Was Vaccination used for Depopulation/Genocide in Early Vaccine History?

by Steve C. Halbrook

“The affection for their children has driven them to regard vaccination as an operation intended by government to thin the number of its poor subjects.”
— The Indian Medical Gazette, “Dr. K. C. Bose on Small-pox in Calcutta.” (March 1890), 82

Now that it is so obvious that vaccination is being used for premeditated murder of much, if not most, of the world’s population, the question becomes: when was vaccination initially used for mass murder?

Here we explore this question. Whatever the answer, read and get a taste of the dark history of vaccination that you probably never heard from the vaccine propagandists in the media, government, and medical system.

Was Vaccination used for Depopulation/Genocide in Early Vaccine History?

That vaccination is used to deliberately depopulate the planet is hard to contest.

First, there is no doubt that vaccines are used in at least certain poor countries to deliberately cause miscarriages. There has been journals advocating the use of such vaccines, and evidence that this has been carried out clandestinely.

Second, throughout vaccine history, there is an endless number of testimonies that vaccines cause harm. This is not hard to discover, and if those of us with limited resources can easily discover this information, then how much easier can the rich and powerful — many of whom are pushing the idea that the world is overcrowded, and use such murderous means as abortion to achieve this end. If they are evil enough to use abortion to achieve this, then there is no reason to assume they won’t use vaccines to do the same. (More thoughts on vaccines and population control here.)

And finally, the COVID vaccine. It is so obvious that COVID has been over-hyped for the purpose of giving people the COVID shot, and that the shot is clearly premeditated mass genocide of much if not most of the entire world population. Despite countless reports of injuries and deaths, the Globalist Controllers continue to work to suppress such information.

The question here, however, is whether vaccination has been deliberate tool of depopulation/genocide in the earlier periods of vaccination. In this article I want to explore this question by looking back in history.

This article will by no means provide all the instances that vaccination was, or perhaps was, used to depopulate groups of people in history; but at least it might be a good starting point, and perhaps serve as a springboard for other researchers in the future to dig deeper into this topic.

I welcome any insights that anyone may have on this. It could be a way to further expose and reprove the evils of vaccination.

(Note: much of our analysis focuses on vaccination in England and English colonies.)

Topics in this post include:

• Depopulation and Genocide Natural in a Fallen World
• A Sampling of Depopulation in History
• History of Biowarfare
• England’s Attempts to use Smallpox as a Bioweapon
• Smallpox Inoculation as a Bioweapon!
• Depopulation Literature prior to the Smallpox Vaccine
• England’s Depopulation Direction
• More Dangerous Vaccines for the Poor than the Rich
• Deadly Vaccines in the English Colonies
• Citizens of India Believe Vaccination used for Depopulation in 1800s
• Decimating Canadian Indians
• 1800s: Blacks view vaccination as a tool of genocide
• Early 1900s: George Bernard Shaw calls vaccination “attempted murder”
• Vaccination Called “a consciously directed sinister activity” in 1935
• Could those behind Pro-vaccine Policies plead Ignorance?
• At Least Due to Greed

Depopulation and Genocide Natural in a Fallen World

Many laugh at the idea that anyone would try to deceive us about vaccines to achieve a depopulation agenda. This is irrationally dismissed as a “conspiracy theory” – as if people never plot to do evil! And yet, many of the same people fail to see the irony when they themselves (slanderously) hold that anti-vaxxers plot (conspire!) to do evil.

The notion of a person or a group of people committing genocide on others (often with deception) should not be scoffed at, as we live in a fallen world.

In fact, depopulation and genocide via deception was attempted by Satan at the very beginning. Satan’s lie in the Garden of Eden resulted in death for all mankind: that is, man immediately died spiritually, and would eventually die physically.

Henceforth, there would be enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of Satan (Genesis 3:15). Unsaved man was now a tool to fulfill Satan’s unending murderous schemes. It wouldn’t take long after the Fall for the first murder to occur. It was by Adam and Eve’s son Cain, “who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother” (1 John 3:12b).

And so, “the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead” (Ecclesiastes 9:3b). Man’s natural fallen, unsaved state – walking “according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience” (Ephesians 2:2) – is characterized by such wickedness as lies and murder:

Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers … (Romans 1:29)

Scripture speaks of those in “the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will” (2 Timothy 2:26a). And elsewhere, Scripture states of Satan’s people:

Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (John 8:44)

Since lies and murder are endemic to a fallen world, we shouldn’t be surprised at all if vaccines were used for depopulation under the guise of “health” even in earlier vaccine history. But of course, the question is whether they were. Not everything is an attempt at depopulation – although there may be more schemes for depopulation than one might suspect.

A Sampling of Depopulation in History

Based on what has already been said, depopulation based on murder, as we would expect, has been an ongoing historical occurrence.

Abortion/infanticide go way back in human history, such as in ancient Greece and Rome. In the days of the Old Testament, Pharaoh, in order to reduce the increasing Israelite population (which he feared would become large enough to join his enemies in battle and escape from the land), ordered Hebrew midwives to murder male Israelite newborns (Exodus 1:8-19). (Thankfully, the midwives refused to obey.)

Leaders of the French Revolution saw overpopulation as a barrier to establishing their socialistic paradise. It would “jeopardize” valuable resources and universal contentment. The solution was mass murder.

In more recent times, there was America’s eugenics movement — and mandatory vaccination was a justification for it. Influenced and inspired by the American Eugenics movement, Nazi Germany – with the help of the medical profession – went beyond America’s sterilization programs to mass murder. This culminated in the Holocaust, which saw depopulation by murder in the millions of those deemed “unwanted.” Since then, Germany’s elimination of the “unwanted” has been far surpassed by America’s abortion holocaust.

As is obvious today, there is a global interest in reducing the world’s inhabitants in the name of saving the planet from “overpopulation.” The overtly global push for murdering babies via abortion is hardly a coincidence.

And so, there is no reason why attempts to depopulate groups of people can’t occur at any age via any means (including clandestinely via vaccination). Those evil enough to want to depopulate people via abortion would probably have no qualms clandestinely killing anyone using poison, such as vaccination.

History of Biowarfare

Not only has murder via depopulation been committed throughout the history of man, but attempts to kill via biological warfare. Biological warfare is:

the use of biological toxins or infectious agents such as bacteria, viruses, and fungi with the intent to kill or incapacitate humans, animals or plants as an act of war.

Wikipedia contributors, “Biological warfare,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia (17 November 2019, 11:45 UTC). Retrieved November 25, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biological_warfare&oldid=926589416

Vaccination, of course, can easily fit within this definition.

