The life and premature death of notorious vaccine shill Jane Hansen, and the 'turbo cancer' phenomenon.
As in the UK and US, one of the longstanding core missions of Australian media outlets is to fabricate moral outrage, incite division, and encourage citizens to hate each other based on their race, religion and political/personal beliefs.
And no-one does this better than the country’s multitude of Murdoch/News Corp outlets.
Murdoch publications are the epitome of the “tabloid” style of ‘journalism’, which Alison Greig aptly describes as “a combination of news stories and sensationalism that provides easy reading, little considered argument and a guarantee of supporting a particularly parochial and limited view of humanity and society.”
A 2011 Economist article credited Murdoch with having "invented the modern tabloid newspaper - a stew of sexual titillation, moral outrage and political aggression."
The Aggressive Murdoch Hate Campaign Against ‘Anti-Vaxxers’
A staunch commitment to appealing to the lowest common denominator and being divisive assholes are not the only hallmarks of News Corp and Sky News. The Murdoch press has long been intensely pro-vaccine and an aggressive agitator for the Australian “No Jab, No Play” campaign.
Murdoch's trashy publications have been a major contributor to Australia's highly polarized vaccination climate, with absurdly shrill headlines such as 'Anti-vaxers, you are baby killers.'
In that article, then-Sunday Telegraph deputy editor Claire Harvey evinced a highly tenuous grip on reality when she compared "anti-vaxers" with ISIS terrorists and likened vaccination refusal to suffocating a baby.
This, from the same person who wrote a couple of months later, "Absurdity is a cardinal sin."
Let’s call the Murdoch campaign against anti-vaxxers for exactly what it is:
HATE SPEECH.
A big song and dance is made these days by authorities about the evils of ‘hate speech’, but it turns out unwarranted, unbridled and gratuitous hatred is OK when directed towards groups out of globalist favor. ‘Antisemitism’ bad, Israelis murdering innocent Palestinians en mass no problem. People who question patently suspect drugs bad, brown shirts gratuitously bashing people to ‘protect’ them from a never-isolated virus all fine and dandy.
Harvey is entitled to her views, as utterly unhinged as they are, but her readers are also entitled to know she writes for a dishonest, elitist, vengeful, ethically bankrupt billionaire whose family is heavily involved in vaccine research and development, and whose research institute receives money from vaccine manufacturers. Despite a 2018 plea, Murdoch's publications continue to avoid mentioning this blatant conflict of interest in their numerous pro-vaccine articles.
That’s right folks - Harvey and her ilk have never mentioned in any of their hysterical hate-bomb drops that News Corp Australia is a corporate partner of the Murdoch Children's Research Institute, an organisation involved in vaccine research and intertwined with the Peter Doherty Institute.
For example, the Vaccine and Immunisation Research Group (VIRGo) is a collaboration between the Murdoch Children's Research Institute and the Doherty Institute.
Among the VIRGo's funders are vaccine manufacturers Seqirus, Janssen, Merck and GSK.
Like the shambolic and hysterical Neil Ferguson-led Imperial College report that helped send the world into lockdown, the Doherty Institute's alarmist modelling was utilized by the Australian Government to justify its highly dystopian response to COVID-19.
Jane Hansen’s Dubious History
Before she joined the muckrakers at News Corp, Australian feminist and ‘journalist’ Jane Hansen worked for the muckrakers at Channel 9’s A Current Affair.
As any Australian can tell you, shonky tradies are staple fodder for shows like ACA. In 1997, Hansen hit the media spotlight after a particularly disgraceful ACA episode of this genre. As Hansen recalled in 2007, “It was a story about a television repair man, Benny Mendoza, apparently not doing the job properly or overcharging.”
Note that, despite claiming the tragic outcome of this story upset her deeply, she seems unsure as to what the guy actually did wrong.
The show’s producers targeted Mendoza for an entrapment segment. As part of the ruse, a Channel 9 technician removed “a simple, $1 fuse” from a Kenwood CD player and allegedly replaced it with a blown fuse. The show then took the CD player to Mendoza, who purported to fix it and charged $159 for the repair.
