Discover more from Margaret Anna Alice Through the Looking Glass
Dialogue with a Curious Injectee
It Happened! It Finally Happened! An Open-Minded Pro-Vaxxer Asked a Question! + Updates Galore, Including Twitter Locking My Account!
Something happened that I was beginning to think was as unlikely to occur as Bigfoot soaring in on a pegasus, sliding down a rainbow, and distributing the leprechauns’ gold stash to the 99 percent: a person who has been quadruple-jabbed and believes in the safety and efficacy of the injectable gene therapy product honestly asked me a question and engaged in a good-faith dialogue.
The question came up in the comment thread of Are You a Good German or a Badass German?, and I asked his permission to share our dialogue with you guys as I thought you could use a positive counterpoint to contentious encounters like this one.
He kindly granted permission but asked that I refer to him as ‘B,’ explaining, “I do live & work in wokeland (where even TALKING to the other side can get me ex-communicated).”
So, without further ado, here is our congenial exchange.
B: Don’t know how I stumbled onto this Substack. I’m a somewhat “anti-woke” pro free speech Democrat. I think my fellow liberals are a bit nuts about masks. (Masks don’t help fight Covid very well). But I’m convinced that the imperfect vaccines are amazing and literally help save us from societal collapse. I’m over 50 and have taken all four shots as recommended. I didn’t vote for Trump & never will, but it’s great that he helped get the vaccines done so fast. I thin[k] everyone should take the vaccine and if more of us had we might actually be out of the pandemic. But maybe not. Covid is gonna Covid. But I trust the global medical consensus. Most of you don’t. Why?
I’m NOT ideological. Trans women aren’t women. Black lives have always mattered, and we didn’t need nightly protests about it. Free speech is the most sacred thing in our democracy. I think Elon owning Twitter would be a net good. I often listen to Joe Rogan.
Just letting you know who I am before you slam me. Just honestly tell me why you think the global medical consensus is wrong?
MAA: I’m not going to slam you, B—I am delighted to welcome you! And *thank* you for asking that question! That’s all those of us who have concerns about the safety and efficacy of the injection want—the opportunity to present the scientific evidence to someone who has an open mind and the courage to ask that question.
Indeed, my entire blog is devoted to answering that question, so I encourage you to explore the Archive. Since you are savvy to the ideological manipulations of the media, you may appreciate my first essay, which shows how propagandists sowed a climate of fear and division to inculcate people into a particular narrative that would justify the shift to more authoritarian governments worldwide.
Dr. Mike Yeadon, Pfizer’s former chief science officer/VP with 32 years’ worth of experience in commercial R&D, delineates the lies bolstering this narrative:
These articles address your question more directly:
And when you say “the global medical consensus,” understand that you are seeing what is presented by the media as the consensus—the same media that received a billion dollars to push the vaccine; the same media that gets 70% of its advertising funding from pharmaceutical companies (75% of their total budgets in 2020).
Because they have been censored, deplatformed, and smeared, you are not seeing the million+ (also see this and this) ethical physicians, scientists, medical professionals, and independent thinkers around the globe who are questioning the narrative.
Instead, you are seeing the representatives who 1) are knowingly deceiving the public; 2) have fallen under the same mass hypnosis as the majority of the public; or 3) are consciously committing scientific fraud because their paymasters have pressured them to do so.
I know of no better example of this than the case of Dr. Tess Lawrie and Dr. Andrew Hill. In Profiles in Courage: Dr. Tess Lawrie, I share excerpts from a Zoom meeting in which Hill admits to intentionally altering his paper to obscure the fact that ivermectin can reduce COVID fatalities by 80%. He acknowledges this deception will kill at least 500,000 people in six weeks (it’s been over a year now, so that figure is much higher in reality, especially when combined with financially incentivized hospicide) and that he’s being pressured to do this by his sponsor, Unitaid (a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation vehicle that gave $40 million to the university where Dr. Hill works).
