To be is to be contingent: nothing of which it can be said that "it is" can be alone and independent. But being is a member of paticca-samuppada as arising which contains ignorance. Being is only invertible by ignorance.

Destruction of ignorance destroys the illusion of being. When ignorance is no more, than consciousness no longer can attribute being (pahoti) at all. But that is not all for when consciousness is predicated of one who has no ignorance than it is no more indicatable (as it was indicated in M Sutta 22)

Nanamoli Thera

Friday, August 7, 2026

Lansky selected quotes 2


On a separate form, Lansky disclosed that he finished the eighth grade. He also revealed that he was receiving private tutoring in mathematics.

Nothing is perhaps more revealing about the man and his personal goals. Whereas many Mafia punks could neither read nor write, Lansky at the age of thirty-nine was still attempting to improve himself. And nothing was more essential to a man who had already handled millions and was fast becoming the National Crime Syndicate’s expert on gambling than a knowledge of mathematics.
*
Lansky knew his promise to win Lucky’s release had to be kept if his future plans were to be successful. ‘The key was Tom Dewey. Long before, when Dewey was special prosecutor, Lansky had noted his ambition. His pledge to Lucky was based largely on his gambler’s hunch that eventually it would be to Dewey’s advantage to release Lucky.
*
Underworld sources like to boast of their political connections, real or imaginary. Yet only the naive will dismiss the boasts out of hand. Organized crime could not exist without political corruption, and enough is on record to prove—in theory at least—that anything is possible.

The boast has been made that Lansky pumped as much as $250,000 into Dewey’s campaign. That no record of such a contribution exists is not surprising. Lansky, say underworld sources, simply followed standard procedure in such matters and used respectable fronts as his agents. Utmost discretion would have been required in any case. Where the goal was the ultimate release of a Lucky Luciano, even more care would have been needed.

To win Luciano’s release, it was considered necessary to first put Dewey under obligation. Then, at the right time, an adequate excuse would be invented, as it has been in similar situations: New evidence has been produced; doctors have come forth to testify the prisoner is suffering from a terminal illness; the prisoner has been shown to have served the state in some fashion, perhaps by giving information that led to the conviction of another notorious gangster.
*
With the world at war, the rules were changed. Emphasis was no longer on local gangsters, and reform sentiment was muted. The only thing that mattered to most Americans was the war effort. The gimmick, therefore, was obvious. If a way could be found for Luciano to contribute, or seem to contribute, to the defeat of the Axis, Dewey would be justified in freeing him.

The beginnings of Operation Underworld are still shrouded in mystery. For obvious reasons, Naval Intelligence doesn’t want to talk about it. On the record neither does District Attorney Hogan. And without his permission any files that remain cannot be examined.

Nevertheless, after much criticism of Dewey—some of it born of politics—arose at intervals, the official version has been leaked to favored writers. According to their stories, the inspiration for Operation Underworld came from Naval Intelligence in the Third Naval District. The Navy was upset over the possibility of espionage and sabotage on the docks of New York City.

A couple of officers got the notion the underworld could be enlisted to keep an eye on German and Italian secret agents. Naturally they turned to the district attorney’s office for advice, and at their first conference they met with Hogan—and Gurfein.

Under indictment and awaiting trial was Joe ‘‘Socks” Lanza, who through illicit labor unions allegedly controlled Fulton Fish Market, a municipally owned institution and the second largest fish emporium in the world. Gurfein suggested Socks might be willing to cooperate under the circumstances, which, sure enough, turned out to be the case. Socks started building an intelligence network, but after a month or so reported that he was having problems. He just wasn’t powerful enough. The only man who could get the job done was—who else?—Charlie Lucky.

It was mid-April, 1942. Dewey was running for governor and considered a sure bet. And here was his ex-assistant, the man who brought in the first tip on Lucky’s alleged prostitution- racket connections, getting word that Luciano—behind bars for five years—was essential to the war effort.
Socks’ message went first to Commander Charles H. Haffen- den, who headed the operation for Naval Intelligence. Needless to say, Haffenden immediately consulted with Gurfein who consulted with Hogan, and the decision was made.

For two years the meetings were held at frequent intervals. If some gangster wanted personal assurance from Lucky, he was brought to the prison. But that seldom happened. It was Lansky’s job to convey Lucky’s orders to the Mafia, and even those writers following the official line admit that “word carried by Lansky would wield the same authority as if Lucky delivered it personally. That was Lansky’s standing in the syndicate.” What the writers don’t say is that the Mafia members knew very well that Lansky was attempting to free the Boss, and they cooperated completely in the effort. Winning the war was secondary to helping Charlie Lucky by obeying Lansky’s orders.

Actually, there was no need to continue the meetings once the decision had been made, but Lansky and Polakoff were making a record—and the personal participation of Lucky was essential if the real goal of their conspiracy was to be achieved.

Little time was wasted in starting the wheels turning that would open the prison gates for Lucky. In February, 1943, At- torney George Wolf—Polakoff, for some reason, took a back seat —appealed to the State Supreme Court for a reduction of sentence to time already served. Wolf, who later represented Costello at the Kefauver hearings, based the appeal on Lucky’s con- tribution to the war.

“Luciano has cooperated with high military authorities,” Wolf said. “He is rendering a definite service to the war effort.”

The judge hearing the appeal wanted to know more, so Commander Haffenden—and Gurfein—were taken into his chambers where in strict security they allegedly disclosed the details of Operation Underworld. Apparently impressed, the judge turned down the application, but he dropped a hint in Dewey’s direction. In his written order he concluded:

“If Luciano continues to cooperate and remains a model prisner, it may be appropriate at some future time to apply for executive clemency.”

As Lansky had said long before, “Dewey put him in; Dewey can get him out.”

Certainly Lucky didn’t expect to be released in 1943. After all, the war was still going and he had served only some eight months in prison. Soldiers and sailors were serving for the duration, and why should Luciano be an exception if his services were of any real value? But the record had to be prepared, the foundation laid. The reference to executive clemency pointed the way and opened the door for Dewey to act at the proper time.

Lansky was well pleased. The prospect of getting out the Boss of the Mafia was very good. Meantime, acting as the voice of Lucky, he extended his control over that jealous society to an unprecedented degree. Even Anastasia expressed himself as happy with the way Lansky was redeeming his promise.

“You're the only bastard with brains enough to do it,” he ac- knowledged.
*
Wild are the tales told about Luciano’s aid to the war effort —including one that he personally led the invasion—but noth- ing has been said about a singular contribution allegedly made by Meyer Lansky. The story is told here in full knowledge it won't, perhaps can’t, be confirmed, but it comes from sources that can only be described as reliable.

As Lucky’s area of influence was the Mafia, at home and abroad, Lansky’s was Florida and the Caribbean with his spe- cial relationship to Cuba. He became chummy with Fulgencio Batista shortly after that ex-sergeant seized power in September, 1933, and that friendship ripened in the following years as Lansky operated the racetrack and gambling casinos in Havana.

The war put an end to empire building, but Meyer planned to resume when the conflict ended. Batista, meanwhile, encountered some political difficulties. To solve them, he legalized the Communist Party of Cuba in 1938. In 1940, the Communists supported him when Batista— 122 tired of supporting puppets—got himself elected president for the first time.

A new election was approaching in 1944, and rumor had it that Batista was ready to make new concessions to the Communists. Fearing a complete takeover by the Reds—a not unlikely development as was proved fifteen years later—President Roosevelt sent stern warnings through diplomatic channels. Batista received them politely but made it clear he would be guided by his own interests.

The President, who considered Batista a gangster, decided— so goes the story—that he needed a gangster who could talk tough to Batista. Informed of Lansky’s role in Operation Un- derworld, and of his friendship with the dictator, Roosevelt in- structed Naval Intelligence—an agency dear to his heart—to send Lansky to Havana with orders to tell Batista to permit an honest election—or else. The U.S. Navy had plenty of ships and men available, and Roosevelt wouldn’t hesitate to use them.

A little awed by his mission, and personally none too happy about it, Lansky spoke to his friend. Batista conceded, none too willingly, and some private plans were made. It was no surprise that in an honest election held in 1944 Dr. Ramoén Grau San Martin, a physician, won in a land- slide against Batista’s handpicked candidate. Expecting defeat, Batista let a stooge take the fall.

Immediately thereafter, Batista was permitted to retire to an orange grove near Daytona Beach, Florida, up the coast from Lansky’s Broward headquarters.

The new administration, while hard on Communists, was corrupt enough. Lansky, whose secret role in eliminating Batista was suspected, found himself still welcome in Havana. And he made preparations against the day that Luciano would complete his war service and would be free to set up a new base of operations.

In underworld circles, the rumor has persisted that Lansky, in exchange for his contribution to American hemispheric secu- rity, was promised immunity against federal prosecution. In support of that theory: In 1953 the IRS recommended prosecution of Lansky for income-tax evasion. The Justice Department, which had final authority, declined to prosecute.
An attempt to denaturalize Lansky and deport him broke down in the higher levels of Justice after years of investigation. Whether the rumor is true or not, Lansky for years seemed immune on the federal level.

On V-E Day, May 7, 1945, Lucky Luciano petitioned Governor Dewey for executive clemency. Dewey turned the petition over to the State Parole Board, a body consisting of his appointees. After some months of apparent investigation, the board recommended unanimously that on the basis of his war effort Lucky should be released. Deportation was a foregone conclusion.

With the way thus carefully prepared, Dewey approved the recommendation. His apologists called his action routine.
It had taken longer than expected, but Meyer Lansky had kept his promise.
*
Yet the Casino Era had begun, dwarfing anything that preceded it. Prohibition, with all its millions, couldn’t compare with the profits that rolled in from gambling—legal and illegal.

The postwar boom, the reaction to the economic hardships of the four years just ended, provided the incentive. New cars, better roads, and planes provided the means. No longer was it necessary to have a gambling joint furtively hidden in the suburbs of a large city. Now regional gambling and vice centers arose, drawing their patrons from the several surrounding states.

And Meyer Lansky, who carefully had laid the foundations over the years, emerged as the single most powerful man in crime.
*
If his hands weren’t full enough with this vast expansion, Lan- sky found himself with domestic troubles. Relations with Anna, after remaining stable for years, worsened steadily as the children grew older. Anna noted with alarm the strange affection the first son, Buddy, held for his father. As if trying to compen-sate for a life the crippled boy could not lead, Lansky told him stories of his adventures in Havana and Las Vegas. Always he would stop talking when she entered the room, but Anna heard enough to believe that her husband was boasting about his career as a gangster instead of trying to hide it.

No such confidence existed between the second son and his father; Lansky followed his plan and pushed Paul toward West Point with a determination that knew no compromise. Anna, noting the boy’s good mind, secretly hoped he would become a rabbi, but her husband gave her tentative suggestions no consideration. Paul, while kind to his mother, held himself aloof from both parents.