Hansen recalled to fellow Channel 9 and ACA colleague Ray Martin: “The story was assigned to a producer and a researcher and when they had what they thought was enough evidence, the story was assigned to a reporter and I walked in the door that day.” (Bold emphasis added)
(Excerpt from A Current Affair - August 1997):
BENNY MENDOZA: Yeah, we change it for sure.
JANE HANSEN: Well if they were changed, would there be evidence of soldering?
BENNY MENDOZA: Yeah, that's right, yep.
JANE HANSEN: Well there is absolutely no evidence of any soldering ...
(End of excerpt)
In its textbook sensationalist fashion, Channel 9 heavily promoted the segment over the weekend before airing the story on a Monday night.
Mendoza, after seeing his image and the accusations splashed all over TV, proceeded to hang himself.
He left behind a wife and two children.
I haven’t seen the actual episode in question, but Hansen’s wishy-washy recollections make me wonder whether Mendoza really did pull a swifty, made a mistake, or was simply set up to fail by the grubs at Channel 9, who - let’s face it - have long had a reputation for being a pack of [CENSORED]. The excerpt above and his surname suggest English was his second language, which would have made him an easy target for a stitch-up relying on a misunderstanding to succeed.
What I have no doubt about is that, in a corruption-plagued rort pit like Australia, where useless, lisping morons who frequent rub’n’tug massage parlors can enter politics and magically end up with a portfolio of multi-million dollar properties, targeting a sole trader over a $159 repair is awfully petty.
Let’s not forget that, at the time, Channel 9 was owned by Australia’s then-richest man, Kerry Packer. I’m guessing if we delved into Packer’s past, we’d find a heck of a lot more than $159 worth of anomalies.
Hansen told a sympathetic, pandering Martin about Mendoza’s suicide:
“It still really upsets me. It’s been 10 years. I think what gutted me the most was that two children were without a father and a wife was without a husband. I didn’t feel as though I had a right to talk about how I felt about the story because I wasn’t the victim. In everyone’s mind, I was the perpetrator.”
Here we catch a glimpse into the way people like Hansen absolve themselves of responsibility for their actions. She was the journalist who confronted Mendoza, yet laments that she was perceived as “the perpetrator.”
Well, duh.
“I was just doing my job and I know that’s the Nuremberg defence but I wasn’t in the position to say, ‘Shove it, I don’t think it’s a good story.’ Which is how I felt anyway. I didn’t think it was a good story. It was my job and I wasn’t in a position to be a prima donna,” says the supposedly feisty feminist who (anonymously) wrote a book called Boned attacking the “blokey” culture of Australian television.
Which brings us to the textbook classic switcheroo used by feminists. On one hand, they are Strong Independent Women™ Who Can Do Anything a Man Can Do™ - which, of course, would include being honest and stating that a story about a TV repairman who may or may not have lied about a $1 fuse was terribly lame and therefore shouldn’t go to air. Her producers may well have overridden her objections, but she could at least have put her case forward.
Actually, the time to speak up was before she even approached Mendoza. She claims the stitch-up was concocted by the producer and a ‘researcher’. She was then told to be the belligerent reporter who walked in and confronted Mendoza, a task she evidently accepted without question.
She could have instead asked for a full briefing on the story and the evidence at hand, and then told the duo, “Seriously? Is this what we’re calling investigative journalism nowadays? Get me the f**k a real story, one that doesn’t involve crushing a guy’s reputation and ruining his life over a $1 fuse! What do I look like to you, Jerry @#$%ing Springer?!?””
But that would take backbone and character, something most people don’t possess.
Interestingly, Hansen boasted of sleeping “on the floor in the bombed-out 'sniper side' at the Holiday Inn, Sarajevo, in the middle of the Bosnian war.” The Bosnian war raged between 1992-1995, well before she confronted Mendoza.
