Channel Nine’s assault on vaccine sceptics decoded

This text will be replaced

Broadcast of June 20, 2011. Part 1 of 1 » Download mp3: click here

20 June 2011 | Permalink | comments: 3

Share |

Categories: [ Media Lies, Vaccination, Vera Scheibner ]

Bronwyn Hancock, Vera Scheibner, and Ellen Fanning
Ellen Fanning (right) takes on Bronwyn Hancock (left) and Dr. Vera Scheibner (centre).

On 10th June 2011 Channel 9 aired a "60 Minutes" episode which contained a crude piece of propaganda aimed at undermining the credibilty of vaccine sceptics.

The program featured Bronwyn Hancock - a regular guest on TNRA, and Dr. Viera Scheibner, a leading researcher in the anti-vaccination field who has been writing and giving lectures on the subject matter of vaccines and vaccinations since her retirement from the Department of Mineral Resources, New South Wales, Australia in 1987.

Hosted by Ellen Fanning and titled "Getting the Point", the program purported to be an in-depth look at the anti-vaccine movement, but was really nothing more than a crudely crafted character assassination, serving Big Pharma's blatantly fascist agenda of crushing all dissent from mainstream medical practice, and any alternative approaches to health.

In tonight's show I am joined by Bronwyn Hancock who deconstructs, point by point, the lies promulgated by Channel 9 and 60 Minutes.

Please enjoy!

NOTE: We present the following quote in support of Bronwyn's observations about the emergence of polio in the 20th century: "Major polio epidemics were unknown before the 20th century; localized paralytic polio epidemics began to appear in Europe and the United States around 1900" - wikipedia.

Related Links

Comments

I can’t seem to get Truth News on itunes anymore. Am I still able to do this?

Thanks. I have been missing your show.

Delena

By Delena Gaffney on 2011 06 21 - 10:28:12

Delena, the itunes feed is there, you just have to put in the new address. Visit this page for more info: http://www.truthnews.com.au/web/feeds

By Hereward Fenton on 2011 06 21 - 11:40:20

Great show,love your website improvements, keep it up as we need people like you to put the truth in front of as many people as possible.
Like your Alex Jones’ too)-:

By Will Hof on 2011 06 21 - 17:40:52

In order to leave a comment you may need to register and sign in.

Recent Comments

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Leonard Clampett,

the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.

What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?

Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?

By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?

By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.

So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.

1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?

2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?

3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?

If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.

Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.

By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Josh Anonymous,

You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.

By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.