Sandy was still another problem. Her father adored her, and the little girl was intelligent enough to know it. “You're spoil- ing her,’’ Anna would cry, to no avail. Sandy was spoiled, and she deeply resented her mother’s effort to interfere. Nevertheless, she was a pretty and charming child—when she wanted to be—and Anna was more than slightly jealous of her own daughter.

Lansky was away a lot during those years, and Anna, while suspecting the truth and fearing the worst, was told nothing about his business. Marriage became a mockery she was increasingly unable to accept. Several nervous breakdowns occurred, and in 1945 she was placed in a mental institution. The rest did her good, but her absence caused her to lose any controls she 132 still exerted over the children. Shortly after her release, she suggested they separate.
*
Less than a week after the divorce became final, the big story broke: Lucky Luciano was in Cuba.

Much was written then and later about Lucky’s sojourn in Cuba. Many of the stories were speculative, based on various official guesses, and few came near the truth. Only Meyer Lan- sky and several of his trusted aides knew the real truth, and, for obvious reasons, they weren’t talking.

In the first place, Lucky wanted a base in Havana. He ‘wanted to be close to his family; he wanted to be close to his in- vestments; and he wanted to make himself capo di capi re of the Mafia.

Lansky had no choice but to go along—up to a point. To have refused to make the necessary arrangements would have destroyed all he had worked so hard to gain. Yet Cuba was Lansky country, despite the departure of Batista.

So Lucky found a warm welcome. He invested in a couple of gambling casinos—all small by Lansky standards—and he talked vaguely of future plans. But most of all he enjoyed himself. Those lost years in prison had taken a lot of the steam from the Boss; he felt he deserved a long vacation.
Between visits to the racetrack and dates with the beautiful Cuban women, Luciano summoned the top men of the Mafia to Cuba. Everyone from Joe Adonis to Albert Anastasia to Vito Genovese came to pay their respects to the self-proclaimed new boss of all the bosses. Capos in the hinterlands followed suit, and while there was some grumbling, no one was ready to defy Luciano. The presence of Lansky at his side, representing the National Crime Syndicate, was in itself enough to discourage potential rebels. Lansky controlled casino gambling—and it was proving to be a gold mine. Any capo hoping for a cut of the action didn’t want to offend Lansky.

Lucky noticed the reaction. One day he growled, “The bas- tards seem more afraid of you than me.”

Lansky shrugged. “Maybe they figure I’m your enforcer,” he said. “After all, you’ve been away.”

It was only after Lucky had received the pledges of allegiance from almost all ranking members of the Honored Society that Lansky acted. He sent an informer to have a quiet talk with a Federal Narcotics Bureau agent in Havana. Harry J. Anslinger, then commissioner of Narcotics, told what happened in his book, The Murderers, published in 1961 by Farrar, Straus & Cudahy.

“IT had received a preliminary report,” Anslinger wrote, “through a Spanish-speaking agent I had sent to Havana, and I read this to the Cuban ambassador. The report stated that Luciano had already become friendly with a number of high Cuban officials through the lavish use of expensive gifts. Luci- ano had developed a full-fledged plan which envisioned the Caribbean as his center of operations. The Isle of Pines, south of Cuba, was to become the Monte Carlo of the Western Hemisphere. Cuba was to be made the center of all interna- tional narcotic operations. We had a number of transcribed calls Lucky had made to Miami, New York, Chicago and other large American cities, and the names of the hoodlums who called him. Lucky kept himself busy in Havana.”
*
Following his conversation with the Cuban ambassador, An- slinger wrote, the ambassador immediately telephoned the president of Cuba with an urgent plea to issue an immediate deportation order for Lucky. The president consulted with Lansky—the one man he was afraid of offending. Meyer played it cool, advising the president to wait until given a suitable excuse.

Anslinger takes credit for providing that excuse. He notified the Cuban government, he said, that “‘as long as Luciano re- mains in Cuba, America will not send one more grain of morphine or any other narcotics for medicinal or any other needs.” Now the Cubans had no choice. Lansky sadly reported to Lucky he had to go.

Luciano was disappointed, naturally, but the blame belonged to Anslinger. Lansky had done his best and had proved his loyalty again and again. He was the only man Lucky fully trusted.

Once more the top members of the Mafia were summoned to Havana by urgent messages. The capo di capi re had orders to communicate. Singly and in small groups, he gave the word. He was returning to Italy. From there he would organize the international narcotics trade and make sure a constant supply reached the United States.

Meanwhile, to act as his regent, he was appointing Meyer Lansky. Anyone failing to obey a legitimate order from Lansky would be considered in contempt of the capo di capi re and would answer for such contempt with his life.

Those weren’t the exact words, but that was the mandate handed down by Luciano. And no one objected. Lansky had won the respect and admiration of everyone. He had shown them how to get rich. He had guts and brains. He had loyally served the Boss by keeping his promise to get him out of prison.
*
Shortly after the new club completed its first season, a stranger walked into the office of Emett Choate, then attorney for Bouche and later to be a federal district judge in Miami.

The stranger piled $250,000 in cash on Choate’s desk and announced that the Club LaBoheme was under new management.

Choate, who had been warned to expect some type of proposal, was startled by the money cascading on his desk from an expensive briefcase, but he refused.

“Better take it,” said the well-dressed stranger. “It’s the best offer your people will get.” Shortly thereafter, two hard-faced strangers walked into Letendre’s office in the club and announced they were his new partners. They were friendly enough, explaining the new club was just too big to be permitted to operate independently. Letendre ordered them out. Before leaving, they gave him some advice.

“You’re marked for murder,” they told him.

Letendre was greatly disturbed by the incident. He had no illusions about the power of the men running the Colonial Inn, although most people assumed the real force behind it was Frank Costello—the new bogeyman of organized crime. He drove to Miami and consulted with a few of his friends in the racket. They treated him as if he were already dead. Rumors spread rapidly, and when Letendre flew home to Woonsocket to consult with Butsy Morelli, then Mafia boss of Rhode Island, he got the brushoff.

“Tf Lansky’s involved, I can’t help you,” Morelli said bluntly.
“Matter of fact, I shouldn’t even talk to you.” Letendre returned to Florida, still hoping to find allies. He conferred with Joe Massei, a top capo from Detroit, and got the same answer. Little Augie Carfano was sympathetic but helpless.
“It’s a syndicate operation,” he said. “I can’t interfere.” More frightened than ever, Letendre returned to Woonsocket. Shortly after midnight on April 23, he left the Blackstone Hotel and started to his “pretentious home,” as newspaper reports described it. As his big station wagon slowed to make the turn from the street into the long driveway, a man stepped out of the darkness and onto the running board. He yanked open the door and fired two slugs from a 38-caliber revolver of the type often issued to policemen.

A neighbor said he heard the shots at 1 A.M. and looked out a window in time to see a man with a pistol in his hand step into a “dark sedan which immediately roared away.” It was an execution in the best tradition of the Bugs & Meyer Mob. And it served to illustrate to Broward County that if the bribe didn’t work, the bullet did.
*
The board members, aware of the friendship between Lansky and Siegel, listened carefully but found nothing to challenge in his presentation.

“I now have information,” Lansky continued in a flat, unemotional voice, “that Ben has put together a personal bankroll of six hundred grand. He plans to join Virginia in Paris within a week. From there he hopes to work out a deal acceptable to us.

The silence was broken at last by Albert Anastasia who harbored an ancient grudge against both Lansky and Siegel.
“Farlo fuort,” said Anastasia. ‘Kill him.”

Carfano, who also had his reasons, seconded the motion. Costello nodded his assent, and Longie Zwillman his. Moe Dalitz said nothing, his eyes on Lansky.

“T’'ve got this thought,” said Lansky. “We owe Ben something. He’s been with us through some rough days. It’s this bitch that got him out of line.

“The Flamingo is a good idea. It’ll work. Before long there’ll be a whole row of resorts out there. We’ll get our money back many times over.” “I agree,” said Dalitz.

“Okay,” continued Lansky. “Let me go out and talk to Ben.
If it doesn’t work. I'll personally make the necessary arrangements.”

The word of Lansky was enough. The meeting broke up with the death sentence—first ever handed down on a member of the board—suspended at the discretion of Lansky.

Next day, Lansky arrived at the Flamingo. Siegel introduced him to Paul Price, the public relations man at the hotel since the day it opened. Siegel and Lansky were soon closeted in the penthouse Bugsy had built as a love nest for Virginia on top of the Flamingo.

Rumors spread that the two men were quarreling bitterly.
No one saw Lansky leave, but he was reported next day in Los Angeles. Siegel had refused to listen to reason. Instead, he counterattacked, offering the plan he had devised earlier of turning over the Flamingo to the Mob to satisfy his debts and retiring with only a small piece as a source of income for the future. Or so Lansky later reported to the syndicate.

Lansky, recognizing that it was impossible to save his friend, promised to consider the proposal. They agreed to meet in Beverly Hills on June 21 to continue the discussion.

In the early hours of June 20, Siegel flew to Los Angeles and spent a busy if frustrating day. Friends reported that he was
tense and worried. The rumors had reached L.A. that he was marked for murder. That evening he drove to Virginia’s home on North Linden Drive. With him was Allen Smiley, an old associate. They were sitting side by side on the sofa when the end came.

Outside in the darkness, a syndicate killer aimed a 30-caliber carbine at Siegel’s worn but still handsome face. The first bullet caught him in the head, knocking out his right eye. The second bullet wasn’t needed, but it, too, struck the head. Still other shots were fired, perhaps as an alibi for Smiley. One went through his coat sleeve.

Twenty minutes later, Morris Sidwirtz, better known as Moe Sedway, walked into the Flamingo. With him was Gus Greenbaum and Morris Rosen. To an awed and frightened staff they announced they were taking over.

When Joe Epstein got the news in Chicago, his first thought was of Virginia Hill. Was she also marked for death? He called her in Paris. Heartbroken and scared, she went into seclusion.

Several days later, she departed with friends for a trip to Monte Carlo, where she tried to kill herself with an overdose of sleeping pills. Several years later, after repeated efforts, she succeeded.

An estimated $600,000 Siegel had given a friend in Vegas for safekeeping before leaving to meet with Lansky was eventually located and confiscated by the syndicate. Hymie Siegel, who represented Lansky in the garment industry, made a search for other hidden loot. He didn’t find any.
*
The new millions now flowing into the Swiss bank accounts of the underworld increased Lansky’s prestige and authority, but at the same time it aroused a certain resentment. Nothing was surer in organized crime than the fact that the higher you climbed the more persons were eager to replace you.
*
While he was spending time in jail, the long IRS probe came to a successful conclusion and Costello was convicted of tax eva- sion. He managed to get out of prison a few times on appeals, and it was 1958 before his last attempt to beat the rap was rejected.