“I've eyeballed a Taliban mullah in an interview and made him storm out,” she claimed. “I've had a people smuggler deliver a death threat under my hotel room in Jakarta, and slept with an iron in the bed for protection after upsetting a coup leader in Fiji.”
A gushing Ray Martin told Australian viewers “Hansen reveled in the grind of daily current affairs television. She reported from some of the most dangerous places in the world.”
“I was in it for the big stuff,” Hansen told Martin. “When you got to strap yourself into the front seat of history and to bear witness to that was an extraordinary privilege. This of course, is a song of victory ... Having grown up watching Jana, I wanted to be that, like many journalists of my generation. It was a new frontier for women in a way, to get out there and to do the stuff that was traditionally, you know, George Negus' area.”
The histrionic Claire Harvey, now editorial director at News Corp’s The Australian, said Hansen was the “most passionate journalistic crusader … She swore a lot. She got outraged a lot. And she laughed a lot – and made me laugh – every time we spoke.”
“I feel so lucky to have known Jane, and proud that here at News Corp Australia we published her work with the pride and prominence it deserved.”
The consensus among her media colleagues is that Hansen was a fearless, feisty pioneer, one of the first Australian female journalists to report from a war zone. Yet when her job of selling the blatant lie that Iraq was harboring “weapons of mass destruction” was done, and she returned home to resume predatory ‘reporting’ for ACA, and a father of two committed suicide because of her obnoxious antics, she acted like she could never have seen it coming and that it was all someone else’s idea. Yep, it was all the fault of her male colleagues, those blokey bastard boofheads at Channel 9.
So what did this fearless pioneer do to combat the rampant misogyny at the highly dysfunctional and toxic Channel 9? Did she speak out? Did she resign in protest? Did she rally her female (and sympathetic male) colleagues to band together and demand change? Did she seek inspiration from truly courageous women in the vein of Lydia Cacho and Máxima Acuña, who have endured shocking brutality while doggedly exposing corruption and standing up for what is right?
Or did she stay quiet, keep taking the handsome paychecks, enjoy the perks that came with being a recognizable reporter, and instead take out her venom on easy targets?
The closest Hansen ever came to making a principled stand on an important topic was writing a book called Boned, which portrayed the toxic, sexist culture of Australian commercial TV. However, it was not a hard-hitting tell-all that named names but a fictitious novel which Hansen and another colleague penned anonymously. It took almost a decade before Hansen ‘confessed’ to being a co-author.
Let’s face it: Jane Hansen was no Lydia Cacho. Far from it.
There are men and women with integrity and spine, who stand up for what’s right even when it means enduring physical and/or psychological discomfort. Hansen, like so many journalists, simply went with the agenda, and used her gender to deflect accountability.
Which makes one wonder what excuse male reporters and columnists use for peddling hogwash that a nagging voice deep down inside tells them isn’t true or newsworthy.
A decade later, Hansen still wasn’t prepared to accept responsibility for her role in the gutter-level sham that led a father-of-two to kill himself. Instead, she recalled the appalling affair as if she had no choice in the matter - she was just ‘doing her job’.
As Stuart Littlemore commented on Media Watch at the time (August 1997):
“One sordid little entrapment too many and another unremarkable example of A Current Affair’s mindless succession of bullying righteousness, yields a result they will say they never foresaw. A little man, caught by a cheap deception far worse than anything he was accused of doing, despairs of ever living down the shame and takes his own life.”
“These unspeakable bastards did however deceive Mr Mendoza and then set him up …”
So did the self-professed burden of Mendoza’s death, and even meeting with his family, help re-calibrate Hansen’s moral compass? Did she become a softer, more empathetic human being?
Hardly.
She instead joined the grubby Murdoch camp, and became an intensely hateful pro-vaccine advocate.
Instead of launching war on the blokey bastard boofheads that polluted commercial television, those vile media wankers who were allegedly flopping out their genitalia in boardroom meetings, she instead trained her sights on concerned parents who refused or hesitated to have their children vaccinated.
