traditionally been in power are not who I’m solving fairness for.
Gennai correctly observed that the “same people who voted for the current president who do not agree with our definition of fairness.”
And whatever her love for Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, Gennai is concerned about her plan to break up Google because Trump might be re-elected:
Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that.
Among Gennai and Google’s kooky ideas are “algorithmic unfairness,” meaning that even if a search result is objectively true, if the truth is “unfair,” the search result might have to be manipulated.
Says one Google document Veritas published:
For example, imagine that a Google image query for “CEOs” shows predominantly men. Even if it were a factually accurate representation of the world, it would be algorithmic unfairness because it would reinforce the stereotype about the role of women in leadership positions....
In some cases, it may be appropriate to take no action if the system accurately reflects current reality, while in other cases it may be desirable to consider how we might help society reach a more fair and equitable state.
Example? Typing “men can” into a search window auto-completes as “have babies.”
Google Insider
And auto-complete, the Google whistleblower showed PV’s James O’Keefe, is how Google manipulates search results.
Typing in “Hillary Clinton’s emails” will not autocomplete, even though the emails, according to Google’s own analytics, were a highly searched subject. Yet “Donald Trump’s emails” provided a full menu of auto-complete options even though the president’s emails were not a highly searched subject.
Why the difference? Because, the whistleblower said, the social justice warriors inside Google think “Clinton’s emails [are] a conspiracy theory and it’s unfair to return results based on her emails.”
Social justice warriors are “training the AI now,” he told O’Keefe, and YouTube, a Google subsidiary, is censoring conservatives as well.
As for fairness, it’s “a dog whistle. It does not mean you think it means,” meaning what an average Google user would think. “And you have to apply doublethink in order to understand what they’re really saying.” For the social justice warriors inside Google, “fairness is that they have to manipulate their search results so that it gives them the political agenda that they want.”
Google, he said, is a “highly-biased political machine that is bent upon never letting some like Donald Trump come to power again.”


Check out this extensive list of examples detailing Big Tech’s war against conservatives, Trump

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
The latest bombshell expose by Project Veritas showing Google’s extensive efforts to meddle in the 2020 presidential election is just another piece of devastating evidence against Big Tech’s war against conservatives, free speech, and America itself.
The latest revelations of Big Tech’s censorship and algorithm war against conservatives were released by Project Veritas on Monday, showing hidden cam footage of a Google executive and internal documents provided by a Google whistleblower detailing just how they plan to make sure nobody like Donald Trump is ever elected again.
But Infowars has extensively documented evidence of Big Tech’s illegal censorship activities for years, which culminated in August 2018 when dozens of tech companies banned Alex Jones and Infowars from their platforms under the guise of fighting “hate speech.”
– In 2017, Google instructed contractors to de-list Infowars from its search engines in the name of combating “fake news.”
– Then in 2018, Facebook introduced a new shadow-banning algorithm that choked off traffic to many conservative websites, including The Gateway Pundit and Breitbart News.
– Twitter was also found to be regularly shadow-banning conservative voices, according to undercover video by Project Veritas.
– In July 2018, Twitter began shadow-banning Republican Congressmen and officials until they received blowback.
– By September 2018, with the all-out censorship campaign against Infowars well underway, leaked video from a Google conference recorded just after the 2016 election revealed that executives were shocked at Trump’s historic win, which they called a “blip” that had to be prevented from ever happening again.
– A month later, a leaked 85-page internal Google briefing called “The Good Censor” revealed that tech companies began criticizing free speech as a “breeding ground for conspiracy theories,” and that censorship would become a key tenet of Big Tech’s business practices.
– In the same month, Facebook and Twitter purged hundreds of smaller alternative media websites, including The Free Thought Project and Anti-Media.
– Facebook and Google also engaged in overt election meddling when they refused to carry campaign ads for conservative candidates during the 2018 midterm elections.
– In June 2019, YouTube – which is owned by Google – purged and demonetized several conservative channels after a left-wing Vox activist complained that commentator Steven Crowder was bullying him.
– Just days later, YouTube banned Project Veritas after a whistleblower revealed Pinterest’s anti-Christian bias.
President Trump must act fast to break up the Big Tech monopoly unless he wants to move back into Trump Tower and fade into obscurity after the 2020 election.
In a recent interview President Trump made clear his view on collusion between Big Tech and the Democrats as well as indicating he believes there is monopoly activity being committed by Big Tech.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
Lefties take over organizations, hoping to use their credibility to advance their causes. But there's a fine line between exploiting that credibility and trashing it. Employing medical groups to push for gun control bent the partisan line. Using them to push global warming breaks it.
Assembling a variety of organizations from a spectrum of sectors into an echo chamber is daunting in a North Korean 3,000 dancers moving in unison sort of way. But it also destroys their influence outside the set of people who agree with them.
The new climate change agenda released by the groups, including the American Medical Association and the American Heart Association, comes amid early jostling among Democratic candidates over whose environmental platform is more progressive. 
“The health, safety and well-being of millions of people in the U.S. have already been harmed by human-caused climate change, and health risks in the future are dire without urgent action to fight climate change,” the medical and public health groups wrote in their climate agenda, shared with The Associated Press in advance of its release.
Among other things, the groups are pressing elected officials and presidential candidates to “meet and strengthen U.S. commitments” under the 2015 United Nations climate agreement from which Trump has vowed to withdraw. They’re also pushing for some form of carbon pricing, although without any reference to potential taxation of emissions, and “a plan and timeline for reduction of fossil fuel extraction in the U.S.”
Of course they are.
It would have been bad enough if they were warning that the sky would call. Their claim that millions of people in America have been harmed by global warming is bizarre nonsense. And the only thing this does is destroy the credibility of the AMA and the American Heart Association.