But the publicity had destroyed Costello’s value to the syndicate and caused his Mafia rivals to sharpen their knives in anticipation of taking over his share of the rackets. Sensing that the lid was about to blow off, Lansky called a meeting of the syndicate’s board of directors for November, 1956. It was perhaps the largest meeting since Bugsy Siegel was sentenced to die subject to Lansky’s discretion. As usual, the session was held in the Waldorf Astoria where Costello had lived for years as Mr. Ross.

The New York delegation was sharply divided, as could be expected. Arguing that Costello had earned his place and would soon be forgotten by the press and public were such gangsters as Vito Genovese, Jerry Catena, Tony (Anthony Strollo) Bender, Longie Zwillman, and, of course, Albert Anastasia. The latter was automatically opposed to anything sponsored by Lansky.

Zwillman, who might normally have supported Lansky, had become closely allied over the years in the New Jersey rackets with Catena and didn’t want to do anything to cause a break in his comfortable relationship.

Supporting Lansky was, of course, Jimmy Blue Eyes Alo;
Trigger Mike Coppola, who now lived in Miami Beach; his partners, Joey Rao and Fat Tony Salerno; Thomas Luchese;
George Scalise; and Lansky’s old enemy, Anthony “Little Augie” Carfano.  Alo, in briefing Lansky before the meeting, warned that Carfano had his eyes on Costello’s empire.

“You get rid of Frank,’”’ he warned, “and we may have a worse problem on our hands. Little Augie hates your guts.”

But Lansky wanted to take one thing at a time. His real worry was Big Albert, who was eager to cut in on the action in Havana.

Had the matter been left to the New York delegation a civil war might have resulted, so close was the division. But now Lansky’s ancient courtship of gang leaders across the country paid off. Without exception, the men who had begun in Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, St. Louis, New Orleans, and even Chicago backed Lansky. Many of them had pieces of the operations in Las Vegas, and others were getting rich in Havana.

‘They owed little to Costello who, as far as they were concerned, had served the cause only by acting as a lightning rod to attract the bolts that might otherwise have fallen on them. Lansky, on the other hand, had taught them how to be rich—and respectable as well.

Despite impassioned speeches by Anastasia, the odds against Costello never shortened. Albert committed an unforgivable blunder at the end by appealing to Mafia loyalties and trying to divide the syndicate along ethnic lines.
Zwillman became uncomfortable enough to pass a message to Lansky:

“The bastard don’t like Jews. Should I change my vote?”

Lansky scribbled: “Stick with Costello. It looks better that way.” The vote was a formality. Costello was voted out of the National Crime Syndicate by an overwhelming margin. Only one question remained: Should he be hit or allowed to retire with dignity?

And now a new division appeared. Carfano arose to demand that Costello be killed. As long as he remained, he argued, there would be continued heat. Furthermore, he would be a rallying point for dissident elements who might try to revolt against the syndicate. Carfano looked at Anastasia as he spoke, and no one misunderstood his meaning. Alo took the floor to argue against the proposal. Frank, he said, had merely been unlucky. He had done nothing in violation of the syndicate’s rules. Let him retire in honor and Alo would guarantee he would cause no future trouble.

The delegates knew that it was Lansky speaking, although the words came from Jimmy Blue Eyes. At the vote, only Carfano and two of his lieutenants favored Costello’s death.
Informed of the decision, Costello accepted graciously. He was tired of the heat, the publicity. Ahead of him still was an- other jail term for the tax conviction. If the word got around that he had been voted out, maybe the Feds would go easy on him.

Some haggling was necessary before Costello agreed to give up all his rackets, and it was only after Lansky personally intervened to guarantee him a piece of the Tropicana Club in Vegas that an accord was reached. After all, Costello wanted to retire in comfort. The Tropicana was nearing completion under the direction of Costello’s old partner, Dandy Phil Kastel, so its choice was entirely appropriate.

The director’s meeting broke up with Lansky the acknowledged, though unofficial, Chairman of the Board. Yet Lansky knew old wounds had been reopened that would require careful observation in the immediate future. Carfano was angry because Costello had not been killed, and Anastasia was sore because he had been deposed. The two men had only one thing in common—each blamed Meyer Lansky.
*
Meanwhile events were moving faster now as old mistakes began to catch up with the few men who still offered a threat to Meyer Lansky. Zwillman was first to go. Under heavy pressure from the IRS and facing a Senate probe of his vending machine rackets, Zwillman gave evidence that he was old, tired, and ready to make a deal. Gerald Catena, who shared the New Jersey jungle with Zwillman, asked permission to eliminate Longie.

Catena was an exception to the general run of Mafia hoods— smart, businesslike, and efficient. Somewhat reluctantly, Lansky gave his okay. If Zwillman crumbled, he would expose much that Lansky wanted hidden. Furthermore, he had opposed Lansky in the decision to remove Costello.

On February 27, 1959, Zwillman was found dead in the basement of his twenty-room home in West Orange, New Jersey. Police called it suicide. Federal officials, hot on Zwillman’s trail, said nothing for publication. Privately they called it murder.

Genovese was next to go. Indicted on July 8, 1958, he was convicted early in 1959 on narcotics charges and sent to prison for fifteen years. Those writers who had made Vito boss of all the bosses in their stories continued to insist that he operated the rackets from prison. When Genovese died in prison in 1969, there was great speculation as to who would succeed him. Meyer Lansky found it all very amusing.

Remaining was Carfano, and Lansky decided he could not wait for events to catch up with Little Augie. For with Genovese’s death, Carfano began an attempt to take over the National Crime Syndicate. He had hated Lansky since being supplanted as gambling boss of Florida, and his new moves were aimed directly at the Little Man. On the night of September 25, 1959, Carfano dined at a restaurant on Lexington Avenue.

Tony Bender was with him, as was Mrs. Janice Drake, a former beauty queen who called him Uncle Gus. A telephone call came to him at the bar, and Carfano got very excited. He returned to the table, threw down a roll of bills, and announced:

“I’ve an appointment in Queens and I have to get there in a hurry.” Taking Mrs. Drake by the arm, he vanished into the night.

The caller who caused Carfano to dash away so hurriedly purported to be Jimmy Blue Eyes. Carfano, who had been discreetly courting Alo in an effort to win him away from Lansky, was eager to continue the courtship. If he could make an ally of Alo, Lansky’s influence with the Mafia would be seriously impaired. Upon hearing that Alo wanted to talk to him, Carfano threw caution aside and rushed out into the night. As had others, Carfano underestimated Lansky’s hold on certain individuals who valued his friendship above ethnic loyalties.

At La Guardia Airport, Carfano picked up two men who explained that Alo had gone on to his apartment. They were to take Carfano to him. The eager Little Augie didn’t hesitate as the men climbed into the back seat.

When they reached a lonely stretch of street, the men in back fired several shots into the heads of Mrs. Drake and Carfano.
The 1959 black Cadillac leaped the curb and came to a stop.
When police arrived, there was, of course, no trace of the kill- ers.

Police later identified the killers tentatively as Jimmy Blue Eyes’ boys, but proof was lacking. Valachi, as usual, blamed Vito Genovese. Tony Bender disappeared two years later and hasn’t been seen since.

Meyer Lansky now ruled as Chairman of the Board of the National Crime Syndicate with no one left to contest that fact. The process of elimination which had begun with the betrayal of Lepke was complete.

Yet the only thing certain in this world is change, and even as Lansky disposed of his rivals, a bearded rebel came out of the mountains and overnight caused the Cuban gambling empire to crumble.

“You win a few and lose a few,” commented Alo. “Where do you go from here?”’ “The Bahamas,” said Lansky.
*
For Lansky the fall of Cuba and the elimination of his rivals marked the end of an era. By the old standards, he had no more worlds to conquer. Yet the challenge remained, to adjust to new Situations, to anticipate new developments, to plan for the future.

The men with whom he had worked, and sometimes fought, were old, rich, and tired—or dead, deported, or in prison. A new generation was coming along—young men who might be college trained, who carried no criminal record dating back to Prohibition, who had never been arrested for illegal gambling.

And the style of crime, thanks largely to Lansky, had also changed. The Mafia might carry on in traditional fashion, with crude attempts at extortion, robbery, blackmail, but they would serve, as always, to attract the heat. The real leaders of crime in the coming years would be quiet, respectable, and almost invisible.

There had been no way to disguise Lansky’s role in Cuba. It had depended almost entirely upon his personal relations with the dictator. In the future there would be no such obvious connection—for Lansky or for the bright young men he would recruit. Indirection, insulation, and high-level graft would protect them. The gray area between legal and illegal activity would be widened, and inevitably that which society had frowned upon in the past would become accepted. The National Crime Syndicate as an organization would merge with the business world until one was indistinguishable from the other.

In short, what Lansky planned in his weeks of seclusion was the economic conquest of the nation. The Bahamas would be his laboratory.
*
The Coordinated War on Crime launched by Bob Kennedy meant the end of wide-open gambling in such remaining stateside centers as Newport, Kentucky, and Hot Springs, Arkansas.

As old doors closed, however, new ones opened. The British in 1960 legalized gambling and naively assumed they could keep out American gangsters. Lansky used the same methods in England that were working in the Bahamas. His trusted aides moved in, organized the casinos, and were replaced in time with respectable fronts whose ties with crime were not so well known. The British could, and did, deport the George Rafts and Dino Cellinis, and having done so could reassure themselves that they had cleaned house. Meanwhile, gambling became a virus in the bloodstream, and no scandal was likely to cause its abolition.
*
Brook was ordered to find a hotel and arrange for it to install a casino. Working with him on the project was Adrien Jedai, a Cairo-born financier who owned half of the world’s largest casino, the Casino du Liban in Beirut, Lebanon. It was understood that Lansky owned the other half, but, of course, no one could prove it.

A new hotel was to be built on the site of the old London- derry Hotel. Brook and Jedai won the right to operate the Park Lane Casino on the first floor. Shortly after it opened in 1966, Brook was indicted on that income-tax probe in Miami.
The British weren’t happy when the news reached England.
Meanwhile, the Eastern Sportsman Club of New York agreed to organize junkets. On one of them, Angelo Bruno, Mafia boss of Philadelphia, flew over accompanied by Morris Lansburgh of the Eden Roc in Miami Beach. The British put both men on a stop list which was supposed to prevent them from returning. The Bahamian government followed suit—a move that was embarrassing when Lansburgh leased the King’s Inn on Grand Bahama from D. K. Ludwig. When Lansburgh kept coming over anyway, the Bahamians explained he had been given a special pass to conduct business.

Ironically, an organization known as the Jewish Defense League began a boycott of Park Lane on the grounds it was connected with such Arabs as Jedai. All good Jewish gangsters were urged to stay away.

