There has been a lot of excitement and anger in the wake of my article on the leaked pilot Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Study (“Study”), by Dr. Anthony Mawson.
To publish or not to publish was indeed the question I thought about and reflected on for eight days after the Study had been first made available via a public url that self-destructed in six hours on Valentine’s Day.
After confirming the Study with its author—he replied to my email in two hours that morning—and the rejecting journal Frontiers, I had the article ready to go on Thursday, February 16, 2017. But I waited another week as I thought good and hard about publishing someone else’s work, which has been trying to get through the censors of Big Pharma to make it to the public, finally, and tell the findings that should be a clarion call for the U.S. federal government to take decisive action in this worsening Autism Epidemic.
First Heard About the Study
The first time I even knew or became aware of the Study was during a pre-recorded radio interview in early December 2016. The radio host for Lost Arts Radio had reached out to me via Skyhorse Publishing to do an interview on my book Master Manipulator, which then increased in scope after Richard Sacks and I had phone conversation. It was during that two-and-a-half-hour interview on his Fireside Chat program that he, not me or the other two guests, brought up the Study, mentioning it was both old and had yet to get publish for obvious reasons when one finally reads its findings.
Even after his mentioning of the Study, I didn’t go search the Internet, ask around for it. A week earlier, I interviewed an expert on doing a 30-year anniversary article on the flaws, foibles, and failures of Vaccine Court (that article will come out in March). That expert said that because the CDC had never sponsored and conducted such a Study—it spent money on the Danish rogue scientist Poul Thorsen instead—Vaccine Court, where there is no discovery process, jury trial, or typical tort law aspects, the government gutted the intent of the court, further immunizing and protecting the vaccine manufacturers and not our children.
Yes, my teenage autistic son was one of the 5,400 “baby doe” cases kicked out of Vaccine Court in the spring 2011 via the Omnibus Autism Proceedings.
So with all of this high level information dumped on my lap, I didn’t bother to pursue finding anything more about the rejected Study, which I knew had been censored without reading it. Thus, ended 2016 with a few more radio interviews—but not further inquiries on my end.
Leak vs. Embargo
The day I published the article, I received some curt emails from a few people, which I have no problem with. People wanted to know my “sources.” Well that will never happen. Their anonymity is protected under the Supreme Court—just ask President Trump about that with all of his leaks.
I didn’t ask anyone for the Study. No one emailed me the Study, with the word “Embargo” on it, meaning that if I received such an email—and I do quite frequently—I, as a journalist, am not allowed to write about the embargoed document. But this was not the case with the Study.
When it was “leaked” to the public domain, it’s fair game for anyone to write about it, comment on it, read it. I was neither Edward Snowden nor Chelsea Manning. I didn’t break into a server, hack a computer, walk off with a laptop, or steal a flash-drive. I was only notified that the Study would be made available on a certain part of the Web, on a specific date, and in a narrow window of time.
So writing about a “leaked” to the public Study and protecting my sources are not a crime in any size, shape or form. Scientists, who conduct the peer-review process, were naturally upset at my decision to write about the outed Study. I fully understand, as I have been around scientists, engineers, architects, developers, and intellectual property, trademarks, and copyright my entire life. My grandfather was a shipping magnate in Bergen, Norway. As a young child, I knew about the importance of one’s work, creation, and authorship.
In the past, I have been leaked internal documents on the 2010 BP Oil Spill (I didn’t publish them); the WHO tamping down on an off-the-shelf remedy to the Ebola virus in favor of funding R&D for an Ebola vaccine (10,000 people have died as a result; will be published later this year); and Zika virus, much of which made it into a half dozen articles I wrote on the CDC’s march for extracting $1 billion from American taxpayers for a vaccine no one will ever need—since Zika doesn’t cause microcephaly (more articles to come).
The Triggers for Publication
Well, if you think President Trump had a rough week or two in his first month of his new administration, censorship and flagrant attacks on free speech and freedom of the press should be equally concerning for all Americans, no matter your background, political views, or beliefs.
A triple tributary of bad news all arrived, like the spring floods, on the same day of Wednesday, February 22, 2017. These stories should disturb people inside and outside the autism community, as they have far reaching implications. And it’s just the start.
In one incredible piece of news, Mike Adams of www.naturalnews.com, the “Health Ranger,” who I have followed for years, had 140,000 pages of linked documents, studies, and reports broken by Google or a hacker. He was threatened the week before to out dirt on an anti-government website, “or else.” Well, a week later that threat was followed through on and his years of work have been censored. Imagining this happening to the Drudge Report or other website aggregating media platforms?
The second shoe to drop on censorship came from Google’s re-engineering its search engine to remove “fake news.” I guess Age of Autism has published so much of this that Google saw to it that when one enters “Age of Autism” the top ten searches run from the late Dan Olmsted (God bless his kind soul) to a Huffington Post view on the website. Gone are the vaccine-autism articles that matter from that simple search.
Censorship is alive and well in America.
The third prong to the devil’s pitchfork of eliminating dissent, squashing public debate, and killing open discourse made headlines everywhere. Google’s different artificial intelligence (AI) software has been sold to CNN, New York Times, and other mainstream media outlets (MSM). This program searches, filters, and weeds out “hate speech” and “toxic” remarks in the comments sections of the online news.
But that is how MSM is selling the new AI for online comments: Hate speech and toxic words. The reality is for those in the ASD community who have helped waged the fight against tyranny the words “vaccines” and “autism” or countering the CDC’s version of everything is good with America’s children will be censored, expunged, weeded out, eliminated, erased, and cast to the wind.
In other words, we are now clearly living in a new age, Digital 3.0 where censorship by the wealthy corporations and governments the world over is preferred than any free words or beliefs or laws in the U.S. Constitution.
So either we change our tactics, methods, and the way we fight the Deep State of Big Pharma, or they clearly will win without us making a dent or winning masses over to counter the Fascist rule over our lives.
Censorship and Findings
The Study is clearly old, as it made it into the pages of the 2015 book Vaccine Whistleblower. In fact, the data goes back a year or two before the publication. That means the Study has been received, reviewed, and ultimately rejected multiple times, with the latest being Frontiers in November 2016.
Thus, this is not a new Study. It is a censored one. Sure, people can be mad at the leaker or me, but a mole hunt is a waste of time. After I published the article and heard back from several people, I learned that others had the full Study—embargoed—from California, through Cape Cod, to the United Kingdom. I also learned that other groups of people or organizations, outside of the sponsors, made press releases about the Study’s findings ready to go last November. But they were never released, after the Study wasn’t published.
So how many digital copies of the Study were let out over the years? Dozens I would suspect. That’s hard to put an internal control on, especially in light of the rejections and ongoing censorship, which in 2017 will get worse, not better.
When the author told me not to widely distribute the Study, hours after I published last week, I complied. No issue with his dignified request.
Finally, should the focus and energy of the community at large be on the leaker or I?
Or should the focus on the Study’s findings; on the censorship by Google, MSM, and other social media platforms; on taking down the runway freight train of CDC vaccine schedule?
James Ottar Grundvig is an investigative journalist who has been published in the Huffington Post, the Financial Times Foreign Direct Investment (fDi) magazine, Law.com, and the Epoch Times, among other media outlets. He has written extensively about technology, autism, and the CDC’s failure to contain the runaway epidemic — all of which comprise the foundation for Master Manipulator. He resides in New York City.