Please watch this 19-minute video to see the evidence of this corruption:
The reason ivermectin had to be maligned is the pharmaceutical companies could not have gotten emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for the vaccines if safe, cheap, and effective alternative treatments were available. The EUAs shield them from liability for the millions of injuries and tens of thousands of deaths that have been reported since the rollout. While pharmaceutical companies make billions, those who are debilitated for life can no longer work and have no financial recourse. Many have committed suicide because the symptoms they are suffering are inescapable and excruciating.
Here are some of the stories of those whose lives have been irrevocably altered by the experimental injection:
Here is a short music video capturing their silencing:
You referred to Operation Warp Speed. The reason Trump was able to help “get the vaccines done so fast” was because he skipped all of the long-term safety trials! Vaccines usually take at least a decade to develop and pass various trials, but those safety protocols simply got thrown out the door. Indeed, Pfizer’s vaccine is still in clinical trials, which won’t be completed until March 2023.
You and everyone who signed up for this experimental drug are the guinea pigs—and you were not given informed consent about this fact nor about the 1,223 deaths, 158,000 adverse events, and 1,291 side effects reported in Pfizer’s cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse events reports through February 28, 2021, presented to the FDA, which tried to suppress this data for 75 years but was forced by a judge to release it at a rate of 55,000 pages per month.
You were also tricked into believing these products are “vaccines.” As Bayer’s Head of Pharma Stefan Oelrich notes, “If we had surveyed two years ago if people were willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body, we would have probably had a 95% refusal rate.”
Are you aware that the CDC has received 1,237,645 reports of adverse events, including 27,349 deaths (99 children so far), as of 4/15/22?
Here are the mortality charts showing them skyrocketing starting in 2021 when the injection was rolled out.
Out of those fatalities, 3,507 occurred almost immediately after injection; 2,797 within 1 day; and 1,344 within 2 days. Dr. Jessica Rose, Dr. Colleen Huber, and many others have demonstrated satisfaction of the Bradford Hill criteria, thus proving the massive spike in mortality and injuries that began occurring in 2021 is caused by the experimental injectable product.
Steve Kirsch repeatedly asks questions none of these agencies are willing to answer:
You may have also noticed the constant goal-post–shifting to hide the fact that the injections not only do not prevent the spread and contraction of COVID, they actually have *negative* efficacy—in other words, they *increase* your chances of contracting COVID and other diseases due to the progressive destruction of your immune system with each successive injection.
I realize this is a lot to digest, especially if you take up the challenge to read my essays as well.
In short, the scientific evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates:
The injectable gene therapy products are *unsafe* and *ineffective*.
The media, governments, and regulatory agencies have colluded with BigPharma to suppress the scientific data and medical experts proving these facts.
Many unnecessarily died of COVID due to the rejection of early treatment protocols and the administration of lethal protocols like remdesivir and ventilation.
There was absolutely no need for a COVID “vaccine” or any of the tyrannical and harmful COVID measures because early treatment protocols combined with conventional health recommendations (e.g., healthy diet and lifestyle; zinc, vitamin D, and vitamin C supplementation; hand-washing; stay home when you’re sick) would have saved nearly all lives lost to COVID except those already likely to die of old age or other illnesses.
The *only* entities that benefited from forcing an experimental product on the global population are the pharmaceutical companies profiting by the billions from recurring revenue; governments justifying totalitarian measures; billionaire megalomaniacs wishing to depopulate the planet; and the medical system reaping profits from larger numbers of sick and injured patients.
I would be happy to answer any additional questions you may have. Please don’t hesitate to ask, and, once again, thank you for having the curiosity and independence of mind *to* ask instead of automatically trusting pharmaceutical corporations, governments, and propagandists to have your best interests at heart instead of their own.
B: Thanks for all the info Margaret. I’ll dig in at some point, though I might skip things like the Ivermectin debate. I’ve been swimming in those rivers for a while. Don’t think you’ll change my mind. Again, not ideological, but smart heterodox people involved in that debate (Scott Alexander, Sam Harris, Monica Gandhi) have been more convincing to me than Brett Weinstein et al. But I’ll look at some of the other stuff. Thanks.
Serious question. You seem pretty vested in this topic. I’m genuinely curious. Despite all you’ve researched to date, do you think there’s a chance you’re wrong and the vaccines really were a net good despite the long term unknowns?