Brook went to Paris for a weekend and upon returning to England was denied admittance. The English had decided he was a gangster. Somehow, he managed to get back into the States, but when he cashed a $50,000 check on a British bank, special agents of Intelligence located him. In 1968 he was convicted on the tax charge and sentenced to a year in prison.

But he had served his twofold purpose in getting the casino opened and allowing the British the satisfaction of kicking 2
out a suspected gangster. The men who replaced him had no such obvious connections. And Harry Brook was but one of many men used by Lansky for such purposes.
*
The theory was that if Papa Doc could be removed, a puppet could take his place who would make gestures of cooperation with the United States and permit the casino to operate undisturbed. When the invasion failed, there was nothing to do but wait.

Following Kennedy’s death, a new syndicate effort to get  along with Papa Doc began. By this time Lansky had developed some friends in the Johnson administration. One of them was Bobby Gene Baker, secretary to the Senate Majority and President Johnson’s right-hand man.
Baker was taken in tow by three of Lansky’s top aides:
Clifford Jones, former lieutenant governor of Nevada; Ed Levinson, who had worked in Lansky’s casinos from Newport to Las Vegas; and Benjamin Siegelbaum, a Miami Beach wheeler dealer who had worked with Hoffa and had connections in Las Vegas.

Complicated deals were worked out that, among other things, paid Baker a penny a pound on all meat slaughtered in Haiti for exportation. Playing an important role was Senator George Smathers of Florida, who claimed the dis- tinction of being a personal friend of both Nixon and Johnson. Smathers had defended Batista to the end, and now he was prepared to use his influence in support of Papa Doc.

This influence was useful in arranging a $2,600,000 loan to Papa Doc in 1964 from the Inter-American Development Bank. The Alliance for Progress, now very frustrated, gave financial aid to the poverty-stricken country. It was taken for granted that most of the money would find its way into the dictator’s personal bank accounts in Switzerland.

By now the little black doctor called himself President for Life, Protector of the People, Maximum Chief of the Revolution, Apostle of National Unity, Benefactor of the Poor, Grand Patron of Commerce and Industry, and Electrifier of Souls. Voodoo was legalized but heavily taxed, and a picture of Papa Doc had to be displayed every time Baron Samedi was summoned from the dead.

Meanwhile, a former college professor, Raymond Joseph, organized hundreds of refugees from Haiti in the United States and fought an undercover war with Duvalier’s secret police, the dreaded Tontons Macoute.

Joseph’s people, with secret aid from the Central Intelligence Agency, planted informants in the presidential palace and broadcast intimate details of Papa Doc’s daily routine. This was intended to convince the Haitians that the rebels had a better deal with the demons than did their President for Life. (So effective were the broadcasts that the Tontons Macoute slipped into the studios of WRUL in New York one night and substituted pro-Duvalier propaganda for the tapes prepared by Joseph.

The station actually broadcast the first one before the deception was detected.)
*
The haul was enough to raise the hair of a high roller. Each piece of equipment, from dice tables to roulette wheels, had built-in electronic devices operated by remote control.
When operating, the equipment nullified the law of averages and made certain the sucker would lose each and every bet.
*
A patient man was Meyer Lansky. At age sixty-eight he was trim and alert. Save for his three ulcers, he was in perfect health. His personal ambitions had long been satisfied, but there was still pleasure to be obtained in operating the machinery he had created. No one, perhaps not even Lansky, could accurately estimate his wealth or power. His empire in 1970 was literally world-wide, and was growing every day.

Lansky had survived the wars of his youth, wars that had cut down such men as King Solomon, Dutch Schultz, and Bugsy Siegel. He had eliminated his rivals—Anastasia, Zwillman, Carfano, and the rest. Lepke had died in the electric chair, and Zwillman had died in a garage. Luciano and Adonis had been deported, and Costello deposed. In later years he watched the FBI pursue the hapless Mafia while he built a modern, sophisticated organization that relied on moxie rather than muscle, that had friends in high places and low, that literally controlled the flow of hundreds of millions of dollars. Lansky owned men, not property, and the men who took orders from him ranked high in business and finance. He had financed revolutions, influenced American foreign policy, and changed the economic and social lives of people in many nations.

‘The process that began in 1929, when bankrupt businessmen turned to bootleggers for cash and credit, had continued over the decades, and in 1970 the lines separating the legal and the illegal had become almost indistinct.

Lansky could walk his dog on Collins Avenue completely confident that, by virtue of brains and guts and iron self-discipline, he had left his mark on his adopted country and on the world.

Regardless of what the future might bring, he was—in the eyes of those who mattered—Chairman of the Board.
*
Epilogue

In November, 1970, after this book was in production, word flashed around the world that Meyer Lansky was in Israel.
Lansky refused to discuss his plans, but reporters noted that as a Jew, Lansky could invoke the Law of the Return of 1950 and acquire instant citizenship. Such a move would not be without precedent.

In 1964, Lansky’s old associate, Joseph “Doc” Stacher, pleaded guilty and was convicted of income-tax evasion. On July 31, Stacher was fined $10,000 and given a five-year prison sentence. The sentence was suspended on condition he go to Israel and remain there. He did.

Al Mones, a nationally known gambler and Lansky associate, fled to Israel after being indicted in Miami in 1970. He is offcially a fugitive from justice. In 1967, two of Lansky’s lieutenants on Grand Bahama Island—Max Courtney and Frank Ritter—vanished mysteriously from the Bahamas and turned up in Israel. Both were under indictment in New York, and both had been declared “undesirable” by the new Bahamian government, although they subsequently decided they were too young to retire and returned to New York to face the music.

Moreover, Lansky knew that his own indictment was but a matter of time in connection with the “skimming” of funds from the Flamingo in Las Vegas. The probe began in New York in 1969 with the seizure of financial records relating to gam- bling junkets to the Flamingo. It moved to Miami where Lansky and some of his top aides were questioned by a federal grand jury. Other sessions were held in Los Angeles.
Then, in October, 1970, Vincent “Jimmy Blue Eyes” Alo was convicted on charges of obstructing justice as a result of Morgen- thau’s probe of Alvin Malnik’s Scopitone deal. Alo accepted a five-year prison term. In asking for the maximum sentence, Assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Naftalis told the judge that Alo is considered ‘‘one of the most significant organized crime figures in the United States. He is closely associated with Meyer Lansky of Miami who is at the apex of organized crime,’ Naftalis added. When Lansky learned what was going on, he simply decided to leave the country.

Perhaps moved to seek comparisons with Cosa Nostra ties to Sicily, some observers have speculated that men like Lansky have been attempting to buy themselves a final, ultimate sanctuary in Israel—a place where they can be respected and left alone.

Certainly Jewish gangsters have long and openly supported Jewish causes and the State of Israel. On the night Lansky’s ex-partner, Bugsy Siegel, was executed, the Flamingo was taken over by Moe Sedway. When asked how he so conveniently happened to be in Las Vegas, he explained he was there to arrange a United Jewish Appeal fund drive. As previously noted, men like Joe Linsey and Lansky make contributions to Brandeis University. And in Miami Beach, known gangsters have pledged large amounts in the huge “‘Bonds for Israel”’ rallies.

Lansky has many friends in Israel. On his frequent visits to Israel, the press termed him a “philanthropist”? and “Miami Beach socialite.”” The multimillion-dollar Dan Hotel, to which he was repaired in November, was built by the so-called Miami Group. In addition to the Dan Hotel—largest in Israel with one thousand air-conditioned rooms—the Miami Group built the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the Accadia Hotel in Herliya, and the Dan Carmel in Haifa. Among other Israeli enterprises, it has drilled for oil wells, built factories, and announced plans for a skyscraper complex to rival Rockefeller Center.

That Lansky could continue to direct his international empire from Israel no one doubted. Indeed, shortly after his arrival, a stream of couriers, some of them old and trusted aides, began journeying to Israel. The FBI noted wryly the departure and return of such men as Hymie Siegel, Yiddy Bloom, Harry “Nig Rosen’ Stromberg and, of course, Jake Lansky.

Members of the Miami Group led by Max Orovitz—the man in whose Miami Beach office the casino on Grand Bahama was planned by Lansky—also appeared suddenly in Israel. They announced they were there to look after their “investments.”

At sixty-eight, troubled with ulcers and having no worlds left to conquer, Meyer Lansky could walk his dog in Tel Aviv as easily as Miami Beach. Behind him in the States he left an efficient organization staffed by a new breed of lieutenants, college trained, with no criminal records, who might go for decades before being identified.

Thanks largely to the genius of one man, the Syndicate International had become a terrible reality.

Hank Messick

Wednesday, August 5, 2026

Vaccine Research: Faking It!

 ALL THE WORLD’S A LAB


So what exactly is in that vial? It’s a question that history has answered, all too often, with shocking details. Not least among these is a development that took place in January 2010, when a researcher who made a ‘groundbreaking’ discovery about the MMR vaccine was discredited on grounds of professional misconduct.

Then there’s the web of deceit that covers up (though every now and then some details manage to slip through) vaccine scams that turn those tiny ‘life-saving’ drops into potentially lethal weapons.

And not least of all, there are question marks hovering over how the Western governments have tried to vaccinate entire populations or sections of the population into submission.

In this section, we shall explore some of these issues while illustrating how untruths are carefully and conveniently converted into ‘scientific fact’ to suit the profit and political agendas of various stakeholders in the vaccine game.


1. The HPV Controversy

 Remember the ‘dirty money’ connection uncovered in Texas in 2007? Governor Rick Perry had then ordered in the interest of health that every female six-grader be vaccinated against the Human Papillomavirus Virus (HPV) to prevent cervical cancer.

It was an order that bypassed the state’s legislature (See Chapter 5: Critical Mass), and the governor’s attempt to force the vaccine on children caused outrage among parents as well as watchdog and civil rights groups.

Soon, Perry’s ‘dirty secret’ was out – the decision would have earned millions of dollars for the HPV vaccine manufacturer – Merck – who had gifted large sums of money to Perry for his political campaign.

The nexus didn’t stop there. In a sequence of events that reeked of kickbacks and more subterfuge, it was revealed that the governor’s chief of staff was a senior Merck employee when the governor was pushing the HPV vaccine. With pressure mounting on Perry, the Texas Legislature eventually passed a law rescinding the governor’s order.

It is easy to believe slick political-speak only because we have been brainwashed from the cradle that vaccines are good for health. Had the HPV secret not been discovered, thousands of sixth-graders would have been vaccinated with a chemical cocktail that has been shown time and again to prove controversial.

Interestingly, the HPV vaccine at the center of the Texas firestorm was Gardasil, approved by the FDA in June 2006, less than 12 months before Governor Perry attempted his forced vaccination campaign.

Needless to say, administering it to every female sixth-grader in Texas would have provided a ready market for Merck.