A brief summary of biological warfare prior to the use of vaccination:

Contagious diseases and other biological weapons were recognized for their potential impact on armies or people as early as the 14th century BC. The Hittites might have produced the first documented example of BW by sending diseased rams (possibly infected with tularaemia) to their enemies to weaken them. In the fourth century BC, the Greek historian Herodotus relates that Scythian archers used to infect their arrows by dipping them in a mixture of decomposing cadavers of adders and human blood. According to our modern interpretation, this mixture might have contained Clostridium perfringens and Clostridium tetani, as well as the snakes’ venom. In the third century BC, the military commander Hannibal of Cartagena set fire to the enemy’s fleet (belonging to King Eumenes II of Pergamon) with pots full of venomous snakes. Similar examples are reported by historians or, for cases closer to our epoch, by anthropologists of the use of arrows or other vessels infected with different products extracted from animal parts or plants in order to attack the human enemy. Similarly, the use of arrows for the transmission of plague is suggested by some allegoric documents, such as the drawing painted in 1437 by an anonymous artist on a wood cover used by the government of Siena to protect official documents. In the Middle Ages, a famous although controversial example is offered by the siege of Caffa (now Feodossia in Ukraine/Crimea), a Genovese outpost on the Black Sea coast, by the Mongols. In 1346, the attacking army experienced an epidemic of bubonic plague. The Italian chronicler Gabriele de’ Mussi, in his Istoria de Morbo sive Mortalitate quae fuit Anno Domini 1348, describes quite plausibly how the plague was transmitted by the Mongols by throwing diseased cadavers with catapults into the besieged city, and how ships transporting Genovese soldiers, fleas and rats fleeing from there brought it to the Mediterranean ports. Given the highly complex epidemiology of plague, this interpretation of the Black Death (which might have killed >25 million people in the following years throughout Europe) as stemming from a specific and localized origin of the Black Death remains controversial. Similarly, it remains doubtful whether the effect of throwing infected cadavers could have been the sole cause of the outburst of an epidemic in the besieged city. However, this episode of the use of cadavers in order to infect a population remains a landmark in the history of BW. Similar examples of the use of the technique of catapulting infected cadavers can be found throughout the modern period, from the siege of the Bohemian city of Carolstein by Lithuanian troops in 1422 to the siege of the Swedish army in Reval (Estonia) in 1710 by the Russians.

V. Barras and G. Greub, “History of biological warfare and bioterrorism,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, Volume 20, Issue 6 (Elsevier, June 2014), 497-502. Retrieved November 25, 2019, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1198743X14641744

England’s Attempts to use Smallpox as a Bioweapon

Not too long before the use of Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccination, England appears to have attempted to use smallpox as a bioweapon.

For instance, when America was under British rule in 1763, Fort Pitt was under siege by Indians during Chief Pontiac’s uprising. The British gave a “gift” to two Indians chiefs who unsuccessfully tried to persuade them to surrender: items infected by smallpox. A local trader named William Trent wrote,

Out of our regard for them, we gave them two Blankets and an Handkerchief out of the Small Pox Hospital. I hope it will have the desired effect.

Harold B. Gill Jr., “Colonial Germ Warfare,” Colonial Williamsburg Journal, Spring 2004. Retrieved November 25, 2019, from https://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring04/warfare.cfm

In “Colonial Germ Warfare,” Harold B. Gill Jr. writes,

It is not known who conceived the plan, but there’s no doubt it met with the approval of the British military in America and may have been common practice. Sir Jeffery Amherst, commander of British forces in North America, wrote July 7, 1763, probably unaware of the events at Fort Pitt: “Could it not be contrived to Send the Small Pox among those Disaffected Tribes of Indians? We must, on this occasion, Use Every Stratagem in our power to Reduce them.” He ordered the extirpation of the Indians and said no prisoners should be taken. About a week later, he wrote to Bouquet: “You will Do well to try to Innoculate the Indians by means of Blanketts as well as to try Every other method that can serve to Extirpate this Execrable Race.”

Though a connection cannot be proven, a smallpox epidemic erupted in the Ohio Valley that may have been the result of the distribution of the infected articles at Fort Pitt. Whatever its origins, the outbreak devastated the Indians.

Ibid.

There is also the possibility of the British using smallpox as a weapon in the Revolutionary War – even against civilians:

There is no proof that anyone attempted to spread disease among the enemy troops during the American Revolutionary War, but there is a plenitude of circumstantial evidence. Almost from the beginning, Americans suspected the British were trying to infect their army with smallpox. …

Rumors and suspicions of British efforts to spread disease in the American troops were persistent throughout the war. …

It is evident that the British had few qualms about the tactic of infecting the general population as well as the enemy army with smallpox.

Ibid.

Smallpox Inoculation as a Bioweapon!

The word inoculation is used to describe both vaccination (initially against smallpox) and its forerunner and analogous procedure, variolation. Both procedures claim to protect one from naturally catching smallpox by infecting one with a certain amount of smallpox itself (in variolation), or cowpox (in vaccination).

The origin (or at least one of the origins) of smallpox variolation is in India. Here, smallpox variolation was derived, not from scientific experimentation, but from a superstition practiced by the common people in India dating to the sixth century. In 1721, a modified practice of inoculation would be introduced to England and America.

Like vaccination, smallpox variolation was deadly and actually spread disease. Even this pro-vaccine author admits the following (even if the number of smallpox-caused deaths due to the procedure are minimized):

The process was not without risk. Bloodborne diseases such as syphilis and scrofula (a form of tuberculosis) could be transferred along with the smallpox virus, and inoculated individuals were temporarily contagious and needed to be isolated to prevent infecting anyone who was not immune. In addition, about 2 percent of people who were variolated developed cases of smallpox that killed them.

Tish Davidson, Vaccines: History, Science, and Issues: The Story of a Drug (Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, 2017), 26.

In the 1800s, Arthur Wallaston Hutton, M. A., said that when the medical community wanted to replace smallpox inoculation with vaccination via cowpox, they essentially “confessed” to the failures of the former:

In the early years of the present century, when medical men, with almost complete unanimity, were seeking to replace the variolous inoculation by the vaccine inoculation, they confessed, or rather urged, that the earlier practice had destroyed more lives than it had saved.

Cited in James Martin Peebles, Vaccination a Curse and a Menace to Personal Liberty: With Statistics Showing Its Dangers and Criminality (Los Angeles, CA: Peebles Publishing Company, 1913), 18.