MAA: I appreciate your open-mindedness, B, and I applaud you for your willingness to examine the evidence that has been suppressed by the forces that benefit from propping up the “safe-and-effective” Big Lie.
Along those lines, I strongly recommend challenging the biases that have been implanted in you and those you cite as credible sources regarding ivermectin. The evidence of scientific fraud, corruption, and the orchestrated disinformation campaign on ivermectin is undeniably compelling.
It won’t take much time, I promise. Start with this video (I mistakenly said it was 10 minutes (now corrected) earlier, but it’s actually closer to 19—and worth every second, I promise you):
This website provides a live real-time meta-analysis of 82 significant studies (and counting) and features “random effects meta-analysis results for all studies, studies within each treatment stage, specific outcomes, peer-reviewed studies, Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), and after exclusions.” It is a great place to start for getting a sense of the overwhelming scientific evidence of IVM’s efficacy.
In the following article, I document the smear campaign perpetrated in mainstream media sources like the Rolling Stone, New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, and the Associated Press. Retractions were quietly issued after the propaganda had already generated its intended effect of discrediting ivermectin:
In short, I see your Scott Alexander, Sam Harris, and Monica Gandhi and raise you a Dr. Tess Lawrie, Dr. Pierre Kory, Michael Capuzzo/RESCUE reporters, Phil Harper, Dr. Meryl Nass, Steve Kirsch, Dr. Robert Malone, Igor Chudov, and Mathew Crawford. That oughta be enough to get you started :-)
Below is my response to your question, “Despite all you’ve researched to date, do you think there’s a chance you’re wrong and the vaccines really were a net good despite the long term unknowns?”
In early 2021, I intuitively sensed that “Operation Warp Speed” was simply marketing-speak for a recklessly rushed pseudo-solution that would generate billions of dollars’ worth of recurring revenue for pharmaceutical corporations while providing governments with the rationale to impose mandates and seize ever-escalating powers. I worried the lack of long-term safety trials (see, for example, these charts comparing the traditional stages of vaccine development vs. the warp-speed version) would result in a large number of adverse events.
The data was only preliminary at that time, however (at least what the public had access to; we now know Pfizer and the FDA knew about the colossal number of adverse events and deaths as early as February 28, 2021, according to their own cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse events reports), so while I personally chose to remain cautious until I had sufficient data upon which to make an analysis, I did not have enough information to make a definitive claim regarding these experimental products.
I provided my mother and step-father with some of the earliest available data and articles suggesting potential problems but did not feel it was my place to make that decision for them. Unfortunately, they allowed their doctors to pressure them despite their misgivings as they are meek and not the types to challenge authority. This was a decision they would later come to regret as the data regarding the hazards and inefficacy of these injectables mounted, but at least they realized that in time to avoid the boosters.
The more time passed, however, the more evidence emerged of historically unparalleled numbers of fatalities and injuries (especially among the young, healthy, and athletic) that could be directly tied to the injection using the Bradford Hill Criteria for assessing causality; autopsies; and medical evaluations. This information, paired with the fact that the injectable products were not only failing to prevent the spread and contraction of the virus but were actually *increasing* people’s chances of getting it and ending up hospitalized, persuaded me beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that these experimental products are neither safe nor effective, and I believe anyone who assesses the data with a neutral, logical, reasonable, and open mind will arrive at the same conclusion.
I also highly recommend The Real Anthony Fauci, which is bolstered by thousands of supporting references and had every line vetted for veracity. As an attorney, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew he had to make his arguments airtight to avoid lawsuits by pharmaceutical companies, and the fact that that hasn’t happened is further testament to the validity of his claims. I think you will find the book eye-opening, particularly in regards to the corruption of agencies by regulatory capture.
Thank you, again, for making an honest good-faith effort to examine the evidence and for your courageous willingness to reconsider your viewpoints in light of new information. You are a model for rationality and give me hope that others may be willing to reevaluate their beliefs based on robust scientific evidence.