Not surprisingly, controversy has repeatedly followed Gardasil, which its makers claim protects against four strains of the HPV that cause cervical cancer and genital warts. According to the CDC, as of September 1, 2009, 26 million doses of Gardasil had been distributed across the US.

The CDC also states that till that date, its VAERS had received more than 15,000 reports of adverse events, of which 7 percent were serious.

Also, these are merely cold statistics till viewed against the type of serious events associated with the vaccine, and in the short period since it was approved, the vaccine has been linked to cases of young women dying just hours after being administered the drug. The vaccine is also suspected to cause blood clots and strokes and has been linked to the Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a rare and debilitating disorder of the nervous system where the nerves get inflamed and which also causes paralysis.

Some public interest groups state that they have gathered sufficient evidence to link Merck’s HPV vaccine to 18 deaths, of which 11 took place less than a week after the women were administered the vaccine. Miscarriages were also frequently noted in women who had received this controversial vaccine.

According to a study whose results were published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal in January 2009, researchers in Australia had found that Gardasil had provoked a severe allergic reaction – or anaphylaxis – which can lead to death in some cases. The study concluded that the vaccine is 5 to 26 times more likely to cause such a reaction in young women compared to other vaccines administered to the same age group.

The US Federal government finally sounded a warning about the vaccine in July 2009, with VAERS releasing a report which stated that Gardasil is associated with adverse reactions 400 times more than an anti-meningitis vaccine administered to women in the same age group.

As of September 28, 2010, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) has more than 18,000 Gardasil-related adverse events listed in it, including at least 65 deaths. Clearly, the number of vaccine injuries is rising fast. And these are only the reported cases which amount to an estimated 1 to 10 percent of all cases.

The government report also recommended that Congress “investigate how the vaccine was fast-tracked for approval in the absence of safety data on girls younger than 17”. The report therefore raises a serious ethical issue: Considering that Gardasil had only been tested on adult women, what moral right did Governor Perry have to mandate the compulsory vaccination of sixth-graders with this lethal and sometimes fatal chemical?

With the mountain of evidence piling up against this vaccine, Gardasil was dealt another blow, this time from the lead researcher on the team that conducted the clinical trials for Merck. In a confession, since retracted under pressure from the pharmaceutical giant, the researcher confessed that the vaccine loses its efficacy five years after it is administered. Not surprisingly, Merck has been selling the vaccine for $400 a dose!

Moreover, independent research suggests that the HPV naturally leaves the body within two years of infection in 70 to 90 percent of cases. If the immune system can naturally eject the virus and even protect the body from future attacks, why do women need a vaccine against HPV in the first place?

The final twist in the Gardasil story comes from a development in October 2009. This was a red-letter day for Merck because the FDA had approved the vaccine to prevent genital warts in boys.

It was no coincidence that the announcement by the vaccine manufacturer came less than a day after rival GlaxoSmithKline announced that the FDA had approved its own HPV vaccine for cervical cancer!

All the data I have presented above raises some serious ethical questions: The motives of at least one manufacturer in the case of one virus (in this case HPV) have been clearly bared as being profit-driven with no regard for the lives of the young women being coaxed to get vaccinated.

Hopefully, the unfolding Gardasil drama will serve as a deterrent to parents and their children to not so readily submit to unproven experimental drugs like Gardasil that were never tested against a true placebo. We certainly cannot rely on the FDA to protect us against the reckless profiteering schemes of drug producers. Being the watchdog body supposed to safeguard the public’s health, the FDA had yet again sold out to a vaccine maker with no regard for its objectives.

Finally, if a healthy human body and immune system can do the job of a synthetic vaccine, is a vaccine against HPV necessary at all?


2. Experimenting in Africa

Uganda: Global public health agencies are watchdogs of public health, saving millions of lives on the planet, with most of their objectives fulfilled in poor and developing countries. That’s the message the media has been putting out so successfully that most of us believe it is true. But there are hidden agendas, which often remain concealed. But once in a while, their so-called noble intentions are unraveled, laying bare a shocking reality.

Among these was a web of deceit uncovered by an African radio broadcaster who discovered that mass immunizations with the OPV in Uganda were definitely not intended to save children from the debilitating paralytic disease.

Vaccinations with the OPV – which uses the live virus – began in Uganda in 1963, a country that had no history of polio while the government of Uganda introduced mass immunization at the behest of the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1977.

Kihura Nkuba, the broadcaster, who had studied in England, had returned to Uganda to open a radio station there. But his experiences with the Ugandan people revealed a shocking story. Hundreds of Ugandan children who were being inoculated during government-enforced immunization drives were dying of polio.

In other words, the OPV, quite literally being forced down their throats, was causing a disease that had not been present in Uganda till the vaccine was introduced in the 1960s.

Nkuba said that parents, who had made a connection between the vaccine and their children’s deaths, would hide in the African bush when government officials and health volunteers came around to administer the OPV. In some cases, children were allegedly dragged out of hiding to be vaccinated.

It was only in 2002 that the penny dropped, when Nkuba made the connection between the discontinuation of the OPV in the US and its introduction in Uganda. The OPV, developed by Dr Albert Sabin in the 1950s and which used the live polio virus, had been banned from use in America because it had been observed to accidentally cause the disease in recipients of the vaccine. The US then reverted to using the Inactivated Polio Virus or IPV.

Instead of discarding vaccines worth millions of dollars, these suddenly useless but dangerous doses of the OPV were being force-fed to children in Uganda!

Nkuba realized another shocking truth – that the vaccine when administered in the US was contraindicated for use in families with a history of HIV. That is because the live virus used in the OPV gave rise to a condition called ‘viral shedding’. This takes place, as explained earlier, when a vaccinated individual literally sheds the virus through mucous, feces and other bodily fluids for a period of time immediately after being vaccinated.

Naturally, the OPV was not recommended for use in families where individuals have a compromised immune system. But neither was this practice being observed in Uganda, where HIV was widespread, nor was the information being disseminated among the public. The catastrophe that this caused can only be imagined.

Nkuba went public with his observations on the OPV disaster on his radio station and was subsequently hounded and persecuted. Not surprisingly, his radio station was also shut down by the Ugandan government, which he openly accused of committing mass murder hand in glove with the WHO, UNICEF, United States Association for International Aid (USAID) and CDC.


Nigeria: It is easy to use a vulnerable nation – where illiteracy rates are high, where disease is rampant and where global agencies have projected themselves as saviors of the people – as a human laboratory.

Like Uganda, Nigeria is another country where global health agencies have been accused of abusing the trust of the people, and worse still, of committing genocide. This has resulted in a triple whammy for this African nation.

The country has seen severe outbreaks of polio, and even deaths, ever since Western health agencies began a mass OPV immunization campaign in 2002.

A year after the campaign kicked off, the drive was halted after the local people and Muslim clerics alleged that the vaccine contained material that left recipients infertile.

The WHO resumed immunization, this time more ‘aggressively’ in 2006, in an attempt to cover as many people as possible. But then, soon after, Nigeria saw the beginning of its worst-ever polio outbreak, leaving 60-odd children paralyzed in 2007-2008 and more than 120 in 2009.

What went wrong in Nigeria? In a secret that cost the US CDC huge embarrassment and worldwide censure, the Nigeria outbreak was finally diagnosed as being vaccine-induced. The polio vaccine administered in 2002 resulted in the development of a mutant strain that was now causing the disease in healthy children who had not been vaccinated earlier.

How was this possible? The ‘benevolence’ of Western health agencies had placed Nigeria in a Catch-22 situation. Children were contracting polio either directly from the OPV while others were left open to the disease because they resisted immunization with a faulty vaccine!

The implication was that to be protected against the mutant polio virus, Nigerian children should have been immunized with a faulty vaccine. All because the WHO decided to ‘dump’ a vaccine that had been banned in the US.

Why didn’t the agency use the IPV that was being used in the US? One, it saved the vaccine maker millions of dollars not to destroy millions of doses. Two, the OPV is cheap. And three, the OPV can be easily administered by health workers and volunteers, not necessarily doctors. This accounts for the popularity of the faulty vaccine in mass immunization efforts across Third World countries.

But it also left the WHO in another dilemma. Immunization programs in Nigeria had been aimed at the polio Type 2 virus but due to genetic mutation, the outbreaks post-2007 were caused by the Type 1 strain!

To cover up its mistakes and make sure they had not left out any known strain of the polio virus, immunization programs in Nigeria have since included two rounds of vaccination that target Types 1, 2 and 3 of the virus! Could there be a bigger mess?

Alas, Nigeria wasn’t the only country affected by the OPV mistake. No less than 12 countries have reported cases of vaccine-induced polio over the last decade. During this time, 10 billion doses of the faulty OPV had been administered to children in developing countries, including outbreaks in the Dominican Republic and Haiti in 2002.

(...)

4. Going Retro: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

 Scientists love jargon and drug companies love them even more. That is because the more ominous a virus or disease sounds, the faster people will panic and look to pharma companies for a ‘cure’.

One of the favorites of vaccine-makers is the term ‘retrovirus’, a type of virus discovered in human beings in 1981 (or genetically engineered during the Special Cancer Virus Program [SVCP]).

All viruses need a host cell to replicate. However, a retrovirus gets the host cell it infects to replicate itself. It achieves this by incorporating its own genetic material into the host cell’s genetic make-up so that when the host produces new cells, it also replicates more retroviruses.

How does it manage to do this? A retrovirus is a type of RNA protein particle that uses an enzyme called ‘reverse transcriptase’ that converts its own RNA into DNA in the host cell that it infects. The DNA is then transcribed back into RNA, which is how a retrovirus makes copies of itself. This enzyme is unique to retroviruses.

This is a complex process but suffice to say that retroviruses have been associated with a wide range of immunodeficiency disorders, a condition where the immune system seriously malfunctions. In extreme cases, such as in HIV, the immune system appears to attack itself, leaving patients defenseless against the onslaught of the virus and a host of other potentially infectious agents.

Retroviruses have classically been associated with serious debilitating diseases, especially diseases of the immune system. Vaccine-makers have been accused of wielding the ‘retrovirus’ weapon for disease mongering, that is, first scaring people into believing that a certain virus causes a specific disease and then offering a vaccine to protect them from it.

In my book, Ending the AIDS Myth, I show that the presence of these retroviruses in persons with severely impaired immune systems is merely a correlation and does not prove that the diagnosed AIDS diseases are in fact caused by retroviruses. To the contrary, I show that the dozens of disease conditions, known as AIDS, are actually behind the breaking up of RNA molecules into the retroviruses known as HIV 1, HIV 2, HIV 3, and so forth.

I am certainly not the only one who believes that HIV is not responsible for causing AIDS.

