What is the CDC whistleblower’s strategy now?
by Jon Rappoport
September 22, 2014
Congressional hearing. That’s what CDC whistleblower William Thompson wants or is willing to deal with. That’s what his closest, or formerly closest, confidantes are looking for. An explosive Congressional hearing.
Congressman Bill Posey has many (thousands?) of pages of vaccine documents Thompson has sent him. Posey’s (qualified?) staff are going through them now.
Posey doesn’t, however, have a great deal of clout in the House. Can he gain support for a hearing?
If it occurs, it could take place after the first of the year. Earlier, say November, would be a bad time for garnering much press attention.
I would be happy to write the conclusions of a hearing right now:
On the subject of the 2004 MMR-vaccine study, about which co-author Thompson has admitted fraud: “Reasonable scientists can agree and disagree on research methods. The other co-authors of the 2004 study disagree with Dr. Thompson’s views. They believe the data were analyzed fairly. The omitted data lacked usefulness and reliability, for purposes of the study.”
On the general subject of vaccines causing autism: “The studies have already been done. Despite some misguided objections, the conclusion is clear. There is no vaccine-autism connection.”
End of hearing.
For that reason, waiting and hoping and planning for a day in the sun is an ineffective strategy.
Unless…whistleblower Thompson is ready to take the stand and assert, with great conviction, that a whole array of fraud at the CDC exists, with respect to vaccine research. He’ll have to name names and make very serious accusations and present himself as a highly knowledgeable insider. No wishy-washy nonsense. No hedging his bets. No remote “balanced” posturing of the typical scientist.
So far, I see no signs that Thompson is prepared to put the CDC, where he still works, through the ringer.
The one possible advantage of a hearing? Many revealing documents can be entered into the record, and attorneys can draw on them to file a class-action suit, on behalf of parents of autistic, vaccine-damaged children, against the CDC.
However, as I’ve written before, why wait? Why don’t Brian Hooker, Congressman Posey, Andrew Wakefield, and possibly others dump all their Thompson documents online now?
If those docs are truly explosive, put them out there.
In case you haven’t noticed, the whole whistleblower story is losing momentum. Forget the mainstream media blackout, which continues. Even alternative news sites are moving on. And why shouldn’t they? They have nothing new to report.
Do you really think a hearing is going to spur mainstream news networks to characterize “the Thompson affair” as a major scandal?
Closer to home, Thompson’s strategy is opaque. He’s retained the services of a well-known whistleblower lawyer, Rick Morgan. Morgan specializes in qui tam filings.
Qui tam is a process by which an employee of a government contractor exposes misdeeds of his own company, thereby saving the government money that has been wasted. The employee can gain 15-30% of the assessed damages.
But the law is cloudy when the qui tam whistleblower is an employee of the government, not a company:
“A much maligned and controversial group are former and current federal employees who file qui tam actions. The Act, as amended in 1986, does not exclude federal employees from being a relator [quit tam filer]. However, when a federal employee does file a qui tam action, it results in considerable controversy and numerous court challenges as to whether the employee, due to his or her responsibilities, are obligated to disclose the fraud. The courts have been mixed on whether a federal employee has standing under The Act, but, generally, rule against the relator, and the Justice Department remains hostile toward this type of relator. Concerns have been raised as to whether a federal employee filing an action presents a type of conflict of interest.” (The Bauman and Rasor Group, a whistleblower advocacy and assistance organization)
Perhaps Thompson’s lawyer has put together an innovative strategy for a qui tam filing, and is using the threat of such action as a barrier against the CDC punishing his client.
The lawyer isn’t talking and neither is Thompson.
As I’ve detailed in past articles, it appears that Thompson has enough insider knowledge to send a highly destructive torpedo into the center of the CDC.
He and the CDC are playing nice with each other. On the surface.
However, the entire vaccine establishment, including the CDC, understands that Thompson represents a distinct threat. From their point of view, he has to be neutralized, discredited, or eliminated.
Publicly, Thompson is assuring one and all that he has no intention of attacking the hand that feeds him. So what kind of witness would he make in front of a Congressional hearing?
Would he echo remarks he made on phone calls—which, he alleges, were recorded without his knowledge or permission—during which he launched a passionate attack on vaccines containing mercury? Or would he retreat to his public position—reasonable scientists can agree and disagree, questions about vaccines remain to be explored, and one subset of data from one study was wrongly omitted.
Which Thompson would show up in front of a Congressional committee?
I’m not betting on the “phone-call” Thompson.
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com