BY Marco Cáceres
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
On June 5, 2014, senior research scientist Stephanie Seneff, PhD of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory made the following statement at an event sponsored by the Groton Wellness organization in Groton, Massachusetts:
At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.1
Dr. Seneff repeated the prediction at a conference on Dec. 18, 2014.2 In December 2014, Dr. Seneff was interviewed about the prediction by journalist Thom Hartmann on the Thom Hartmann radio program.3 She was interviewed again about the prediction by Hartmann in January 2015 for RTtelevision.4 In that interview, Dr. Seneff noted that she had been misquoted and that what she actually said was that “half of all children born in 2025” will be autistic. She said:
The CDC data are on 12-year-olds. People don’t realize that—kids who are 12 years old today. So when you look at 2014, you’re looking at 2001 in utero. So we want to look at the situation in 2001. Since then, things have gotten a lot worse in all the vectors—the toxic chemicals that I have identified are connected to autism. And, of course, the one I’ve really singled in on is glyphosate. I think it’s the single most prominent chemical that’s responsible for the epidemic. That is the active ingredient in the pervasive herbicide Roundup.4
Dr. Seneff explained how she arrived at her prediction:
If you take the data that the CDC has provided since 1975 and plot it, you can see that it’s an exponential growth curve. You can extend the line. When you extend the line, it intersects 2025 at one in four, and 2032 at one in two. Now, my feeling is that things are worse than the line. So I think that one in two in 2025 is not an unreasonable prediction.4
At the time of Dr. Seneff’s interviews with Hartmann, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated the rate of autism in the U.S. at one in 68 children. That estimate was based on data involving eight-year-old children four years earlier in 2010.5 6
The current CDC estimate of eight-year-old American children with autism is one in 59, which is based on 2014 data.7 So there’s always a four-year lag time in the CDC’s determination of autism rates and it is based on eight-years-olds, not children in utero or at birth—which is what Dr. Seneff’s prediction is based on. Using the CDC’s system for calculating autism rates, an estimate of one in two children diagnosed with autism would be not be reached in 2025 but rather by 2033. Given the four-year lag, that estimate would not be reported by the CDC until 2037.
Whether it is 2025, 2033 or 2037 or whether it is children in utero, at birth or eight years of age, the idea that a country in which one in 59 children are now diagnosed with autism—and there is even a possibility that in the future  one in two children would become autistic—represents a public health crisis of historic proportions. The impact on America’s social structure, economy and national security is immeasurable, particularly when you combine that trend with an aging population that will, not only be unable to help care for these children, but will be competing with them for available care.
And yet, there appears to be a relatively little sense of urgency about the autism epidemic from doctors, government and the media. Unlike the alarm created by about 1,000 cases of measles reported this year, the autism epidemic has been the perpetual elephant in the room for two decades. Few people want to speak about or entertain the possibility that it is being caused, at least in part, by environmental factors such chemicals like glyphosate and even vaccines and their “synergistic effects,” which Dr. Seneff mentioned in her radio interview with Hartmann. “There are many chemicals in vaccines that are synergistically toxic with glyphosate. We’re getting more vaccines on the agenda,” Seneff said.3
The fall back theories are that autism is genetic or that there really is no epidemic at all, that the rising rates are simply due to greater public awareness and reporting of autistic-like symptoms, as well as a more liberal classification of the disorder. That is a theory that has been espoused by pediatrician Paul Offit, MD:
I don’t think there’s an epidemic of autism. I think that if we went into a time machine, and went back 30 or 40 years, and use the same diagnostic criteria that we currently use to diagnose autism, and introduce it into the communities so that everybody is aware as they are now, and also make it very clear in that community now 30 years in the past that you will qualify for services if you have this diagnosis, I think you would find that the incidence of autism would be the same 30 years ago as it is now.8 9
In the 1980s, the autism rate in the U.S. was reported at one in 10,000 children.10 According to Dr. Offit, that rate was wildly inaccurate and so there is no need for alarm. Everything is as it has always been. Will this same “Emperor’s New Clothes” mentality be as readily accepted when the estimate for autism reaches one in two children?