In 1983, world renowned French scientist Dr Luc Montagnier, had discovered HIV for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology/Medicine in 2008. Montagnier is currently director of the organization which he helped found: the World Foundation for AIDS Research and Prevention, a UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization). He has repeatedly stated that HIV alone cannot cause AIDS. Instead of trying to destroy HIV (which cannot cause AIDS) with costly and potentially dangerous drugs and vaccines, Montagnier recommends measures of good hygiene, balanced nutrition, clean drinking water, and antioxidants such as fermented papaya extract to prevent and cure AIDS diseases.

In the 2009 documentary House of Numbers, which can be viewed at www.houseofnumbers.com, Dr Montagnier states: “We can be exposed to HIV many times without being chronically infected. Our immune system will get rid of the virus within a few weeks, if we have a good immune system.” This is how any healthy person deals with any virus. In other words, HIV is a harmless passenger virus that bothers no one, unless the immune system has been compromised by other factors, such as polluted drinking water, poor personal hygiene, poor nutrition, oxidative stress, etc.

I suggest we take it from the world’s leading virologist. Experts like him know that it is by introducing simple health measures that has always led to the decline of viral epidemics, and not vaccination campaigns. Montagnier believes this to be also the best approach with regard to other epidemics, including malaria. What applies to HIV/AIDS certainly applies to other presumed virus-induced diseases.

One of the diseases currently being blamed on a retrovirus is Chronic Fatigue Syndrome or CFS. This disorder is characterized by extreme muscle fatigue and an all-round, all-pervasive feeling of tiredness.

To date, scientists have been unable to diagnose the causes of CFS but is it believed to be a disorder associated with immune dysfunction. Patients with this disorder have a much higher level of cytokines circulating in their bloodstream, altered T-lymphocyte numbers and low natural killer-cell cytotoxicity. This makes them susceptible to a wide variety of pathogens and afflicted by the disease symptoms they cause.

Lately, though, several researchers have been pointing a finger at a retrovirus called the ‘xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus’ or XMRV. This retrovirus has been linked to prostate cancer as well as CFS patients.

Research findings published in the journal Science in October 2009 state that the virus was found in 67 percent of CFS patients but in only 4 percent of the general population. This has led to a flurry of media reports citing the study and suggesting that CFS may be caused by the XMRV and that a vaccine may be in the offing. When media reports such as these (usually fuelled by drug and vaccine manufacturers) do the rounds, people tend to ignore the critical ‘may be’, used as a classic alibi by media houses.

Knowing very well that the general populace usually pays little attention to the question marks and ‘maybes’ in these reports, the media usually gets away with false propaganda about causal relationships between pathogens and disease.

CFS is a disease associated with a seriously compromised immune system and many patients are also afflicted by prostate cancer as well as a host of other diseases. The problem with CFS is that it may not be a single disorder. Researchers believe it may be a collection of diseases that are in some way linked to each other to produce the constellation of symptoms classified as CFS. How, then, can a single virus be associated with a disease about which so little is known?

The Epstein-Barr virus or EBV was at one time thought to be correlated with CFS. But science is still a long way from understanding CFS and many researchers have since minimized the causal relationship between EBV and CFS. Yet, jumping to conclusions and instantly suggesting ‘causes’ of diseases seem to be the prerogative of the media and vaccine-makers.

Just as the US study on CFS patients created a stir, another research study, this one in the UK, found that none of the 186 CFS patients studied tested positive for XMRV.

The study, undertaken by researchers at the Imperial College London and King’s College London, illustrates just how little science knows about CFS and how important it is that we exercise caution while believing what media reports have to say.

Take the HPV discussed above, for instance. Cervical cancer is caused by various factors. Some researchers say it is not caused by a virus at all. Yet vaccine manufacturer Merck is trying hard (too hard?) to convince the public that HPV is the sole cause of this type of cancer and that it has a vaccine to protect against it!

My question is why are none of these researchers and neither the drug companies nor the governments the slightest bit interested in investigating anything other than germs that could possibly impair a person’s immune system? It is a rhetoric question to which the answer is obvious. There is not much money to be made by telling people that they need get rid of their vitamin D deficiency, oxidative stress, poor hygiene, nutrient depletion, and overexposure to toxins, including those contained in vaccines and medications.

We know that heavy metal exposure alone can trigger chronic fatigue symptoms and cause brain injury and dementia. Why is the amount of aluminum in the US rivers and streams now up to 50,000 times higher than permitted by US government regulations? Millions of metric tons of Aluminum oxide and other toxic minerals like barium are being dumped by commercial airlines and fighter jets to form chemtrails, allegedly to achieve climate change and protect us against global warming. It is astonishing to me to still find some healthy people in this country!

And, according to a recent CNN report, 45 million Americans live in poverty and suffer from serious malnutrition. Every doctor knows that malnutrition damages the immune system. Merely including the poverty-stricken who currently cannot afford health insurance in a universal health care program, does absolutely nothing to properly address the causes of their health conditions. This approach just fills the coffers of those who know how to create millions of more patients at the expense of taxpayers and send the country deeper into the abyss of irreversible national debt.


5. Vaccine Research: Faking It!

Vaccine-makers are not known to put conscience before science. Scientific research is replete with examples of dodgy data, clinical trials without sufficient controls, non-representative samples and researchers who either unconsciously or deliberately fudge their results. And, no, vaccine researchers are not immune to these maladies.

The swine flu outbreak of 2009 provides many examples of irresponsible media reportage and drug companies who used an overenthusiastic media to push their vaccine propaganda.

For instance, a reputed news agency quoted ‘researchers’ who claimed that flu vaccines used by pregnant women were likely to increase the birth weight of their infants. It also claimed that pregnant women who took flu vaccines were more likely to have full-term babies. What next, a vaccine against premature births?

Neither of these studies had used randomized, placebo-controlled study protocols. So how were they allowed to be reported? When a responsible media house (this one was Reuters) makes statements like this, the need to be skeptical about what you read is more pressing than ever.

While on the subject of outrageous claims, here is another absurd one: Individuals who take statin-based (cholesterol-lowering) drugs are “50-percent less likely to die from flu”!

A ‘news report’ undoubtedly sponsored by the makers of statin drugs, recently claimed that “researchers have provided more evidence that cholesterol-lowering drugs help the body cope with infection".

Further probing revealed that there were no clinical trials conducted and that the so-called conclusions were based on a superfluous ‘analysis’ of the medical records of individuals who had succumbed to seasonal flu infections.

Without taking any other variables into account, the researchers found that a majority of patients from their ‘sample’ were taking statin drugs; only 3.2 percent were not.

Conversely, they claimed that only 2.1 percent of patients who were taking statin drugs had died. Since 2.1 percent is about 50 percent less than 3.2 percent, they said that “statin drugs can halve the number of deaths caused by seasonal flu”! A masterful example of statistical jugglery but nothing more than wild claims.

Let me illustrate the almost-incestuous relationship between drug regulators and drug manufacturers, something that has always clouded the clinical trials of new drugs. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is a body of the European Union that approves the sale of drugs across Europe. If the EMA is meant to safeguard the health of the public at large, why did it give vaccine-maker Novartis the green signal to sell its H1N1 flu vaccine Celtura in Europe even though the vaccine was tested on only a hundred people?

Before I answer that question, here’s another disturbing fact: The clinical trial based on which Celtura was subsequently sold in several European countries was conducted by the University of Leicester and University Hospitals of Leicester in England – and was sponsored by Novartis.

Scratch beneath the surface a little more and other skeletons begin to tumble out. The EMA also gave two other swine flu vaccines the go-ahead at the same time – GlaxoSmithKline’s Pandemrix and Novartis’s Focetria.

With two-thirds of the EMA’s funding coming from pharmaceutical companies, is it surprising that neither safety, sample size, control groups nor other scientific measures are concerns for an agency that clears drugs for millions of people across the continent?

Did you know that the EMA pays pharma companies millions of euros in ‘fees’ for services they perform in evaluating the very drugs the companies themselves make?

When pharma, self-serving medical practitioners and the media push the same agenda, it is hard not to be brainwashed. This dangerous nexus between three vaccine promoters – a vaccine technology company, a doctor from Columbia University and the television media – together made a strong case not only for the H1N1 vaccine but vaccines in general in late 2009.

The doctor in question is Dr Mehmet Oz, professor of Cardiac Surgery at Columbia University, no less, an extremely prolific author and vaccine promoter who was on every major talk show during the swine flu outbreak in 2009.

After scaring up a storm on national television, Dr Oz landed a health segment of his own on the hugely popular Oprah Winfrey Show, which virtually launched his television career. After that, he landed a lucrative deal with Winfrey’s Harpo Productions and Sony Pictures Television to distribute The Dr Oz Show outside the US, and now it is a popular TV-show in the US.

I have always held a high esteem and respect for Dr Oz because of his continuous effort in making helpful alternative views about many important health topics available to the masses. However, having already been a celebrity doctor for quite some time, I don’t understand why he needed to use the 2009 swine flu scare to make millions of dollars from an unsuspecting population.

Soon after his much-hyped Ask Dr Oz segment on TV, it transpired that the doctor owned expensive stock – 150,000 shares – in a vaccine technology company called SIGA Technologies. The company doesn’t make vaccines per se but researches and develops technologies used in vaccine production.

Dr Oz’s rabble-rousing, it seemed, was almost certainly aimed at driving up stock prices in vaccine companies and vaccine-related companies, which would have earned him – and them – a sizeable booty. During an interview, Dr Oz jokingly remarked that his wife wouldn’t allow their children to be vaccinated against the swine flu.

When one comes across instances of deceit and dishonesty like this and stakeholders in a dangerous game colluding with each other, it is hard to tell fact from fiction. A gullible and panic-stricken public is liable to believe what they hear, especially if they’re watching ‘an authority’ on vaccines on one of America’s top-rated television talk shows.

Professional ethics took another serious blow in January 2010, when a 12-year hearing on the professional conduct on the doctor who first researched the link between the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine came to a close.

The hearing, conducted by the General Medical Council (GMC), the body that licenses and regulates doctors in the UK, ruled that Dr Andrew Wakefield had engaged in professional misconduct.

It was Dr Wakefield’s research that had first suggested a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, leading to a furor and declining sales of the vaccine, which had been developed a decade earlier.

While clearly stating that it was not ruling on the authenticity of Dr Wakefield’s research findings per se, the GMC concluded that the doctor’s methods were blatantly unethical. The most damning revelation was that Dr Wakefield, now residing in the US, was on the payroll of lawyers representing parents who believed that the vaccine had damaged their children’s health.

If that was not shocking enough, further investigations revealed that Dr Wakefield had based his findings on a sample of just 12 children! Moreover, the doctor was a gastroenterologist at the Royal Free Hospital in London and was not qualified to perform medical procedures such as lumbar punctures, colonoscopies and MRI scans that he had used in his research.