P.S. These moving pictures of publicly available data tell a powerful story:
B: Thanks Margaret. A lot of links! You’ve clearly dug deep. Unfortunately while I do gather from our limited conversation that you seem to be making your points in good faith, unfortunately, since life is short, I have a personal rule of thumb that I don’t engage people who can’t simply say, “Of course, yes, I might be wrong.”
To be clear, you MIGHT in fact be right! But, like many on the other side, you seem convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt. So any back & forth would be me being open minded and you sending me more links. LOL. Which becomes a sermon, not a conversation.
I will check some of this stuff out when I can. I’m familiar with Kennedy & Dr. Malone already so I’ll skip them. (Their arguments haven’t convinced me I’m afraid.)
Either way I wish you well. Hope you stay safe. Maybe we’re all wrong! Chances our humanity gets wiped out eventually anyway. Hope you get some R&R to just enjoy life. It’s short for everyone.
Thanks for the back & forth. Peace.
MAA: You know what, B? You’re right. I do acknowledge I could be wrong. I have arrived at my conclusions based on an exhaustive review of the evidence, so I feel confident in those determinations and believe the evidence would stand up in a court of law, but I do understand it is not possible for me to know anything with 100% certainty, being a fallible human subject to cognitive biases and neurological trickery :-)
As for topics where I haven’t performed this level of examination, I try to remain neutral until the preponderance of evidence leads to a particular conclusion, and I am open to revising my understanding if new information compels recalibration.
I am genuinely curious to hear about your journey, though, so I hope you’ll check back in and let me know your thoughts if you’re willing to share.
I’d love to publish this exchange with my readers if you’re okay with that. I think it would give them hope to see someone rational and open-minded willing to discuss these matters in good faith.
Meanwhile, I wish you well and thank you for your thoughtful dialogue. Peace ✌️
B: Fair answer. Didn’t mean to browbeat you into saying it. But I appreciate the directness. I’m here in your comments section so obviously I’m not trying to be anonymous, but I do live & work in wokeland (where even TALKING to the other side can get me ex-communicated), so if you mention our conversation in a full up post I don’t think you have to mention me by name or email. That would be appreciated.
Peace & good will to you too.
MAA: Haha, no worries, I’m nothing if not direct :-)
*lol* Understood. I was planning to title it something like “Dialogue with a Curious [or Open-Minded] Injectee.” I usually just show the back-and-forthing like a transcript, so your first name would only appear in the transcript section (unless you want me to obscure it with ‘B’ or something like that) and would link to the original comment thread if people want to see it in context.
Thanks again for your brave willingness to talk to the other side, and happy movie-watching!
UPDATE: I’ve published an afterward to this exchange for my paid subscribers here:
Note: Inline links have been embedded for ease of reading. I have left mistakes intact for fidelity with the exception of minor punctuation tweaks and one bracketed correction for clarity.
© Margaret Anna Alice, LLC
You Make This Work Possible!
Are you willing to spend 16.4 cents/day (annual) or 19.7 cents/day (monthly) to help me continue fighting tyranny and democide? You gain access to premium content like “rolling” interviews, podcasts, Behind the Scenes, and other bonus content:
Substack now offers group subscriptions! Purchase 4 or more subscriptions for a group, and you get 10% off!
If you’d like to make a one-time donation, you can buy me a Ko-fi:
I cannot overstate how much your support means to me and how necessary it is for me to continue devoting every possible second to unmasking totalitarianism and awakening the sleeping before tyranny triumphs. THANK YOU, FRIENDS! 🙏🤗🙌
Stop AB 2098!
I am disgusted to report that the California State Assembly Committee on Business and Professions voted to advance AB 2098 at the April 19 hearing. It is now moving to the House Committee on Appropriations. Click the “Submit Position Email” button on this page (or just email firstname.lastname@example.org) and consider including a link to my Letter to the California Legislature with your comment. You can also sign this petition.
See these posts on how to take actions to help stop the slate of medical tyranny bills in California if you haven’t already:
BTW, Dr. Mercola just published an excellent article on this topic, and I was honored to see he included an excerpt from my letter.