More about variolation here. Variolation was eventually criminalized, but by that time, vaccination was in use, so such criminalization was giving with one hand while taking with the other.

Now, it didn’t take long after England introduced inoculation that the “value” of this procedure for killing people was recognized. In the Revolutionary War, it appears the British likely had individuals inoculated (via variolation) so that they can infect and debilitate the American army:

Of course, many colonists believed the British army planned to intentionally introduce small pox to the Massachusetts population. One Boston resident noted as early as January, 1775 that “soldiers try all they can to spread the smallpox but I hope they will be disappointed.” Seth Pomeroy wrote in May 1775, “If it is In General Gages power I expect he will Send ye Small pox.” On December 3, 1775, Robert H. Harrison noted that “four [British] deserters have just arrived at headquarters giving an account that several persons are to be sent out of Boston . . that have lately been inoculated with the smallpox, with the design, probably, to spread infection to distress us as much as possible.”

Washington received reports in early December, 1775 that the British army was exploring germ warfare to weaken the American siege. However, the general suspected that any biological attack was not … designed to decimate the Massachusetts countryside but rather cripple the American army outside of Boston. On December 14, 1775, Washington complained to John Hancock, that “smallpox rages all over the town. Some of the military [British] as had it not before, are now under inoculation. This, I apprehend, is a weapon of defense they are using against us.”

Washington’s suspicions were corroborated when he received a report that “General Howe is going to send out a number of the Inhabitants. … A Sailor says that a Number of these coming out have been inoculated with the design of Spreading the Small pox through this Country and Camp.” Three days later, the general grimly reported to Congress “the information I received that the Enemy intended spreading the smallpox amongst us, I could not suppose them capable of; I now must give some credit to it, as it has made its appearance on several of those who last came out of Boston.”

Alexander R. Cain, “With the Design, Probably, To Spread Infection” – Rumors of Biological Warfare During the Siege of Boston, Historical Nerdery (June 2, 2017). Retrieved November 26, 2019, from http://historicalnerdery01.blogspot.com/2017/06/with-design-probably-to-spread.html

According to Stephen Carr Hampton,

This, along with the comings and goings of the war, led to the largest single smallpox outbreak in North America.

Stephen Carr Hampton, “The strange truth about smallpox and Native Americans,” Memories of the People (June 15, 2019). Retrieved November 11, 2019, from https://memoriesofthepeople.wordpress.com/2019/06/15/the-strange-truth-about-smallpox-and-native-americans/

Just a couple years later, the following was recommended by a British officer:

In 1777 a British officer, Robert Donkin, published in New York a little book entitled Military Collections and Remarks. In a footnote he offered a suggestion:

“Dip arrows in matter of smallpox, and twang them at the American rebels, in order to inoculate them; This would sooner disband these stubborn, ignorant, enthusiastic savages, than any other compulsive measures. Such is their dread and fear of that disorder!”

Harold B. Gill Jr., “Colonial Germ Warfare,” Colonial Williamsburg Journal, Spring 2004. Retrieved November 25, 2019, from https://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring04/warfare.cfm

And so we see that almost from the outset, smallpox variolation, or inoculation – vaccination in all but name – was recognized and likely deliberately used as a tool for killing large numbers of people.

Depopulation Literature prior to the Smallpox Vaccine

Prior to the use of the smallpox vaccine, there was an intellectual movement discussing “problems” with population growth:

Nicole Machiavelli, Giovanni Bottero, Walter Raleigh, Thomas Hobbes, William Petty, and Josiah Childe had been dealing with the problem of rapid population growth long time ago. Many philosophers, politicians, and economists had seen the rapid rise in population as the main cause of plague, hunger, and war. …

As Rothbard (2010) mentions in his biography, it was Giovanni Botero, an Italian machiavellist who pointed out the dangers of population growth. In his work On the Cause of the Greatness of Cities (1588), he outlined the same beliefs about survival, as interpreted in Thomas Malthus’s work An Eessay on the Principle of Population more than two centuries later. In addition, Petersen (1979) claims that Walter Raleigh in his Discourse of War in General (1650) points out to the fact that the growth of population induced the “daily wars which afflict the whole earth (p.173)”. Another personage who was involved with the issue of population growth was Thomas Hobbes. In his work, Leviathan, published in 1651, claims that “and when all the world is overcharged with inhabitants, then the last remedy of all is war; which provideth for every man, by victory, or death” (p. 255).

Zuzana Lukáčová, “On the Nature of Demographic Changes in Victorian Britain” (University of Presov, Slovakia), 28, 29. Retrieved October 26, 2019, from https://www.pulib.sk/web/kniznica/elpub/dokument/Strakova4/subor/Lukacova.pdf

Surely many of those with, or who influenced, political power in England were well aware of such literature at the time of vaccination. And we know that they would be, as discussed below, influenced by Thomas Malthus after the release of the smallpox vaccine.

England’s Depopulation Direction

Edward Jenner’s murderous smallpox vaccine was propagated when England, as discussed above, had already a history of attempting to use smallpox – even likely using smallpox variolation – as a bioweapon. And, deliberate or not, the timing of Jenner’s vaccine perfectly coincided with England’s depopulation direction.

(As previously noted, the difference between smallpox variolation and smallpox vaccination is that the former uses smallpox, while the latter uses cowpox, which was said to be a “safer” way to create “immunity” to smallpox.)

Smallpox vaccination was popularized in England after Edward Jenner published in 1798 “An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae; a Disease Discovered in some of the Western Counties of England, Particularly Gloucestershire, and Known by the Name of The Cow Pox.”

In England, in the same year that seeds were planted for vaccination (1798), seeds were planted for the depopulation philosophy of Thomas Robert Malthus with the publishing of his An Essay on the Principle of Population.

Malthus influenced public policy quickly, accelerating the 1800 Census Act. (See Miranda Thurston, Key Themes in Public Health ((New York, NY: Routeledge, 2014)), 29.)

According to Zuzana Lukáčová,

T.R. Malthus and his population theory had a great impact at the time. His work An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798) clearly denied the previous merchantilistic view that population growth is a positive phenomenon. In the book Malthus claims: “Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio. A slight acquaintance with numbers will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison of the second” (Malthus, 1798, p. 4). As Robinson (2002) explains, excessive fertility and rapid population growth became a serious social problem. Paradoxically, the attempt to try to reduce poverty made things worse. It may be assumed that Malthus’s views, in fact, changed the direction of ideological and intellectual thinking about the rise in the demographic curve. Most of the English majesty shared his views. The Malthus population principle and the conclusions drawn from it were accepted by leading educators, intellectuals, writers, representatives of the Anglican Church, and masters.