This article or commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers. The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.
1 Meyer N. MIT Researcher’s New Warning: At Today’s Rate, Half of All U.S. Children Will Be Autistic (by 2025)AltHealthWORKS June 11, 2014. 2 ANH-USA. Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT. Alliance for Natural Health USA Dec. 23, 2014. 3 Thom Hartmann Program. Half of all Children will be Autistic by 2025. YouTube (published Dec. 31, 2014). 4 The Big Picture RT. Why Half Of All Children Could Be Autistic by 2025. YouTube (published Jan. 8, 2015). 5 Press Release. CDC estimates 1 in 68 children has been identified with autism spectrum disorder. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Mar. 27, 2014. 6 CDC. Data & Statistics on Autism Spectrum Disorder. 7 Parpia R, Fisher BL. CDC: Autism Rate Going UpThe Vaccine Reaction May 28, 2018. 8 Milner RP. Vaccines, Are They Safe and Effective? The Greatest Medical Controversy of Our TimeGlobal Research News Jan. 3, 2016. 9 Cáceres M. Dr. Offit Quotes: Top 10 ListThe Vaccine Reaction May 26, 2017. 10 How Common is Autism? Autism Science Foundation.
BY Jeffrey Dach, MD
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational and research purposes:
You may have noticed a recent article in The Washington Post by Juliette N. Kayyem entitled Anti-vaxxers are dangerous. Make them face isolation, fines, arrests.”1
My initial reaction was the article must have been written by a moron. However, my opinion changed when I discovered the author, Ms. Kayyem, who graduated from Harvard law school in 1995. So, it appears this article is a carefully crafted piece of pro-vaccine industry propaganda. In other words, a large pile of nonsense and misinformation masquerading as authoritative information. Propaganda pieces typically contain nonsense and blatant lies. That’s OK because the “Big Lie” becomes believable if repeated often enough. (Who Said That?)9 Let’s take a look at the main point and the most glaring falsehood in the article: “Anti-Vaxxers Are Dangerous.”

What is an Anti-Vaxxer?

The catch word, “anti-vaxxer” has become popular in the vaccine industry propaganda machine as a pejorative term for children who have been vaccine injured, and whose mothers no longer vaccinate them. This is aptly described by Barbara Loe Fisher in her article: “No Mercy for Mothers Or Their Vaccine Injured Children2

The Big Lie: Unvaccinated are Dangerous

The easiest way to demonstrate the Big Lie: “Unvaccinated are Dangerous”, is to ask the CDC, the U.S. Government Center for Disease Control.
It is universally agreed those most susceptible to the ravages of infectious disease are the immuno-compromised, such as those undergoing bone marrow transplantation. If the “Unvaccinated Are A Danger,” then one would expect the CDC to advise keeping the unvaccinated away from the immunocompromised, those having bone marrow transplants. Quite to the contrary, the CDC says the exact opposite. The recently vaccinated, not the unvaccinated, must be kept away from the transplant ward.3
The CDC document Guidelines for Preventing Opportunistic Infections Among Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients contains this quote…3
Visitors who might have communicable infectious diseases (e.g., URIs, flu-like illnesses, recent exposure to communicable diseases, an active shingles rash whether covered or not, a VZV-like rash (note: VZV is Varcella, chickenpox) within 6 weeks of receiving a live-attenuated VZV vaccine, or a history of receiving an oral polio vaccine within the previous 3–6 weeks) should not be allowed in the HSCT center (note HSCT is hematopoetic stem cell transplant center) or allowed to have direct contact with HSCT recipients or candidates undergoing conditioning therapy (AII).3
Not sure you want to believe the CDC? Instead, lets ask the University of Kentucky Transplant Service.4 Are the unvaccinated a danger? and should they be kept away from the transplant ward? Again, they say the exact opposite, adults and children who are recently vaccinated with the chickenpox or polio vaccine are a danger and should be kept away from immunocompromised transplant patients.
Still Don’t Believe it? Maybe the University of Kentucky is an exception? All transplant wards across the nation follow the American Society for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplantation Guidelines.5 What do they say? Are the unvaccinated a danger to be kept from visiting the transplant ward? No, again they say quite the opposite. Those who have been recently vaccinated are a danger. Nowhere in this document do they say the unvaccinated are a danger. Quite to the contrary they say those recently vaccinated with the following vaccinations are a danger to the transplant ward: MMR (measles mumps rubella) Polio vaccine (OPV), Varicella Vaccine, Rotavirus vaccine, Influenza Vaccine (LAIV).5