Murdoch Mierda Media Strikes Again
Reflective of her new career path was the smear ‘documentary’ titled “Big Shots: Anti-Vaxxers Exposed”, aired in 2021 by Sky News, the Murdoch brainwashing spin-off aimed at ‘conservatives’.
Hansen used the documentary to scorn anti-vaxxers for turning their attention to the Great COVID Con and allegedly attempting “to derail what is set to be the most ambitious vaccination program the world has ever seen.”
Despite the warnings of those who could see what was really transpiring, that “ambitious” campaign stormed ahead like a parade of jackbooted Nazis, and led to unprecedented increases in excess mortality both locally and globally, the likes of which Australia had not seen since the world war era.
The world’s biggest COVID vaxxxine side effect study to date (funded by the CDC, so definitely no ‘anti-vaxxer’ derailment attempt) found the Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca gene therapies significantly increased the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis.
The Fast and The Furious: This Time, Its Cancerous
Since the scamdemic, there have also been reports of a marked increase in rare and aggressive cancer diagnoses. Dubbed “turbo cancers”, these malignancies are often already late-stage when diagnosed, increasing the risk of a fatal outcome.
The response of the mainstream - who has thus far egregiously lied to us about everything COVID- and vaccine-related - has been to dismiss the turbo cancer phenomenon as “conspiracy theory”, often insisting there has been no such increase in aggressive cancers.
They’re lying. There has been an increase in both overall and “hyperprogressive” cancer, and dozens of case studies have documented the sudden appearance of cancers in people who were recently vaxxxinated.
Jane Hansen: Should’ve Listened to the “Anti-Vaxxers”
As you’ll learn shortly, Hansen would have done well to listen to anti-vaxxers, instead of raucously ridiculing and defaming them.
But like so many of her Murdoch colleagues, she was too caught up in the smug righteousness of being terribly wrong.
She penned a litany of hate-spewing articles, making no effort whatsoever to hide her sheer contempt for skeptics of vaccination - a medical practice whose alleged safety and efficacy is based on exactly zero placebo-controlled evidence.
A 2016 hatchet job on the residents of Mullumbimby, which allegedly had the lowest vaccination rate in Australia (“Only one in two children has been vaccinated there”, lamented Hansen), was a textbook classic sampling of her toxic snark.
Residents who attended a Sunday meeting about “Mandatory Vaccinations” did not come to hear “the medical and scientific facts about vaccines”, declared Hansen. Nope, they simply “came for validation: to indulge their conspiracy theories and to pat each other on the back for the area’s 50 per cent vaccination rate.”
She claimed they “all had guzzled from the chai-infused Kool-Aid,” and lived in “a patchouli-scented, steamy alternative universe where all rationale was suspended and replaced by terrifying plots by big government, big pharma, big media and even big airline, all colluding to pin kids down and stick them full of cancer-causing nasties.”
A most ironic snipe, given the fate that would eventually befall Hansen.
Like all shameless pro-vaxxers, she mentioned “The fraudulent Wakefield paper from 1997 linking autism and vaccination,” not at all bothered by the fact that the Wakefield paper was not fraudulent, that everything claimed about the paper by mainstream liars is egregiously false.
Her mean-spirited pettiness knew no bounds. She even wrote a 2021 piece belittling former Australian model Elle Macpherson, for no other reason than she was dating Andrew Wakefield. As if it were any of her business.
She obnoxiously gloated over any suggestion her coercive No Jab, No Play campaign of duress was increasing vaccination rates. “No Jab No Play has caused a rush to immunise as anti-vaccine lobby turns desperate in the face of defeat” she declared in 2015, citing no data whatsoever and quoting a single anonymous Byron Shire mother who allegedly reconsidered her vaccination stance.
Hansen loudly attacked vaccine skeptics for their alleged lack of science, all while offering up absolutely no science herself, just the usual Murdoch-issue name-calling and shameless spin.