Zuzana Lukáčová, “On the Nature of Demographic Changes in Victorian Britain” (University of Presov, Slovakia), 28, 29. Retrieved October 26, 2019, from https://www.pulib.sk/web/kniznica/elpub/dokument/Strakova4/subor/Lukacova.pdf

Lukáčová goes on to describe Great Britain’s direction on population:

The procedure to prevent enormous population growth consisted of three basic measures. Firstly, the social rescue network for the poor was removed and the policy was dropped. In 1832, the Royal Commission of Enquiry on the Poor Laws was founded. The second point of the reform of the population reduction system was emigration. The emigrants were not only poor citizens, but also criminals. This was a new way to tackle crime in Britain as well as reduce the population numbers. People emigrated to British colonies such as New Zealand, Australia, Canada and South Africa. The third point of the reform was the expansion of anti-natalist ideas between intelligence and nobility. Through them and the contemporary writers, these ideas reached out to the ordinary people. Propaganda started. On the other hand, it should be noted that the Church in England was not clearly for a planned parenthood. The moral aspect was problematic. The church was, however, aware of the connection between excessive birth rates and poverty (Robinson, 2002).

Ibid.

In one of the versions of An Essay on the Principle of Population (not sure which), Malthus says:

It is an evident truth that, whatever may be the rate of increase in the means of subsistence, the increase in population must be limited by it, at least after the food has been divided into the smallest shares that will support life. All the children born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons. … To act consistently, therefore, we should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavouring to impede, the operation of nature in producing this mortality, and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use.

Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases: and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders. If by these and similar means the annual mortality were increased … we might probably every one of us marry at the age of puberty and yet few be absolutely starved.

To be clear, we are not saying Malthus was the only intellectual impetus behind England’s depopulation direction and policies. In any case, if those words by Malthus are disturbing, so it appears Great Britain was in the early 1800s. According to “Population Policy in Early Victorian England” by Warren C. Robinson:

This paper argues that the generally-held belief that there was no population policy in Great Britain during its fertility transition is incorrect. There were, in fact, clear and implicit and explicit policies in place by the early 19th Century which aimed at reducing population growth. These were negative, involving elimination of family allowances (the famous Poor Laws), and also positive, through subsidised emigration and “transportation” of felons to the colonies. Moreover, a changed “ideation” on the part of the nation’s political, intellectual and spiritual leaders, changed norms about marriage and child-bearing, raising sharply the perceived economic and psychic cost of children. Lacking acceptable means to control pregnancies, many working class women resorted to abortion, infanticide and child abandonment to reduce their family size. The policy’s actual impact on overall fertility is uncertain but it did constitute a deliberate attempt by society to affect demographic behaviour and outcomes.

Warren C. Robinson, “Population Policy in Early Victorian England,” European Journal of Population, Vol. 18, No. 2 (preview) (June 2002), pp. 153-173. Retrieved October 26, 2019, from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1015511805628

Indeed, regarding abortion/infanticide itself, whatever laws may have been in place officially prohibiting it, such murder saw an increase in nineteenth-century Britain. In “Infanticide and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century Britain,” R. Sauer writes:

A survey of contemporary literature was undertaken to help delineate nineteenth-century British behaviour and attitudes regarding infanticide and abortion. Although always seen as a sizeable problem, writers are almost universally agreed that infanticide was increasing at mid-century, with many believing the increase to arise from changes of government policy regarding illegitimacy. At peak, the number of all forms of infanticide, ranging from subtle neglect to obvious physical abuse, certainly ran into hundreds and very probably to well over a thousand annually. While most viewed it to be a major offence, infanticide was not regarded as equal to the murder of an adult, in part because of the lesser value given to infants and in part because of the circumstances under which many women were seen to commit the act. Abortion was always believed to be more numerous than infanticide but much less attention was paid to it in the popular and medical press until late in the century, when it was seen to have increased considerably; as technological advances made abortion safer and less painful, abortion largely eliminated the need for infanticide to rid oneself of desperately unwanted children.

R. Sauer, “Infanticide and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century Britain,” Population Studies, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Mar., 1978), 81-93. Retrieved December 8, 2019, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2173842?seq=1

One should see that such cheapening of life in nineteenth-century Britain makes vaccination as a tool of depopulation very plausible. Why would a nation so concerned with overpopulation and so unconcerned with human life be so adamant about vaccination for the purpose of saving lives?

More Dangerous Vaccines for the Poor than the Rich

Is it possible that the more dangerous vaccines were insidiously given to the poor in the 1800s? There are some interesting statements in J. J. Garth Wilkinson, Compulsory Vaccination: Its Wickedness to the Poor, written in 1873. Wilkinson says the following about arm-to-arm vaccination in England:

The transmission of the Vaccine poison through system after system gathers up the taints of the bodies it comes from, until a sheaf of impurity is in the arms of the medical harvesters, very different from the disease of the cow from which, perhaps, the first poison originated. The modern Communists of evil do a deadlier work than Jenner could effect in his day. For the personal pollution of three more generations is on the points of their lancets.

J. J. Garth Wilkinson, Compulsory Vaccination: Its Wickedness to the Poor (London: F. Pitman, 1873), 4.

This method of vaccinating one with the “taints” of countless other people, of course, maximized the danger of spreading diseases via vaccination, such as the horrible disease of syphilis. However, according to Wilkinson, there were those in the upper class who apparently realized the danger of vaccinating with the taints of multiple people and opted to only vaccinate from one other person:

It may be added that the legal necessity to vaccinate all the poor involves, perforce, that they be driven, like sheep, into the Vaccination-pens, and blood-poisoned higglety-pigglety, with no power of question or appeal. They cannot, as Her Majesty did, have a select baby for their babies, but are all imbrued in each other’s taints, and carry them into their miserable homes to be developed to the utmost. Vaccination amuses and abuses the rich; it is palpable obscene murder to the poor.

Ibid., 5.

Not that any vaccine is safe, but if what Wilkinson says is true, one has to ask why the ruling class would allow the poor to endure such a comparatively dangerous procedure. Indifference? Or, a more insidious reason?