The Varivax Package Insert Says Vaccinated are a Danger to Others

This information is readily available. All you need to do is read the package insert for the vaccine. Merck, the manufacturer of the Varivax (chickenpox) vaccine openly admits in their product insert that people recently vacccinated with the Varivax vaccine pose a danger to the immune-compromised, pregnant mothers and infants.7 The danger is due to transmission of live vaccine virus from those recently vaccinated to those contacts around them. This is a quote from the Varivax product insert:
Due to the concern for transmission of vaccine virus, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid whenever possible close association with susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks following vaccination with VARIVAX. Susceptible high-risk individuals include: Immuno-compromised, pregnant mothers, and infants-(shortened for brevity).7

Healthy Unvaccinated People are Not Dangerous

The reality is that healthy unvaccinated individuals are NOT DANGEROUS, and are allowed visitation rights on the transplant wards across the country. It is the recently vaccinated who are “dangerous” and are restricted from visiting the transplant ward. Perhaps someone reading this could inform Juliette Kayyem and The Washington Post of this information so their blatantly incorrect article can be retracted, or at least modified to correct the false information contained.

The Unvaccinated are Causing the Measles Outbreaks

Another BIG Lie in this Washington Post article by Kayyem is the blame for the recent measles outbreak falls squarely on the unvaccinated. For this reason, the unvaccinated should be branded as criminals to be arrested, found guilty and sent to prison. For the moment let us ignore the obvious contrary argument that persecuting the unvaccinated like this is a violation of just about every form of national and international human rights and civil liberties laws you can think of.

Measles Outbreaks are Caused by the Vaccine Program Itself

Lets take a look at what Dr. Levy in 1984 J Epidemiology has to say about this in his article: “The future of measles in highly immunized populations”.6 Dr. Levy is not alone in stating the obvious. Because of limitations and failures in the measles vaccine program ( i.e. primary and secondary vaccine failure),  we are creating a larger population of susceptible individuals, than before the vaccine era.6 Dr. Levy is saying the measles vaccine program itself is creating a larger population of people susceptible to contracting measles, and this is the reason we are seeing periodic measles outbreaks which are predicted to increase.
Dr. Levy says:
despite short-term success in eliminating the disease (measles), long-range projections demonstrate that the proportion of susceptibles in the year 2050 may be greater than in the prevaccine era. Present vaccine technology and public health policy must be altered to deal with this eventuality.6
What Dr. Levy is saying is that the unvaccinated are NOT to blame for periodic recurrent measles outbreaks.  We will be seeing more and more of these outbreaks as a result of primary and secondary vaccine failure.
Dr. Gregory Poland, world expert on measles vaccine, said in Vaccine 2012 that measles outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations occur because of primary and secondary vaccine failure.8 Here is a quote:
Thus, measles outbreaks also occur even among highly vaccinated populations because of primary and secondary vaccine failure, which results in gradually larger pools of susceptible persons and outbreaks once measles is introduced.. This leads to a paradoxical situation whereby measles in highly immunized societies occurs primarily among those previously immunized (Quote Gregory Poland)8
Similar measles outbreaks have been documented in other highly vaccinated populations in countries such as Israel, Nigeria , Korea, Czech Republic, Australia  and Japan involving the vaccinated as well as unvaccinated.8 This is discussed in more detail in my previous article.
Conclusion: Pro Vaccine Industry Propaganda has reached a new extreme which threatens to label the unvaccinated as criminals to be arrested and sent to prison. In case you haven’t noticed, its official, you are now living in a police state.

Note: This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. It was originally published at
This article or commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers. The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.
1 Anti-vaxxers are dangerous. Make them face isolation, fines, arrests. Juliette N. Kayyem The Washington Post. 2 No Mercy for Mothers Or Their Vaccine Injured Children. Barbara Loe Fisher The Vaccine Reaction Apr. 25, 2019. 3 CDC Guidelines for Preventing Opportunistic Infections Among Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients. 4 Univ Kentucky Visiting Patients on the Transplant Unit 2012. 5 Amer Soc Blood Bone Marrow Transplantation Guidelines for Preventing Infectious Complications. 6 Am J Epidemiol. 1984 July;120(1):39-48. The future of measles in highly immunized populations. A modeling approach.  Levy DL. 7 VARIVAX: Package Insert and Label Information. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Jan. 23, 2019. 8 Measles Outbreaks Fake News Hysteria. Jeffrey Dach, MD. 9 If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Quote attributed to Joseph Goebbels. 10 Glass, Germs, and Steel:Why Mayor De Blasio’s Draconian Public Health Policy Will FailSarah Dillingham The New English Review May 2019.