By Jon Rappoport
Every new "pandemic" is the big one.
"This isn't like the last one, oh no. This one is really going to spread out across the globe and kill millions and millions of people."
Ebola. MERS. Swine Flu. Bird Flu. Smallpox. SARS. West Nile.
We're still here.
Do you think you can rely on government reports about diseases?
Can you trust them when they say there are 10,000 cases of disease X?
The mainstream press accepts the reports without blinking an eye. Accurate? Of course.
And the public? If the information weren't accurate, the public would be...dupes, fools.
For example, in the case of Ebola, the people wouldn't know who to believe. Up the creek without a paddle.
So let me recount an instance, in the fall of 2009, when a scandal broke, and US Centers for Disease Control executives were, behind closed doors, screaming bloody murder.
A mainstream reporter had just planted a dagger in the guts of a billion-dollar campaign to terrify the public about Swine Flu.
Her name is Sharyl Attkisson, and at the time she worked for CBS News. She was their ace investigative reporter.
Recently, she and CBS parted ways. She wasn't getting air time. Her stories about Benghazi and Fast&Furious were quite controversial.
But the biggest story she ever covered, in terms of potential impact, was the Centers for Disease Control Swine Flu debacle.
Until her bosses shut the story down.
Until CBS decided it didn't want to take things further and create a scandal that would have toppled pillars of the US medical system.
Remember Swine Flu? The dreaded H1N1 virus? It was the "Ebola" of 2009. The whole world was going to be infected. The World Health Organization declared it a "level-6 pandemic," their most dangerous category.
The US Centers for Disease Control was turning out press releases like hot cakes, churning up fear, promoting the Swine Flu vaccine.
The CDC had one very, very important job: letting the press know, up to the minute, how many cases of Swine Flu there were in the US.
That was their only real job.
If they couldn't get that one right, they had no reason to exist.
How did the CDC decide how many cases of Swine Flu existed? They took reports from health agencies in the 50 states and they added them up.
Not exactly rocket science. You could say any idiot could perform that task.
Well, along came Sharyl Attkisson, and she exploded a bombshell:
"If you've been diagnosed 'probable' or 'presumed' 2009 H1N1 or 'swine flu' in recent months, you may be surprised to know this: odds are you didn't have H1N1 [Swine] flu. In fact, you probably didn't have flu at all.
"That's according to state-by-state test results obtained in a three-month-long CBS News investigation.
"In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 [Swine] flu, and stopped counting individual cases. The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?
"...we [CBS News] asked all 50 states for their statistics on state lab-confirmed H1N1 [Swine Flu cases] prior to the halt of individual testing and counting in July. The results reveal a pattern that surprised a number of health care professionals we consulted. The vast majority of cases were negative for H1N1 as well as seasonal flu, despite the fact that many states were specifically testing patients deemed to be most likely to have H1N1 flu, based on symptoms and risk factors, such as travel to Mexico." (cbsnews.com, October 21, 2009, "Swine Flu Cases Overestimated?")
The CDC exposure was titanic, even if many readers didn't get the point:
The CDC had stopped counting the number of Swine Flu cases in America, by blithely assuming there was an epidemic; and therefore, its job was done.
But that was a naked lie. The CDC had actually stopped counting cases because the tests of patients who most likely had Swine Flu didn't have Swine Flu at all, and most of them didn't have any kind of flu. In other words, the whole Swine Flu "epidemic" was a bust. A dud.
This was apparent from Attkisson's article.
The CDC was lying through its teeth.
And the staggering capper on this tale? Roughly three weeks after Attkisson's Swine Flu revelations appeared in print, the CDC, obviously in great distress over the exposure, decided to double down. The best lie to tell would be a huge lie.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC's response: "Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents - the CDC's best guess is 22 million - came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 ." ("22 million cases of Swine Flu in the US," by Daniel J. DeNoon)
In other words, leaping from overblown and false reports of tens of thousands of Swine Flu cases in American, the CDC was now saying that roughly 1 out of every 14 Americans had Swine Flu---when their own tests showed the overwhelming number of people presumed to have Swine Flu didn't have it at all.
I interviewed Sharyl Attkisson. She told me the following:
"...we discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was 'the most original story' he'd seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others [at CBS] pushed to stop it and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It [Attkisson's investigation\] was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary."
Trust government pronouncements about diseases?
Are you serious?