Moreover, consider the following as applied to New Zealand, which could be a window into the treatment of the poor in other vaccinating countries. In the publication Parliamentary Debates (June 20-July 23, 1889), a one Mr. Saunders is recorded as saying this about dangerous arm-to-arm vaccination – mandatory for the poor, but not for the rich:

It will be seen that, our vaccine matter having made some of these loathsome diseases more common than before, vaccination becomes more dangerous every day. That is what is being found in England. In this colony the question is in its simplest form. … If we continue this careless vaccination we shall inflict a constant injury on our children, and endanger and lessen the health of the community at large by the introduction of diseases to an extent of which you know nothing. Of late years it has occupied the attention of the English community to learn why such diseases as cancer have increased so enormously. I think there is a Commission now sitting to inquire into the circumstances of the rapid increase of cancer. There can be no more likely means of introducing cancer than by communicating the products of the blood from arm to arm from children who may have the germs of the disease. And let me say here that the healthy appearance of the child is no security that it does not carry in it a constitutional tendency to disease which may be communicated to all children vaccinated from its arm. There is another matter to be considered by those who have charge of the interests of the community at large and who wish to do justice to all, and that is, that this law bears heavily on the poor, who have no help against getting their children vaccinated with any stuff that the Public Vaccinator may choose to use. The rich can avoid it. At the very time I was making inquiries about these dreadful cases in Christchurch I found that there were any number of excuses for the children of the rich not being vaccinated. Any one who has the luxury of a family doctor can get a certificate that the child is not in a fit state for vaccination, or that the Vaccinator has not got pure lymph. That being the case, the fact remains that the poor are compelled to submit to this dangerous law. The doctor’s own children and those of the richer part of the community are not submitted to anything of the sort, and the vaccination of their children is postponed until a more convenient season, when it can be done with less risk to themselves than it is to the community at large. This should form a very serious consideration to this House, and induce it to take the matter into careful consideration, and I hope it will induce the Government to consider whether they cannot make a very much better provision for the prevention of disease in this country, and take care, in doing so, that their provision is of such a nature as not to add to the disease of the country through the means they adopt to avoid it.

New Zealand, “Parliamentary Debates: Third Session of the Tenth Parliament: Legislative Council and House of Representatives,” vol. 64, June 20-July 23, 1889 (Wellington: G. Didsbury, 1889), 176.

Deadly Vaccines in the English Colonies

We just discussed the matter of more dangerous vaccines for the poor than for the rich within England. There is also the matter of more dangerous vaccines in English colonies.

Just as arm-to-arm vaccination was notorious for spreading syphilis in England, it was notorious for spreading leprosy in certain other countries. This can be read about in William Tebb’s thorough book published in 1893, The Recrudescence of Leprosy and Its Causation: A Popular Treatise. When one reads this, why, one must ask, did British rulers allow leprosy to spread via vaccination? Indifference – or depopulation?

In a testimony before the Select Vaccination Parliamentary Committee in 1871, a one Dr. Bakewell says the following:

There is a very strong opinion prevalent in Trinidad, and in the West Indies generally, that leprosy has been introduced into the system by vaccination; and I may say that, as Vaccinator-General of Trinidad, I found that all the medical men, when they had occasion to vaccinate either their own children or those of patients in whom they were specially interested, applied to me for English lymph; and that was so marked that in one instance a man, who had never spoken to me before, wrote me quite a friendly letter, in order to get lymph from England when he had to vaccinate his own child. It is quite evident that the only reason for wanting lymph from England must be that they consider it free from contaminating the system by leprosy; because, of course, there is an equal chance, and probably a greater chance in England, of the lymph being contaminated by syphilis.

William Tebb, The Recrudescence of Leprosy and Its Causation: A Popular Treatise (London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1893), 134, 135.

And so, as bad as English lymph was, the medical men deemed it safer than material used for vaccination in the West Indies, which could cause leprosy.

Note also the following quote, which confirms the common knowledge that material used for vaccination in the West Indies was dangerous. It also discusses medical officers regularly complaining to the government for “calf lymph” – as well as the “careless yet vigorous manner” that vaccine laws are imposed on the people:

Mr. Alexander Henry, Vice-Chairman of the Council of the British and West Indian Alliance, and formerly editor of the St. Kitts Gazette, who has resided some years in the West Indies, and has devoted much attention to the spread and causation of leprosy, writing 12th June, 1890, says:—”A medical officer of health cautiously admitted to me that leprosy was contracted by means of careless vaccination. Now, careless vaccination means vaccination from arm to arm, which is almost universal in these islands. I do not believe there is a doctor of any standing in the West Indies who would deny that leprosy can be inoculated. It is admitted that owing to the slow incubation of the disease it is difficult to distinguish a leper; and when you take into account that medical officers are constantly complaining to the Government ‘that they cannot get a supply of calf-lymph,’ and add to this the indiscriminate and careless yet vigorous manner in which they carry out the vaccination laws upon an ignorant and simple people, who have no means of asserting themselves, I think we may safely conclude there is a high probability that leprosy is spread by vaccination.”

Ibid., 151.

Citizens of India Believe Vaccination used for Depopulation in 1800s

In the 1800s, some in India suspected that vaccination was used to deliberately kill them.

For instance, in the March 1890 edition of the Indian Medical Gazette in an article titled “Dr. K.C. Bose on Small-pox in Calcutta,” the author, a pro-vaccine doctor, says that certain Indians believed vaccination was used to “thin the number of its poor subjects”:

The affection for their children has driven them to regard vaccination as an operation intended by government to thin the number of its poor subjects. This dread, coupled with their religious scruples, have made them obstinately firm and resolute, and sound arguments are regarded as a worthless dodge to play on their minds to kill their own children.

The Indian Medical Gazette, “Dr. K. C. Bose on Small-pox in Calcutta.” (March 1890), 82. Accessible at https://europepmc.org/backend/ptpmcrender.fcgi?accid=PMC5149194&blobtype=pdf

The author blames the actions of rogue, unsanctioned vaccinators for this distrust of vaccination. He may have sincerely believed this, but this may or may not be true. We are constantly told lies to protect vaccination from reproach. There is always an excuse. And it is not as if official, sanctioned smallpox vaccinators didn’t cause mass death themselves. Interestingly, earlier in the article the doctor does admit that vaccination can be dangerous:

I cannot pass on to consider another point without saying a few words the dangers sometimes attending the process of vaccination. …

Ibid.

J.N. Hays, in The Burdens of Disease, also comments on residents of India viewing vaccination as a tool of depopulation:

[A]s early as 1898 rumors circulated through Calcutta that Haffkine’s vaccine was in fact a poison prepared by the government …

J.N. Hays, The Burdens of Disease: Epidemics and Human Response in Western History (Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2003), 199.