Dr Wakefield’s method of assembling his clinical sample – the 12 children – was equally shocking. He admitted to having bribed them at his son’s birthday party to part with blood samples for this research!

The medical journal, Lancet, which had published Dr Wakefield’s findings in 1998, issued a retraction of the doctor’s paper after the GMC investigation concluded as the doctor had (obviously) not disclosed details of his research methods at the time.

So if Dr Wakefield’s original research sparked one of the biggest debates in the area of vaccination, revelations about his professional misconduct have made an impact for quite a different reason.

If Dr Wakefield had been bribed to conduct his ‘ground-breaking’ research, what about all the other ‘ground-breaking studies that are milestones in vaccine research and medical research in general? How many of them have broken the rules? What is authentic and what is not? And how many ‘reputed’ research studies have been funded by pharmaceutical companies to ‘produce’ results that promote the vaccines that these companies manufacture or plan to make?

Growing fears that medical research is becoming increasingly dishonest were further substantiated by a study carried out by the University of Edinburgh in June 2009.

The study, published in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS One, reviewed 21 scientific misconduct surveys between 1986 and 2005 and found that faking, falsifying and even fabricating it is more widespread than suspected.

While one in seven scientists surveyed admitted that they were aware of colleagues seriously manipulating their results, 46 percent claimed they were aware of questionable practices by their peers.

Another area of omission is long-term studies on new vaccines. Though researchers know only too well (perhaps because they do) that the side effects of vaccines take months, even years, to surface, they rarely if ever conduct long-term studies to look for possible detrimental effects on the human immune system.

Also, follow-up studies are rarely if ever conducted in vaccinated populations. Most researchers monitor the target group or a sample of it for a couple of weeks only, to detect blatant symptoms.

For instance, symptoms produced by vaccines – such as rashes, arthritis, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, memory loss, seizures and neuropsychiatric problems – have a long incubation period as neurological and immunological dysfunctions usually takes a while to manifest themselves.

The icing on the cake for vaccine-makers and drug companies in general is the all-round immunity they enjoy. Regardless of the consequences of the lack of stringent clinical controls, faulty laboratory practices and manipulation of results – and due to their patronization of federal funds, budgets and political campaigns – vaccine-makers are not accountable for their misdeeds.

Thanks to federal laws, they are allowed to keep their formulations and methods secret even while contesting lawsuits, which places a considerable onus on the plaintiff to prove their claims.

Cases against vaccine manufacturers are heard in the ‘Vaccine Court’ a colloquial term for a tribunal set up under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The tribunal was established in 1986 to arbitrate the flood of complaints against the DPT vaccine. Ironically, claims are funded by a tax imposed on the sale of every dose of vaccine in the US.


6. Where The Twain Meet

The marriage between medicine and pharma is no accident and dates back to the history of the American Medical Association (AMA), the largest and most influential body of physicians in America.

At a time when the AMA was flailing and near-bankrupt and medical schools in the country were desperate for funding, two of the America’s largest philanthropic foundations stepped in – the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations.

Their funding of the AMA, medical education and sponsorship of the crucial Flexner Report, which brought about widespread changes in medical practices, were a turning point in the history of medicine in the US.

It was a turning point because funding by these foundations was contingent on a certain type of medical education, one that raised doctors on drug-oriented practice. It is these practices – it is no coincidence that pharma companies receive grants from these two foundations – that sowed the seeds of many modern diseases.

The mid-20th century saw another turning point in medicine – the rise of various specialties or branches of allopathic medicine. Suddenly, it seemed, every part of the human body had a specialist to fix it!

This was also no coincidence. The bias towards symptomatic treatment meant that symptoms would recur, which ensured a steady demand for drugs and therefore a readymade market for the drugs made by companies funded by these two foundations.

This was the beginning of a complex web of people and institutions concerned with the medical profession – medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, doctors of all allopathic hues, insurance companies and government health bodies such as the FDA – seeking in collusion with each other to perpetuate the myth that human health and life lay in the hands of drug makers.

Vaccination is a part of the larger synthetic drug or allopathic myth and therefore the same rules and the same web of deceit apply. So with any immunization campaign or public service message urging the community to get vaccinated, there are ulterior motives. Your health is nowhere on the priority list.

To keep the allopathic myth alive, health authorities have gone all out to discredit any form of medical therapy that is not allopathic. With the help of the media, they and the medical establishment have done a good job of convincing the public at large that drugs – and drugs alone – are insurance for a long and healthy life.

However, in recent years, there has been increasing awareness of these motives and the manner in which the government and pharma companies have been influencing and thus manipulating the public’s notion of health and disease.

But is profit the only motive?


7. Hidden Motives

 So is profit the obvious motivator for the vaccine myth? Or are there other reasons why governments immunize vast numbers of the world’s population and push the vaccine agenda on an ill-informed public?

The answer to this question is layered and subtle and sometimes hard to digest. The fact is that vaccines target the immune system, cause it to malfunction and make people vulnerable to disease. Sickness ensures a ready market for drug manufacturers and keeps profits rolling in.

But it is not always as simple and blatant as that. Vaccines, believe it or not, also serve subtle political agendas. They help dominate people, groups of people and even countries that the West wants to control – even their own populations. By systematically weakening the people through mass immunizations and predicting a sick fate for those who don’t voluntarily choose to vaccinate themselves and their children, governments subtly create a sense of psychological weakness.

This, in turn, creates a sense of powerlessness, submission and dependency on authority figures – government agencies, politicians and world bodies. People are therefore more likely to believe what these ‘authority figures’ say.

Vaccination is an effective tool used for decades by Western nations, who have sought to exercise social and economic control over several developing countries as clearly illustrated by the African model.

Africa is a continent rich and abundant in natural resources. Keeping the African population weak and preoccupied with sickness and grappling with disease serves Western economic interests. Immunization, along with an influx of economic aid, has worked to effectively subdue possible rebellion and suspend rational thinking.

It’s a Machiavellian strategy that involves several layers of people who perpetuate this agenda – UNICEF, the Red Cross, WHO and a mammoth global network of non-profit organizations. And while billions of people are led to believe that their motives are nothing less than noble, vaccines also conveniently channel funds into the bank accounts of specific companies and powerful individuals.

Keeping entire populations or sections of the population sick and vulnerable also diverts attention from real social and economic issues. These issues are inconvenient for governments because they require genuine resolve and huge budgets to tackle.

Academic researchers, reputed authors and some medical researchers also believe that vaccines are being used as a biological weapon to decimate certain socio-economic and ethnic groups. As discussed above, one section of researchers cites the HIV virus as an example of such weapons being designed and engineered in US laboratories to serve this very purpose.

Does this amount to genocide? We are privy to some stunning disclosures by Dr Sidney Gottlieb, a military psychiatrist who held a key position with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the 1950s, who later claimed he was instructed by his political masters to use viruses in the struggle for Western control over the Belgian Congo or modern-day Zaire.

In CIA hearings, Gottlieb admitted that he was sent to the Congo with “lethal biological material” (containing viruses), which was to be used to assassinate the country’s first elected prime minister after the African nation won independence from Belgium. The country is rich in mineral resources and as soon as it broke free of colonial rule, the US was determined to seize control.

Dr Gottlieb didn’t succeed in his mission as the CIA was unable to find a way to biologically poison the politician it was intended for. However, Dr Gottlieb is reported to have confessed in CIA hearings later that he had dumped this “lethal biological material” into the Congo River. Was he instructed to this or was it an act of carelessness? Some believe it was no accident.

Mass trials of the Hepatitis B vaccine among the American Indian population – whose vast tracts of land have often pitted them against the US Federal government – have also repeatedly raised eyebrows among a section of researchers as well as the American Indian population.

These trials were conducted in 1981 in Alaska, among a people who had no track record of health issues with Hepatitis B. Yet, a plasma-based Hepatitis B vaccine was introduced in schools and in immunization programs among adults as well.

Surprisingly – or not – for school-going children, the program did not require the consent of parents, neither was any justification given for a vaccination campaign among an ethnic community that did not require it.

Several years later – symptoms of vaccine-induced diseases often have fairly lengthy incubation periods – a representation was made before the US Senate Select Committee on Indian Affairs, which claimed that the vaccine may have contained tainted blood that could induce autoimmune diseases in the population.

According to those who made the representation, this was the only explanation for the rise in diseases such as diabetes, cancer and heart disease that were not prevalent among the healthy Native Americans of Alaska.

The representation before the Senate Committee accused the federal government of using the Alaskan population in medical experiments to test dangerous vaccines. It was not the first time such an accusation had been made.

It is a documented fact that certain ‘expendable’ sections (read ethnic groups) of the human population have been used for medical experiments without their knowledge.


8. Can We Trust Medical Research?

 John Ioannidis, who is one of the world’s most renowned experts on the credibility of medical research, doesn’t think so. According to him and his team of eminent researchers, as much as 90 percent of the published medical information relied on by doctors to prescribe drugs, vaccines or recommend surgery is flawed or incorrect.

In November 2010, The Atlantic reports: “His (John Ioannidis’s) work has been widely accepted by the medical community ... Yet for all his influence, he worries that the field of medical research is so pervasively flawed, and so riddled with conflicts of interest, that it might be chronically resistant to change, or even to publicly admitting that there’s a problem.”

In addition, most medical doctors and patients assert that modern medical treatments, including drugs, are “scientifically proven”. Not so, according to a Huffington Post article (April 2010) by Dana Ullman. “…this ideal is a dream, not reality, and a clever and profitable marketing ruse, not fact”. Ullman reports: “The British Medical Journal’s ‘Clinical Evidence’ analyzed common medical treatments to evaluate which are supported by sufficient reliable evidence (BMJ, 2007). They reviewed approximately 2,500 treatments and found:


• 13 percent were found to be beneficial

• 23 percent were likely to be beneficial

• 8 percent were as likely to be harmful as beneficial

• 6 percent were unlikely to be beneficial

• 4 percent were likely to be harmful or ineffective.

• 46 percent were unknown whether they were efficacious or harmful”


What’s even worse is what happens when doctors hand out unapproved drugs to unsuspecting portions of the population as if they were candy. Ullman writes, “We all want drugs given to infants to be as safe as possible, but mothers and fathers will be surprised and perhaps shocked to know that very few drugs are ever tested on infants.” He cites a 2007 study of over 350,000 children which found that a shocking 78.7 percent of children in hospitals are prescribed drugs that the FDA has not even approved for use in children (Shah, Hall, Goodman, et al, 2007). “If this isn't shocking enough, a survey in England found that 90 percent of infants were prescribed drugs that were not tested for safety or efficacy in infants (Conroy, McIntyre, Choonara, 1999),” says Ullman.