Not to mention audacious lies.
In a 2014 Daily Telegraph article, attacking parents who refused to needlessly inject their kids with scientifically unproven junk, Hansen inserted a photo of Byron Shire mother Liane Mandalis with her partner and then-newborn child. Hansen claimed Liane was once an anti-vaxxer, but a “recent whooping cough scare was enough for her to put her two daughters on an immunisation catch-up plan.”
It was a blatant lie.
In a subsequent letter to the editor, Liane pointed out the photo was used without consent and that she felt “entirely misrepresented in what I had expressed to reporter Jane Hansen regarding my views on immunisation.”
Regarding the caption claiming her pictured newborn daughter was now “fully immunised”, Liane emphatically stated:
“NOT TRUE …. My daughter remains COMPLETELY UN-IMMUNISED …. Saying that she is now fully immunised, apart from being a complete lie, is misleading as to my current stance on immunisation. I feel like I have been used as a pawn here to advocate immunisation.”
Liane never heard back from the editor: “It would appear that the responsibility to portray the truth in media that I had addressed him on fell on deaf ears and does not meet with their agenda.”
When Hansen was questioned upon her conduct, she reportedly passed the buck and claimed there had been a “stuff-up”.
Despite her talk about being transformed by the Benny Mendoza incident, Hansen clearly hadn’t changed. She was still wholly incapable of taking responsibility for her dubious antics.
Jane Hansen and Her Stalker Friend
Hansen claimed in her articles that she had been subjected to threats of harm and even death by anti-vaxxers - but never provided receipts for such serious allegations.
Meanwhile, Hansen was happy to consort with a serial internet stalker with the online moniker of “Reasonable Hank”, who was eventually named by a group of Internet sleuths as Peter Tiernan.
However, according to Hansen, it was all a case of mistaken identity. The anti-vaxxers had the wrong guy. Reasonable Hank, she insisted, wasn’t Peter Tiernan, but Peter Tierney, who she claimed “lives about 1000 kilometres away.”
This is how Hansen described the fanatical Reasonable Hank in a 2016 article:
“Mr Tierney, aka Reasonable Hank, has been a thorn in the side of the anti-vax movement for years, blogging and exposing the cruel trolling of bereaved parents, alerting authorities to fraudulent behaviour and, most recently, outing nurses who are spreading anti-vax misinformation in hospitals, which has led to the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia clamping down on such nurses.
For his troubles, Mr Tierney has received hundreds of death threats while anti-vaxxers have tried for years to unearth him.”
Tierney said “he had chosen to remain anonymous for good reason.”
“Very deliberately there are no public photos of me,” said the Cowardly and Unreasonble Hank, “because the threats have escalated over the years”.
Like she did for herself, Hansen created a narrative in which Tierney was the victim.
Of course, there were quite a few key details Hansen conveniently omitted.
Sydney naturopath Brett Smith, one of the sleuths that unmasked Reasonable Hank, wrote:
“On Tuesday 1 November, we texted the known phone numbers of Reasonable Hank and Peter Tiernan. ‘They’ were advised that I had just finished a blog exposing Peter Tiernan as Reasonable Hank. We gave them a right of reply to clarify any errors we may have made in relation to the blog. We waited 3 days and when we received no reply we posted the blog. I, in fact, texted Super Hero Hank twice to clarify any error in the blog. So much for Hank’s concern for an ‘innocent’ man.”
Smith used what he dubbed his troll phone (“yes pro vax trolls threaten our side too”), which he insists only one other troll had the number for (“another cowardly little Brisbane Skeptic that hides behind the moniker Big Smiffy”).
So who was the first to reply to Smith’s texts?
Well, we already know it wasn’t Reasonable Hank or Tiernan.
It was Jane Hansen.
How did she get Smith’s troll phone number?
In the ensuing text exchange with Smith, Hansen admitted to going to school with Tiernan!
She also claimed she was friends with Reasonable Hank, who she claims was in fact Peter Tierney.