The standard, sanctioned practice of arm-to-arm vaccination unleashed a reign of terror in India. One might think that the British authorities were at war with their Indian subjects. Natives of India had good cause to fear vaccination:

The laws enforcing vaccination in British India, which are unparalleled for their severity, were passed without the consent and against the wishes of the people, whose objection to vaccination arises from a knowledge often gained by sad and bitter experience. They know that the fearful spread of leprosy in India and other countries is coincident with and, as they believe, due to the extension of vaccination, and they prefer to face the severities of the law, with its ruinous judicial penalties, or even to risk the dangers of the jungle, where they are sometimes compelled to seek refuge for their little ones, to the risks of this hideous and destructive scourge. That leprosy, confessed to be incurable, is inoculated by vaccination (a fact once vehemently denied) is now reluctantly admitted by the leading dermatologists of all countries, and by the most experienced chiefs of the leper asylums and public health departments in the West Indies, in South America, South Africa, and in the Sandwich Islands.

William Tebb, The Recrudescence of Leprosy and Its Causation: A Popular Treatise (London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1893), 362.

Researcher Tom Swanky discusses the use of smallpox inoculation to depopulate Indians in Canada

Decimating Canadian Indians

Was vaccination a tool of genocide against Indians in the Americas in the 1800s? This appears to be the case in at least Canadia. Kevin D. Annett, an educator who has worked with aboriginals in Canada, wrote in 2009 the following for the Republic of Lakotah website:

Last week, many of the aboriginal people in the remote west coast village of Ahousaht were innoculated with the tamiflu vaccine. Today, over a hundred of them are sick, and the sickness is spreading.

In the same week, body bags were sent to similarly remote native reserves in northern Manitoba that have also received the tamiflu vaccine.

On the face of things, it appears that flu vaccinations are causing a sickness that is being deliberately aimed at aboriginal people across Canada, and this sickness will be fatal: a fact acknowledged by the Canadian government by their “routine” sending of body bags to these Indian villages.

Before you express your shock and denial at the idea that people are being racially targeted and killed, remember that murdering Indians with vaccinations is not a new or abnormal thing in Canada. Indeed, it’s how we Europeans “won the land”, and it’s one of the ways we keep it.

In 1862, Anglican church missionaries Rev. John Sheepshanks and Robert Brown inoculated interior Salish Indians in B.C. with a live smallpox virus that wiped out entire native communities within a month, just prior to the settlement of this native land by gold prospectors associated with these missionaries and government officials. …

In 1969, native children who escaped from the Nanaimo Indian Hospital on Vancouver Island described being inoculated with shots that caused many of them to die “with bloated up bodies and scabs all over”, to quote one survivor.

Knowing this history, it’s not surprising when Indians on isolated Canadian reserves start sickening and dying en masse from sudden illnesses, after receiving flu shots. After all, it’s still the law in Canada, under the apartheid Indian Act, that no on-reserve Indian can refuse medical treatments or experimentation. So it’s small wonder that these reserves are the places being targeted first to be injected with untested, unsafe and potentially lethal flu vaccines.

Kevin D. Annett, “The Mask Slips, for Those with Eyes to See: Preparing for the Real Pandemic,” Republic of Lakotah (September 19, 2009). Retrieved December 13, 2019, from http://www.republicoflakotah.com/2009/the-mask-slips-for-those-with-eyes-to-see-preparing-for-the-real-pandemic/

And so if what Annett says is correct, at least as early as 1862, vaccination was used to depopulate the Indians. (I will reserve judgment on the motives of the involvement of Christians in these examples, as they may have had good intentions; but that doesn’t mean that there weren’t those who influenced their actions who had bad intentions.)

Annett could be drawing to some degree on the work of Tom Swanky (a pro-vaxxer, by the way), who has written much about the use of smallpox inoculation as a means of genocide against Indians in earlier Canadian history.

Swanky authored the book “The True Story of Canada’s ‘War’ of Extermination on the Pacific.” In an interview he states the following:

During the regime change period between the time when the ingineous nations were sovereign in what’s now British Columbia — and when Canada became sovereign — the settlers deliberately spread smallpox as the primary means for the de facto imposition of British institutions. …

Smallpox was also used to disposses them of land and resources, and it’s used to depopulate the area so that it can be repopulated with Europeon settlers. …

Now the alleged smallpox genocide took place in 1862 and 1863 and native death toll is about 100,000 from what I can tell from eye witness accounts and so on. Now the spectacular thing is that these 100,000 people all died in about nine or ten months. …

It seems to me that this event that took place in 1862 … is the greatest human tragedy that ever took place on Canadian soil. … There’s nothing else that compares to it … in terms of the death toll. … Most natives off the coast, for example, they died in inoculation epidemics….

When they do these inoculation epidemics … one of the ways is to send people who have been inoculated to visit villages and circulate in the villages. … the other way to do it is with what I call selective inoculation programs. You go to a village and you say, “Well, I’m here, I’m going to help you out,” and then you inoculate 10 people or 15 people out of a village of 200. Those people then in ten days they come down with smallpox and they spread it to the remaining 200 people.

Gorilla Radio host Chris Cook interviews author Tom Swanky about his book, “The True Story of Canada’s ‘War’ of Extermination on the Pacific”. Aired August 27, 2012. Retrieved December 14, 2019, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd37MwL2bAk&list=PLNdeEkS3tHiJrQ7XVMHbONcvelrHZlDv3&index=10

In the interview Swanky holds that Indians were murdered by the form of inoculation called smallpox variolation instead of smallpox vaccination. In his reasoning he shows that he is deceived about the danger of smallpox vaccination, believing that it cannot increase the incidents of smallpox. Vaccination was actually notorious for spreading smallpox — consider, for example, the epidemic in the Philippines, and the town of Leicester, England, where smallpox declined after vaccination was abandoned. Swanky also wrongly considers smallpox variolation safe and effective for the recipient – although rightfully holds that one inoculated in this way can spread the disease to someone else.

It is for the reason that Swanky wrongly presumes that smallpox cannot spread as a result of vaccination that he holds that the Indians must have been given smallpox variolation instead. Granted, either scenario is possible; both are capable of spreading smallpox. In either case, since variolation is vaccination in all but name, if Swanky is correct about the genocide (I believe he is), vaccination in one form or another is to blame.

Very interestingly, the Indians rose up to defend themselves from further smallpox outbreaks by going to war. Drawing on archival material titled “The Tragedy of British Columbia: Genocide at its Founding,” Swanky discusses

how the largest war ever conducted by Indians against Europeans in western Canada, besides the Riel Rebellion – the Chilcotin War of 1862-68 – was in reality an attempt by the Chilcotin (Tsilhqot’in) natives to halt the men who were spreading smallpox among their people.