Illinois Government Jumps on the Biosurveillance Bandwagon
Stand for Health Freedom has created a petition to help defeat the “Illinois government’s plan to export medical tyranny nationwide,” which they would accomplish “through an infectious disease testing and treatment surveillance regime.” Orwellian excreta, in other words.
Oppose “Mandatory Filing” for Supplements
While you’re at it, you can sign the Alliance for Natural Health’s petition to oppose “mandatory filing” for supplements, yet another blatant attempt to wipe out effective alternatives to pharmaceutical drug cartel products (more details here).
Change the Patent Laws to Protect Consumers
Fellow Substacker and medical freedom fighter Hedley Rees has started this petition about changing the patent laws to bring prescription drug prices down. As a former BigPharma insider, Rees understands how corrupt the industry is and how to help fix it. Among other things, his petition would require pharmaceutical corporations to prove “a potential drug is going to be: safe, effective compared with drugs already on the market, [and] manufactured to the required quality.” The petition currently has 739 signatures. Let’s help him reach his goal of 1,000.
The profitability of new drugs incentivizes pharmaceutical companies to attack safe and effective off-patent drugs like ivermectin and hydroxochloriquine, and these proposed patent changes would address that issue, among others.
Call for the Retractions of These Fraudulent “Studies”
Licensed elementary teacher, researcher, and child safety advocate Darby Shaw has published instructions on how you can help demand the retraction of the error-infested TOGETHER trial published by the New England Journal of Medicine on March 30:
Vilifying the Uninjected
Similarly, superhero scientists Dr. Jessica Rose, Dr. Byram Bridle, Dr. Pierre Kory, and Dr. Denis Rancourt are calling for the retraction of David Fisman’s vile “study” fomenting hatred toward the presently defined enemy—the uninjected (particularly ironic considering it’s actually the injected that pose a health risk to the uninjected, as this recent study proving shedding reveals).
Bangladesh Mask Study
Steve Kirsch is also going after the concocted study that was used to roll out science-denying masking policies, which contradicted the extensive pre-2020 scientific evidence that masks not only fail to prevent the transmission of respiratory viruses but also threaten the health of those who have been suckered into wearing them.
#StopTheAmendments, #StopTheTreaty, & #StopTheWHO
Last week, Dr. Tess Lawrie reached out to schedule a Zoom meeting with me about joining forces to stop the WHO’s malevolent attempted power grab, which arguably poses the greatest threat to humanity and freedom in human history. Most of you know I consider Tess the Queen of Integrity (I just learned from Dr. Pierre Kory that she is also known as “the Conscience of Science,” which suits her perfectly) and she inspired me to launch my Profiles in Courage series. I can’t think of anyone in the world I would be more honored to collaborate with, nor can I conceive of a more important mission.
During this exhilarating meeting, I had the privilege of speaking with not only Tess but also World Council for Health Steering Committee member Shabnam Palesa Mohamed and their talented tech guy, Devyn. The World Council for Health will be embarking on a multitiered campaign focused on 1) stopping the International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments up for vote at the historic WHO meeting scheduled for May 22–28; 2) stopping the international pandemic treaty; and 3) encouraging member states to withdraw from the WHO—a peaceful act of noncompliance that models the secret to dismantling tyranny I described in my second essay courtesy of Étienne de La Boétie’s The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude:
“You can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break into pieces.”
In her elucidating Corona Investigative Committee interview, Shabnam made two crystalline statements I especially resonate with:
“Who funds the United Nations and the World Health Organization? It’s us! Essentially, they’re using our resources to violate our rights.”
“The power of the people is always stronger than the people in power.”
If we can get the people of the world to understand these two points, we will have a strong chance of rallying them behind our mission to #StopTheWHO. I will be writing a series of articles aimed at this and will be coordinating with the World Council for Health on their upcoming campaigns, the most urgent being stopping the proposed IHR amendments. These revisions would end national sovereignty starting in November and give the WHO dictatorial global powers to declare a “pandemic,” forcing countries to submit to their edicts or suffer economic sanctions, loss of international aid, and other shaming penalties.