None of which she mentioned in her November 2016 puff piece accusing Smith and his helpers, Breana Elizabeth and Belgin Colak, of fingering the wrong man.
Hansen claimed Tiernan was being “being bombarded by threatening calls and messages”. When subsequently asked on ABC Radio about this, Tiernan began backtracking. The only specific example Tiernan could give was his wife receiving a message on Facebook from someone saying "I'd like to talk to you about your husband".
No threats were made to him, it turns out. Tiernan said it was more people sending his profile picture to Reasonable Hank’s Facebook page saying, “We know who you are.”
“More sort of veiled threats aimed at him (Reasonable Hank)”.
Right.
“Reasonable Hank also provided Mr Tiernan with screenshots of threats that he too had received, including death threats,” says the ABC.
Peter Tierney, so the story now went, got in touch with Peter Tiernan - before their amazingly coincidental mutual friend, Jane Hansen, publicized the matter.
I smell mierda del toro, but the story appears to have died off shortly after. The anti-vaccination movement threatened a class action lawsuit against Tiernan; Hansen claimed the police were investigating (despite quoting Tiernan in the very same article as saying “I’ve gone to police but they are not interested”). Tiernan deactivated his Facebook page, ostensibly to protect his family, while the Reasonable Hank website has been inactive since July 2021. After the 2016 case of alleged mistaken identity, Reasonable Hank could have revealed his true identity and settled the matter once and for all, but he continued to hide behind his keyboard and insist his real name was Peter Tierney.
Irrespective of his true identity, Reasonable Hank is a cowardly and nasty troll. His website is a compendium of mental illness, a tribute to the Internet’s ability to bring out the inner psychopath in the type of people who would be violent criminals if they weren’t instead scared of their own shadow.
As Smith describes the Reasonable Hank website, “This is years of online abuse, documenting and filing 1000’s of people’s online lives, everything they say, do, post, like or comment on. Hank will screenshot it, pull it out of context, distort, lie, cheat, and steal to demonise anyone who has a different narrative to Bad Pharma’s.”
The above Facebook post depicts what could be construed as a thinly-veiled death threat to Meryl Dorey of the Australian Vaccination-Skeptics Network. It’s the kind of threatening behavior Jane Hansen claimed to be against - at least when directed at pro-vaxxers. However, Hansen also hated Dorey with a passion, often attacking her in her Murdoch-approved hit pieces. Reasonable Hank’s behavior, therefore, was not a problem to Hansen.
Who Really Wears the Tinfoil Hat?
In another frothy-mouthed 2015 rant, Hansen described anti-vaxxers as a “conspiracy-driven mob … in full tinfoil-hat-wearing force.”
Falling over herself in an orgy of ridicule, she wrote “the whole premise of the anti-vaxxers argument is that every government in the world, the overwhelming majority of scientists, the entire medical community and the media are all in on a giant con to jab tiny babies with nasty chemicals, including our own children, for the sole purpose of making drug companies richer.
What utter rubbish.
There is not one rational element to the premise.”
Whether or not the majority of bureaucrats, scientists, doctors and dimwitted journalists realize they are part of a global con job (and they are), does not change one iota the fact that drug companies make billions annually from the sale of vaccines, which are sold at mark-ups around 100 times the cost of production.
This extremely profitable industry is propped up by the heavily-publicized threat of viruses never shown to exist, for which the best protection is allegedly a medical ‘technology’ never shown to work.
While flippantly dismissing this indisputable reality, Hansen told Sky News in February 2021 that “Some of the biggest anti-vax movements in America … make millions of dollars out of this."
However, she didn’t name any of these “anti-vax movements”.
The dishonest journalist also didn’t name Pfizer, the corporate criminal that would go on to reap $37 billion from its COVID vaxxxine in 2021 alone.
She mysteriously failed to mention Moderna, whose $12.2 billion in profit in 2021 was derived almost entirely from its COVID vaxxxine.