Kevin D. Annett, Hidden no Longer: Genocide in Canada, Past and Present (The International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State and the Friends and Relatives of the Disappeared, 2010), 271.

Raymond Obomsawin, who was a founding Chairman of the NIB/AFN‟s National Commission Inquiry on Indian Health (Ottawa, Ontario) and Executive Director of the California Rural Indian Health Board (Ukiah Programme), writes this about the motives for vaccinating Canadian Indians around 1934 – he says it was more about the interests of the general population:

In 1934, the per capita cost for DIA medical services was $9.60 per on reserve Aboriginal, in contrast with $31.00 for other Canadians. Much of the “health care” consisted of crash programs to control widespread tuberculosis, and for smallpox vaccination campaigns. These measures were introduced more with a view to protecting the general population than for the benefit of the Aboriginal people.

Raymond Obomsawin, Historical and Scientific Perspectives on the Health of Canada’s First Peoples (March, 2007). Retrieved December 13, 2019, from https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/wp-content/uploads/Historic-Scientific-Perspectives-Indigenous-Peoples-Health-Obomsawin.pdf

What about in the United States – was there an agenda in earlier history to exterminate Indians with vaccines? This is something I want to examine more in the future. The following statements from Obomsawin are troubling, and could indicate a depopulation agenda against the Indians that has been in place for some time:

[I]n late 1991 my sister Elizabeth Obomsawin (who is an RN) while visiting the Cherokee Indian Hospital in western North Carolina, interviewed a Native American U.S. Indian Health Service employee who had served in five or six different Native American hospitals throughout the United States. A key question that she posed to him was what he considered to be the most serious health problem facing Native American people in the country. Expecting to hear that it was diabetes or alcohol dependency, she was taken aback when he explained that it was vaccine damage to infants and children. He went on to enumerate the numerous cases of neurological and other forms of damage that he had seen in every one of the Indian hospitals that he had served in over a period of many years.

Obomsawin, Historical and Scientific Perspectives on the Health of Canada’s First Peoples, 63.

1800s: Blacks view vaccination as a tool of genocide

Throughout vaccine history, blacks have been maligned as “spreaders” and have especially been a target of vaccine tyranny. For a thorough treatment on this, see our post here.

The 1872 edition of the Journal of the Gynaecological Society of Boston discusses an event that led to blacks believing vaccination was a tool of depopulation.

In one city over nine thousand negroes had been inoculated with three hundred and fifty of these crusts [of retro-vaccination]. Thousands of very sore arms resulted, but such utter failure of protection from variola, that the poor negroes, who had at first been most anxious, for what they were assured was a protection from their deadliest plague, became fully convinced that this wholesale, so called, blessing, was really part of a deep láid plan to get rid of the “negro question,” by quietly getting rid of the negroes through means of variolous inoculation.

The Journal of the Gynaecological Society of Boston, Volume 6, January, 1872, No. 1, 427,428.

One can infer that many blacks got sick and probably died from the vaccine. First, we are told that there was “utter failure of protection.” Smallpox vaccination was notorious for spreading smallpox. The vaccine apparently did so among their population. And/or second, the vaccine was simply deadly. Why would the black population described here see it as a means of genocide unless this was the case?

Third, prior to the statement above the author himself states that the results of retro-vaccination “were, when not directly and often seriously injurious, invariably negative” (Ibid., 427).

The author claims that “retro-vaccination” was used instead of the standard smallpox vaccination. This may or may not be true. Vaccine propagandists lie so often (or in ignorance repeat lies) to protect vaccination from reproach that it’s hard to trust anything they say. In any case, it makes no difference: blacks would have been harmed with either method.

The author claims that the distrust blacks had for vaccination would change with the use of the standard smallpox vaccine. This may or may not have happened with the particular group he is referring to, but as we shall see, resistance to vaccine amongst blacks in general would be ongoing. Apparently, blacks, with good reason, saw vaccination as a tool to decimate their population (as Planned Parenthood would actually be).

Early 1900s: George Bernard Shaw calls vaccination “attempted murder”

Due to the obviously unsanitary and dangerous nature of vaccination, the political activist/polemicist George Bernard Shaw referred to it in 1906 as “attempted murder”.

And thus one must ask: if Shaw could think this about vaccination — which was so obviously dangerous to those who gave it careful consideration — were there men in power who thought the same and used vaccination with malevolent intent?

Here is Shaw’s quote in full:

“For years past the strain of countenancing such a proceeding, so gross, reckless, dirty, and dangerous as vaccination from the calf, has been growing unbearable to bacteriological experts. . . . Nothing but the natural ignorance of the public, countenanced by the inoculated erroneousness of the ordinary general medical practitioners, makes such a barbarism as vaccination possible. . . Recent developments have shown that an inoculation made in the usual general practitioner’s light-hearted way, without previous highly skilled examination of the state of the patient’s blood, is just as likely to be a simple manslaughter as a cure or preventive. But vaccination is nothing short of attempted murder. A skilled bacteriologist would just as soon think of cutting his child’s arm and rubbing the contents of the dustpan into the wound, as vaccinating it in the same official way. The results would be exactly the same.”

George Bernard Shaw, in a Letter to the Secretary of the National Anti-Vaccination League, March, 1906. Cited in Bernhard J. Stern, Should We be Vaccinated?: A Survey of the Controversy in Its Historical and Scientific Aspects (NY: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1927), 81, 82.

Vaccination Called “a consciously directed sinister activity” in 1935

An author of a book in 1935 may also have suspected the use of vaccines for depopulation. The following is quoted in St. Germain’s Volume 2 (p. 151):

The idea that serums made from animals can produce health or protect against disease by injecting it into a clean child’s body is a consciously directed sinister activity. It breaks down health and resistance in the race and destroys the ideals of mankind. The medical profession has been made a cat’s paw for this destruction under the guise of science. Humans continue to use the marvelous mental body to deteriorate the physical body with more and more destruction.

Vaxxter, “Vaccines and Pharmakia: An Abomination” (March 4, 2019). Retrieved November 14, 2019, from https://vaxxter.com/vaccines-and-pharmakia-an-abomination/

Note that the author calls it a “consciously directed sinister activity.” So it would seem to mean one of two things: the deliberate destruction of health to profit the medical industry – or to reduce the population.

Could those behind Pro-vaccine Policies plead Ignorance?

Sure, there has always been, and there always will be, certain people behind pro-vaccine policy who are well-meaning; they have a zeal without knowledge. But, with the rapidly mounting evidence of the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccination, it’s hard to think that the entire vaccine establishment would be in ignorance – even in the earlier days of vaccination.