This would not be so serious if the treated children were unaffected by these drugs. However, according to Ullman, “there is almost a 350 percent increase in adverse drug reactions in children prescribed an off-label drug than in children who were prescribed a drug that had been tested for safety and efficacy (Horen, Montastruc, and Lapeyre-mestre, 2002)”. He says that doctors are committing “medical child abuse” on a regular basis.

These accusations should not be taken lightly by responsible parents, doctors, and scientists. They reflect the serious sickness that medical industry is suffering from, and this sickness affects nearly everyone. The alleged scientific evidence that drugs have a proven value is a myth that has altered the health and quality of life of millions of people, and cost the lives of many others.

Medical science is quackery at its best. As Ullman points out, “‘Quackery’ is commonly defined as the use of unproven treatments by individuals or companies who claim fantastic results and who charge large sums of money.” He says that “although modern physicians may point their collective finger at various ‘alternative’ or ‘natural’ treatment modalities as examples of quackery, it is conventional medical treatments today that are out-of-this-world expensive, and despite real questionable efficacy of their treatments, doctors give patients the guise of ‘science’.”

When over 85 percent of therapies currently recommended by conventional medicine have never been formally proven, we may begin to wonder whether medical science deservers anyone’s trust. Would you give your car to a mechanic who offers you a 15 percent guarantee that his minimal mechanical expertise will succeed in fixing a serious flaw in your car’s engine? But this is exactly what we do when we hand our lives over into the care of a physician who has been trained by a medical system that is fundamentally corrupt.

The root of the problem is in the way scientific research is being conducted today. For example, during an analysis of antidepressant drug trials, the FDA found that of 38 trials for which the evidence appeared favorable, 37 had been published. Whereas of 36 trials for which the evidence did not appear favorable toward antidepressant drugs, 22 were not published at all, and 11 were published in a way that misleadingly conveyed the outcome as though it was favorable.

Accordingly, drug giants can legally publicize the positive findings they want you and doctors to know about regardless of how poorly 50 percent of the trials reflected efficacy of the studied antidepressant. In others words, the drug makers hide from the public that half of the trials done on the drug failed to prove effectiveness.

Drug makers don’t have to publish negative studies. They do as many studies as possible and once they have just two studies with somewhat positive results, they can ignore all the studies with negative ones. There can be as many as 20 negative studies and just 2 positive studies, which is enough for a drug to become approved by the FDA and be pushed on the population. While the positive studies make it into the medical journals, the negatives ones are being pushed under the carpet, never to be uncovered again, unless of course you find an expert on the matter – such as Dr Ioannidis.

In 2005, Dr Ioannidis showed that there is less than a 50 percent chance that the results of any randomly chosen scientific paper will be true. As Dr. Ioannidis wrote: “In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser pre-selection of tested relationships;… where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.”

Again in 2008, in a new analysis published in the Journal of the American Medical Journal, Dr Ioannidis reveals that much of the published scientific research is highly questionable. He found that the most misleading studies are those that oversell dramatic or otherwise considered important results. These include articles that helped spread popularity of treatments such as the use of hormone-replacement therapy for menopausal women, vitamin E to reduce the risk of heart disease, coronary stents to ward off heart attacks, and daily low-dose aspirin to control blood pressure and prevent heart attacks and strokes. As we know today, many of these results were falsified, yet millions of people have been (and still are) subjected to these treatments, many of whom were harmed or died. Hormone replacement therapy, for example, led to an unprecedented rise of breast cancers and heart disease, and coronary stents have never shown to reduce mortality from coronary artery disease.

If just 41 percent of the most acclaimed medical research has been convincingly shown to be wrong or significantly exaggerated, which Ioannidis has done in his analysis, the scope and impact of the problem is simply unimaginable. To make matters worse, even after prominent studies were soundly refuted by repeat studies, researchers continued to cite the original results as correct more often than as flawed – in one case for at least 12 years after the results were discredited, according to the analysis.

The main problem is based on the fact that unbiased, independent research is rarely undertaken, lest published. It is very difficult for an independent researcher to raise enough money to fund the research, and if it doesn’t stand a chance of becoming published, there is no point spending all that time and money anyway. This unfair selection process ensures that what we are being told is “medical science” is only partial truth at is best. As the saying goes, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing”, we are now collectively and individually facing the consequences of relinquishing responsibility for our own health.

Nearly all major clinical trials involving drugs are funded, at least in part, by drug companies. This makes sense since drug companies have a vested interest in making money off their investment. For example, studies on the world’s bestselling drugs, statins, which rake in over half a trillion dollars annually, have all been funded by drug companies. Naturally, drug companies propagated the myth that high cholesterol is our enemy that we must control by taking statins for the rest of our lives.

New discoveries made by researchers at the University of California, published in the Annals of Medicine in October 2010, have shown that 92 percent of about 145 clinical trials conducted between 2008 and 2009 are invalid because they didn’t disclose the type of placebo they used. By manipulating the placebo, in this case one that actually raises cholesterol in the control group, researchers can easily ‘prove’ that a statin drug is more effective than the placebo. Read more about this FDA sanctioned medical fraud later on.

Even if the fraud is uncovered and drug companies are fined for manipulating studies or for not disclosing known serious side effects, business continues as usual. Large, publicly traded pharmaceutical companies, like Merck and Pfizer, are simply too big to fail, even if they are found guilty of being the instigators of massive medical fraud. It is unreasonable to expect that any clinical trial conducted by a drug giant procures results unfavorable to their expectations. And yet, drug companies are now the main source to fund the vast majority of research studies in the world. Owning this monopoly on what kind of research is suitable to conduct is what determines our so highly praised ‘science-based evidence’.

What we all need to learn from this is whatever drug or treatment is scientifically proven, in no way does it mean that it is safe or effective. Likewise, the lack of scientific evidence that a natural herb or treatment is effective or safe does in no way mean that it isn’t. We are responsible for ourselves and our families, nobody else is. I suggest you do your own research and decide what is useful for you and what isn’t.


9. Big Pharma on a Rampage

 There is more on the scams and frauds in the drug business.

Approximately 200,000 million Americans are killed by prescription drugs each year. There was a time when the common drugs that Americans took were tested chiefly in the US or Europe, but now most clinical trials are unethically conducted overseas in poorer countries where there are next to no regulations; where poor, and often illiterate, people sign on consent forms with a thumbprint; where the risk of litigation is insignificant and where the FDA’s supervision is so scarce that the companies have a field day doing as they please. Thanks to globalization, the pharma companies have found new avenues for more unscrupulous money-making.

Romania, Tunisia, Turkey, Estonia, northeastern provinces of China, Poland, Russia - Big Pharma’s explorers have been there, and even to remote, isolated towns and locations all over the world to scout out people willing to undergo clinical trials for new drugs, and thus help persuade the FDA to declare the drugs safe and effective for Americans.

Bangladesh has been home to 76 clinical trials, Malawi 61, the Russian Federation 1,513, Romania 876, Thailand 786, Ukraine 589, Kazakhstan 15, Peru 494, Iran 292, Turkey 716, and Uganda 132.

According to the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, until 1990, just 271 trials were being conducted abroad, whereas in a span of less than two decades, in 2008, the number had gone up to 6,458 – an increase of over 2,000 percent!

The National Institutes of Health has been compiling a database and has identified 58,788 such trials in 173 countries outside the United States since 2000. In 2008 alone, according to the inspector general’s report, 80 percent of the applications submitted to the FDA for new drugs contained data from foreign clinical trials, and more and more pharma companies are doing all their testing offshore. In fact, 20 of the largest US-based pharma companies now conduct “one-third of their clinical trials exclusively at foreign sites.”

All this is happening when 2,900 different drugs for some 4,600 different conditions are undergoing clinical testing and seeking to launch their products into the market.

An important question to ask is: are the results of clinical trials conducted overseas relevant to Americans? People in lesser developed countries may metabolize drugs differently from the way Americans do. Prevailing diseases in other countries, such as malaria and tuberculosis, can distort the outcome of clinical trials.

But the drug companies never had it better, with the cost of running trials far cheaper in such places where the local population just about manages to eke out a living on as little as a dollar a day.

Some of the drugs tested overseas are household names such as the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) Celebrex, which has been marketed on television for more than 10 years. Its manufacturer, Pfizer, the world’s largest drug company, has spent more than a billion dollars promoting it as a painkiller for arthritis and other conditions, including menstrual cramps.

The NIH maintains a record of most drug trials inside and outside of the US and its database counts 290 studies involving Celebrex, out of which only 183 took place in the US and 107 took place in 36 other countries such as Estonia, Croatia, Lithuania, Costa Rica, Colombia, Russia, Mexico, China, Brazil and Ukraine. It is not mandatory for companies to report all studies conducted overseas, and they make no effort to do so.

So what happened to Celebrex? It was revealed that patients who took Celebrex were more likely to suffer heart attacks and strokes than those who took older and cheaper painkillers. It was also suspected that Pfizer had suppressed a study that drew attention to these facts. No prizes for guessing what Pfizer did next - it denied that the study was kept secret and insisted that it “acted responsibly in sharing this information in a timely manner with the FDA.”

Before long, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine reported several more negative results. In the meantime, Pfizer was advocating Celebrex to Alzheimer’s patients, hoping that the drug would slow down the progress of dementia. It didn’t. What did slow down was the sales of Celebrex. From $3.3 billion in 2004, the numbers started declining.

One big factor in the shift of clinical trials to foreign countries is a loophole in FDA regulations: if studies within the US indicate that a drug has no benefit, trials from abroad can often be used in their place to secure FDA approval. When positive data is required by drug companies, and required fast, they turn to seek assistance from the “rescue countries” that quickly come to their aid.

In the 1990s, Aventis Pharmaceuticals (now Sanofi Aventis), developed Ketek, an antibiotic to treat respiratory-tract infections. In 2004, when the FDA certified it effective and harmless, its verdict was essentially based on the results of studies conducted in countries such as Hungary, Morocco, Tunisia, and Turkey. The endorsement came in just a few weeks after a researcher in the US was sentenced to 57 months in prison for forging her own Ketek data. Dr. Anne Kirkman-Campbell, of Gadsden, Alabama, apparently met only willing volunteers to participate in a drug trial. She enrolled more than 400 local adult persons including her entire office staff. In return, she collected $400 a head from Sanofi Aventis.

It was later revealed that data from at least 91 percent of her patients was falsified. (Kirkman-Campbell was not the only difficult Aventis researcher. There were others of dubious reputation as well, but the drug Ketek did win approval on the basis of overseas trials.

Given the massive medical scam operations we are faced with today, including mass vaccination programs, I advice everyone to do their home work before letting those who make a living of defrauding others take advantage of you. The drug giants would quickly turn into harmless dwarfs if we decided to not use their harmful products and fall for their incessant fear tactics, but instead took care of our health in a natural way.

Vaccine-nation Poisoning the Population,

One Shot at a Time

Andreas Moritz