So in the demented world of pro-vaxx propagandists like Hansen, concerned parents are money-grubbing profiteers, while companies like Pfizer, with its seven-decade record of serious fraud settlements, are doing nothing untoward.
Tell me again who subscribes to utter rubbish? Tell me again who the tinfoil-hat-wearing, conspiracy-driven whack job is?
Or was.
Hansen, you see, is no longer with us.
Australia’s Most Prolific Pro-Vaxxx Journalist Gets Turbo Cancer
In July 2021, Hansen boasted of having had her first COVID shot produced by the sweet, kind, humanitarian, money-means-nothing-to-us folks at Pfizer.
Around a year later, Hansen - who smugly ridiculed ‘anti-vaxxers’ for believing vaccines contained “cancer-causing nasties” - was diagnosed with glioblastoma, an especially aggressive form of brain cancer.
Around eighteen months after that, on August 6, 2024, she passed away.
Brain cancer is one of the less common cancers and has a poor survival rate. Males are at higher risk than females, and the incidence is highest among those aged 80–84 years.
So when a seemingly healthy female in her 50s suddenly develops an aggressive brain cancer, you can’t help but wonder if the highly problematic drug she took in 2021 was the reason why.
The vaxxxine-turbo cancer link is supported by compelling temporal correlations and dozens of published case studies, which makes it a very real possibility the same drug Hansen boasted of receiving - and ridiculed others for not receiving - killed her.
Hansen’s Not-So-Admirable Legacy
According to the Daily Mail, Hansen “was most proud of her pro-vaccination campaigns, which resulted in welfare payments being withheld from parents who did not fully immunise their children. Anti-vaxxer parents were also barred from accessing childcare centres and preschools.”
In other words, Hansen considered her life’s crowning achievement to be the legally-mandated discrimination of people who shun the utter fraud that is vaccination.
What a truly abhorrent legacy.
It’s unclear just why Hansen developed such a seething hatred towards anti-vaxxers. At the age of 36, her first baby was delivered at 19 weeks and sadly “had no chance.” At 39, she fell pregnant again, this time delivering at 26 weeks. Her son was born weighing less than a kilogram, and after the touch-and-go period that typically afflicts such premature births, he pulled through.
But neither of these episodes had anything to do with vaccination.
Hansen’s attacks on those highlighting the dangers of vaccination was not based on science. She never discussed the research, because she wouldn’t have known a research paper even if it jumped on her desk and did one of those stupid COVID dances (you know, the ones done by nurses who were supposedly being rushed off their feet in ICU, yet clearly had way too much time on their hands).
To Hansen, ‘science’ meant repeating bromides about how 99.9% of doctors, scientists and governments allegedly supported vaccination, therefore it had to be legit - a line of argument known as the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy.
The primary ingredient in her attacks on anti-vaxxers was ridicule. Not just your regular-strength snark, but a relentless barrage of venom that left little doubt Hansen wanted to personally and terminally humiliate, belittle and discredit anyone who dared disagree with her woefully ignorant stance.
The Benny Mendoza incident and her two traumatic pregnancies should have softened her up and made her more empathetic, but Hansen seemed utterly incapable of even considering that anti-vaxxers had benevolent intentions. She refused to accept that someone trying to raise awareness of vaccine harms could be as passionate about saving children as she was about lampooning people who didn’t subscribe to her parochial vaccine beliefs.
Another ‘Coincidence’: Militant Pro-Vaxxxer Matt Driscoll Dies Suddenly
Hansen was not the only militant pro-vaccine ‘journalist’ who passed away last year.
American Matt Driscoll, a columnist for The News Tribune, died “unexpectedly” in July 2024 at only 43 years of age.
How a Gay Activist Proved Many Journalists Will Believe Anything That Sounds Newsworthy
According to brght.org, when professions are ranked according to IQ, journalism comes in at #365 with an average IQ of 97.88, which falls squarely in the average category.
But that doesn’t even begin to tell the full story.