In 1895, C. Wardell Amerige writes:

Of all professional dogmas of the past or present, none have wrought greater physical injury to the human race than the theory and practice of vaccination. This is a broad statement but it is amply proven by the dire experiences of the past. …

Ignorance of the fundamental principles of health, may be the result of a lack of mental capacity rather than limited reading, but no advocate of vaccination has the moral right to plead ignorance of those historic facts which have been abundant, from the days of Jenner’s personal experiences, to the present time. These facts, though often suppressed by pro-vaccinators, have always been accessible to honest investigators.

C. Wardell Amerige, Vaccination a Curse (1895), 3, 4.

And so despite evidence about the futility and dangers of smallpox vaccination, there has been those determined to prey on the helpless populations with this cruel, blood poisoning rite. William Tebb writes in 1893:

Notwithstanding the proofs laid before the Royal Commission on Vaccination regarding the futility of the practice as a prophylactic against small-pox, its injurious consequences in spreading inoculable diseases, and the cruelty and injustice attending its enforcement, there are not wanting those who are continually plotting to extend the system, by means of coercive legislation, amongst populations who are known to entertain a widespread repugnance to vaccination, but who are without representative institutions.

William Tebb, The Recrudescence of Leprosy and Its Causation: A Popular Treatise (London: Swan Sonnenschein & Co., 1893), 355.

Only two possible motives for this comes to mind: a greedy desire to get rich from vaccination, or depopulation.

At Least Due to Greed

The ongoing lies, data manipulation, and excusing of vaccine-caused deaths throughout vaccine history implies that at the very least, greed for money was the motivating factor behind vaccine-caused genocide in the earlier days of vaccination. In Vaccination a Curse (1895), C. Wardell Amerige writes:

That they have deliberately falsified the records is well known, but their motive for so doing may not be as thoroughly understood by the public as it should be.

Dr. Maclean, a well known medical authority of the early part of the present century, therefore contemporary with Jenner has said: “It will be thought incumbent on the vaccinators to come forward and disprove the numerous facts decisive against vaccination stated on unimpeachable authority, or make the amend honorable by a manly recantation. But experience forbids us to expect any such fair and magnanimous proceeding, and we may be assured that, under no circumstances, will they abandon so lucrative a practice, until the practice abandons them.”

Dr. Gunn, says: “There is a vaccination ring in England, receiving millions of the public money. It is in their interest to favor the practice at all hazards and to falsify statistics in order to conceal its failure and its evils. There are also armies of public vaccinators in every large city all over Europe, who are supported from the public treasury, and every practitioner who does not oppose the practice, derives a considerable income from its continuance.”

According to the “Herald of Health,” “Ten millions of dollars are paid to physicians in England, annually, which would not be paid, if the law did not enforce vaccination.”

These remarks are equally applicable to our own country. The capital invested in the manufacture of vaccine virus (poison) would become a complete loss as soon as the diabolical nature of the business is fully exposed. We have also here, as well as in Europe, an army of public and private vaccinators whose profits from this blood-contaminating process may be estimated to be fully equal to that paid in England, and our political experience would seem to indicate that a much smaller sum than ten million would tempt the vicious and unscrupulous, when they know that the law will shield them from all personal responsibility.

C. Wardell Amerige, Vaccination a Curse (1895), 28

Conclusion

Genocide and depopulation has occurred throughout the history of mankind. It is a sad characteristic of human nature. By the time vaccination was introduced in England, depopulation literature and paranoia began to influence society.

Moreover, the use of biowarfare had already been used by nations throughout centuries, and England itself recognized and likely used smallpox as a bioweapon, probably including smallpox variolation – an inoculation procedure equivalent to inoculation by vaccination. And so almost from the outset, inoculation was conceived of as a weapon of mass killing – and by the very country that would popularize vaccination.

(We all recognize the use of unleashing biological poisons against people in warfare as a brutally efficient means of killing people; we call it biological warfare. And yet, when biological poisons are administered via vaccination, we all lose our senses; biological warfare somehow becomes biological salvation! Human eradication is concealed under the guise of “disease eradication.”)

In England, vaccination was especially dangerous to the poor, and English colonies suffered immensely under vaccination. And so when one looks at the constant testimonies to vaccine-caused deaths, one is warranted in at least suspecting that there was an ongoing depopulation/genocidal motive (by at least some) in even early vaccine history.

Indeed, an emotionally removed observer uninfluenced by pro vaccine propaganda who discovers the widespread and ongoing death and disease caused by vaccination in any given country would think that its government is at war with its people.

It is interesting that England promoted depopulation on the one hand, and on the other, at least officially, vaccinations for the purpose of saving lives. But why would England be so concerned with saving lives, given its concern for depopulation, and especially given the cheapening of life in England via abortion and infanticide? Would it not have been more consistent if England was really promoting vaccinations for the purpose of fulfilling a depopulation agenda?

Granted, there are many variables, such as how far they were willing to go at that time to depopulate; and of course, we must be charitable and note that even if there were some with bad intentions with vaccination, it doesn’t mean that there weren’t those who honestly believed that vaccines saved lives. Moreover, England was to some degree or another positively influenced by Christianity.

Nevertheless, I think there is enough there to seriously consider that an ongoing depopulation agenda existed in the earlier days of vaccination – at least to one degree or another, by one person or another. When and shortly after vaccination was introduced, there were conditions that would not make it far fetched (e.g., depopulation literature and policies); and the obviously ongoing mass deaths that occurred via vaccination is the result we would expect if depopulation was the goal.

Moreover, we have two particular examples where vaccination (or variolation, vaccination in all but name) appears to have been attempted to deliberately kill people: by the British against the Americans in the War of Independence, and by Canadian settlers against Indians in 1862 and 1863, which resulted in genocide and provoked war.

In any case, I hope in time others will explore this topic even deeper and shed more light on the matter.

Beyond this, given the mass slaughter caused by vaccination throughout vaccine history, we can at least say that vaccination has always been part of Satan’s depopulation agenda. Vaccination, being based on lies and murder, is obviously a tool of Satan.

Vaccination is analogous to the temptation from the beginning – a lie promising life by assimilating something into the body that results in death. In the Garden of Eden, it was ingestion of the forbidden fruit; in our day, it is injection of toxins. Vaccination, in short, is death with the promise of life.

But regardless of who is using vaccination for genocide and depopulation, those of us who support life must continually work to expose and end this abominable practice once and for all.

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. (Ephesians 5:11)

If you find this site helpful, please consider supporting our work.

Tagged Deception, History, Mass Murder