An unelected bureaucrat and likely genocidal war criminal would have the power to impose a “OneHealth” dictate that supersedes democratically elected nation-state policies. I believe even the most mind-controlled Covidians could agree that’s not such a spiffy idea.
I will be keeping you apprised of opportunities to participate in our efforts to #StopTheWHO over the coming months, but in the meantime, below are some resources you can review to understand the challenges we are facing.
Fellow Substacker and World Council for Health collaborator James Roguski is on the frontlines of raising awareness about the WHO’s plans. He has been publishing an in-depth series explaining why the proposed amendments and treaty represent such grave perils:
This post outlines concrete actions you can take right now:
Katherine Watt of Bailiwick News has also been covering these matters in detail with particular attention to the legal complexities:
Some of you may recall the WHO held a sneak-attack meeting a few weeks ago and only allowed 48 hours for public comment in response to their coercive question (worded to imply the inevitability of the treaty) limited to 250 words. In case you missed it, here is the response I submitted:
The World Council for Health has a number of instructive videos on this topic, including:
The WCFH’s April 11 General Assembly Meeting is exceptionally informative, and here are three salient presentations excerpted from that meeting:
I encourage you to follow Tess, James, and Katherine on Substack as we all team up to #StopTheWHO:
Twitter Locked My Account!
(so much for Elon Musk saving free speech on Twitter)
Yesterday morning, I received two alerts from Twitter notifying me that it had locked my account for my month-old “misleading tweet” on my Letter to the FDA & CDC, in which I encouraged people to submit comments to stop the FDA from approving injections for little kids.
I am proud to have received my first Twitter slap (fresh on the heels of my Facebook jail term last month), but I honestly find it perplexing that they would single out this relatively innocuous tweet. I didn’t say anything about the injections themselves being dangerous. I didn’t talk about vaxx injuries or deaths. I didn’t provide any scientific evidence countering the narrative. I didn’t even talk about globally coordinated corruption and democide!
Even more confusing, I appear able to access my Twitter account like normal—although I haven’t tried posting anything yet, so I’ll find out if that functionality has been disabled when I try tweeting a notification about this post.
Needless to say, this is yet another reminder to follow me on different platforms as a precaution, including:
I still encourage you to follow me on Twitter as that is where I am most active and is the only place where I can engage in pestering campaigns like the one I mounted against Justin Trudeau during the Canadian truckers’ protest.
Comments: The Singularity Has Arrived
I’m still bowled over by the heartwarming, inspiring, and thoughtful comments on my one-year anniversary post:
I want to thank each one of you for sharing, commenting, hearting, or simply reading my posts. Thanks to your enthusiastic participation in this vibrant community, I do believe I have finally arrived at the commenting singularity. Much as I would like to, I can no longer respond to every comment and still survive the seismic wave of time-sensitive deadlines, especially as I gear up to take on the WHO and its dictatorial attempts to install One-World Tyranny. (I will make an exception for paid posts as the comments are more manageable, and it’s another special perk I can offer those whose support makes it possible for me to do this.)
Even though I cannot respond to comments at the same level I have been doing this past year, know that I read and appreciate all of your responses and remain committed to nurturing this extraordinary community, where you can connect with kindred brilliant souls from around the world working to resist tyranny and save humanity.
If you feel the work I am doing is worthwhile and want to make it possible for me to spend more time writing and researching in my aim to unmask totalitarianism and awaken the sleeping before tyranny triumphs, please consider supporting me, whether it be by subscribing, buying me a Ko-fi, or sharing my posts. I thank you for reading, thinking, sharing, and supporting my work in whichever ways you choose.
Want to make a one-time donation? You can treat me to Ko-fi:
Prefer to donate crypto? You can send Bitcoin using the following code:
Since crypto transfers are anonymized, I won’t know about your donation. Please drop me an email by responding to any of my newsletters if you’d like to alert me to your generous gift.
Remember, a subscription to Margaret Anna Alice Through the Looking Glass makes for an intellectually adventurous gift down the rabbit-hole!
Note: Purchasing any items using Amazon affiliate links included in my content will further support my efforts to unmask tyranny.