Luke Montgomery was born in 1974. At 17, he changed his name by deed poll to Luke Sissyfag, became a vocal gay rights campaigner, and by the ripe old age of 21 had heckled Bill Clinton six times, disrupted speeches by the Secretary of Health, appeared on The Phil Donahue Show, conducted hundreds of interviews around the USA, and even run for Mayor of Washington in 1994 on the platform, “AIDS is the issue”.
Then he grew up. He dropped the Sissyfag surname and, in a dramatic turnaround, became a vocal critic of what he saw as the childish self-indulgence and blatant dishonesty displayed by many in the gay activist movement. In a 1996 interview, Montgomery forthrightly admitted he and his fellow activists deliberately disseminated false claims about the susceptibility of heterosexual women to AIDS, and the prevalence of homosexuality among males.
One especially laughable episode in the early 90s saw articles titled “10% of Men are Gay” feature prominently in newspapers all around the world. The claim was a hoax, one that could’ve easily been identified if the journalists in question had bothered to check even a smattering of the multitude of studies from real researchers showing the true prevalence of male homosexuality to be 1-2%.
Montgomery was asked how he and his former activist colleagues succeeded in having patently false statistics reprinted in newspapers all around the world.
“One thing I learned quickly was that if you could write a really good press release, you could write the story,” Montgomery replied.
“I don’t mean to insult you,” Montgomery said to the reporter, “but from my experience most journalists are idiots.”
And he’s right.
If I received a press release from someone calling himself “Luke Sissyfag”, you can bet your last dollar I’d research the living daylights out of both him and his claims before even dreaming about giving them print space.
But journalists all around the world - bless their gullible, unquestioning, scoop-hungry little souls – saw fit to print his claims without so much as even a cursory check of their veracity.
When journalists smugly pontificate about following the science, understand that most of them wouldn’t know science if it crawled up their keester and started a symposium.
With rare exceptions, when a journalist purports to be talking ‘science’, what they are really doing is regurgitating what has been spoon fed to them in press releases and by the limited array of editor-approved ‘experts’ on their contact list.
Don’t Take Health Advice From Psychopaths
In his 2013 book The Wisdom of Psychopaths, UK clinical psychologist Kevin Dutton discusses the results of a survey he administered to respondents from a wide range of professions. The questionnaire was designed to ascertain one’s degree of psychopathic traits. Both journalism and media made the top ten list of most psychopathic professions. This would help explain how, say, a Murdoch journalist could unquestioningly corner a sole trader in a shameless entrapment sting, virulently attack earnest and well-meaning others without remorse, ignore the blatant and well-documented corruption of pharma giants and instead portray vaccine skeptics as profiteers, and speak with bold authority on a topic they know absolutely nothing about.
The Take Home Lessons
Just because someone acts like a cocksure jackass, it does not mean they know what they are talking about. In an absence of supportive, valid science, it is in fact a strong indication they are compensating for their woeful ignorance.
Journalists, as a rule, are not especially bright. They rely heavily on press releases and quotable quotes from so-called ‘experts’ of dubious veracity.
In line with their propensity for psychopathy, many journalists are big on hypocrisy. They belittle others for not being doctors/scientists, even though they themselves are not doctors/scientists. And as we saw during COVID, being a doctor/scientist by no means guarantees immunity to dangerous BS. Facts are facts, and are determined by reality, not profession.
People will lie, not just to you, but to themselves. Hansen was happy to misquote and misrepresent other people to bolster her pro-vaccine argument, but she clearly did believe in vaccines. She publicly boasted of getting the Pfizer vaxxxine. It probably killed her.
Vaccines/vaxxxines are scientifically unsupported garbage. See below.
The mainstream media is full of toxic characters, and I’m not just talking about the blokey bastard boofheads.
Ciao,
Anthony.
Note: This article was edited for brevity on June 1, 2025. For a detailed discussion of the link between COVID ‘vaccines’ and an increase in overall and “turbo” cancer rates, please click here.
Leave a Reply