Blima Marcus is one of the fiercest pro-vaccination activists within the Jewish world. She has been working closely with the government to produce and disseminate material tailored to persuade Orthodox Jews. As Jewish-appearing comrade Laura Kurcfeld emphasized in a recently leaked conference call, recruiting people “who look like me” to push pharmaceutical products is a critical part of their strategy to obtain the community's trust.
When watching these conversations between glorified drug-pushers that the sheep were not supposed to hear, one is struck by how much they fret over “trust”. Their greatest concern is that people will “lose trust” in the priests of the medical cult. The conversations revolve around strategies they can employ to overcome this and similar “challenges”.
Consistently telling the truth, being transparent, modifying their beliefs in light of new information, displaying humility, steering clear of bribery and other conflicts of interest, and otherwise being trustworthy are not among these strategies.
Blima Marcus introduced herself to the Jewish world as an ultra-Orthodox nurse, a highly dubious self-identification, though most convenient for insinuating herself into the community and performing, as she calls it, “vaccination outreach”. Oddly, in the same thread she also referred to herself as “a liberal Democrat”, which would make her a unicorn.
She later stated: “I imagine a world where all of the frum (religious) media had a unified, supportive message for public health policies from the start of the pandemic. Things would be so different.” Indeed, pushing vaccines on everyone would be much easier without voices of dissent against the government with whom she collaborates.
Marcus has a strong social media presence (highly unusual for an “ultra-Orthodox Jew”), and her manner toward those who are skeptical of establishment positions is often malicious, even abusive.
Marcus's vaccination outreach bears more resemblance to forcible conversions. Indeed, she openly supports vaccine mandates – a sanitized term for having the government force people to take injections against their will, which anyone with a sense of decency should abhor.
Marcus is President of an organization called EMES Initiative, which, like JOWMA, is a front organization of Jewish-appearing vaccine-pushers to propagandize in Orthodox Jewish communities. “Emes” is the Hebrew word for truth, though, as we shall see, it is yet another dubious self-identification.
One propaganda booklet from EMES, which was disseminated by the government of New York City, contains a “cheat sheet” that attacks “anti-vaccination sources”. Marcus and her comrades define the dreaded “anti-vaxxers” as “people who oppose vaccination or laws that mandate vaccination”. Just a few paragraphs later, however, they deceptively write that “we strongly believe in parental choice”.
If Marcus had her way, what “choice” would people actually have? Take a vaccine or else.
Marcus regularly defames people who wish to choose what, if any, pharmaceutical products they inject in themselves and their children. In the “cheat sheet” she helped create she accuses them of using “biased sources”. As it states, being “affiliated with an anti-vaccination organization” automatically renders one biased, and discredits any information from such a person.
This is circular logic. After all, what sort of organization would one expect people who independently arrived at these conclusions to join? Vaccines For All? On what basis does association with an organization that doesn't kneel before the vaccine gods render one “biased” to the point of immediate disqualification? And why does the same rule not apply to Blima Marcus and her cohorts at “vaccination outreach” organizations?
Most incredibly, they add that “if a study was sponsored by a pharmaceutical company, it can be considered biased as well”.
Insert your own punchline.
They further accuse “anti-vaxxers” of cherry picking information that suits their agenda, noting that this is “a common propaganda tactic”. File that away for now.
Then they accuse “anti-vaxxers” of stating “pure lies”. Of course they do; they call their vaccine-pushing organization EMES, truth. Just like Fauci is science, Blima Marcus is truth, and those who have unfavorable opinions about the products she pushes must be pure liars.
What's most amusing about this “intellectual” response to “anti-vaxxers” is that the booklet accuses them of spreading false information “for reasons we cannot understand”. After all, what incentive is there for people to express skepticism about vaccines? Unlike establishment drug-pushers, they will not be richly rewarded with government grants, “consulting fees” from drug companies, prestigious positions, and adulation from the establishment.
Could it be that some “anti-vaxxers” independently drew their own conclusions about certain pharmaceutical products? Could it be that some of them arrived at their beliefs the hard way, through devastating personal experience with these products, and therefore do not concur with Marcus's 5-star reviews? Could it be that professionals with far greater knowledge and experience than Marcus believe her information is false, and have the integrity to jeopardize everything to say so?
One can well understand why vaccine-pushers like Blima Marcus might, in theory, spread false information. But one is indeed hard-pressed to understand why, circumstances being what they are, her opponents would do the same.
Perhaps the most amusing, least self-aware part of the EMES “cheat sheet” is the accusation that “those who promote 'vaccine choice'” did not allow Marcus and company to “ask important questions” on their hotlines, and did not reply to their emails. For people on that side of the discussion to whine about not being given a forum, their voices not being heard, and their questions not being answered is enough to discredit them without further examination.
Remember, this ridiculous propaganda, projecting all the sins of vaccine-pushers onto those who oppose them, was incorporated into New York City's official material.
Back to Blima Marcus. With this lengthy introduction in mind, a recently leaked video of this “ultra-Orthodox” queen of vaccines is explosive. In a conference call with Dr. Jane Zucker, Assistant Commissioner, NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Marcus took off her mask and dropped any pretense of integrity, or, shall we say, emes.
“As I think you know already from our conversations,” began Marcus, “my goals, at least in the [Orthodox Jewish] community are twofold: increase vaccinations for, you know, when appropriate – which in this case is basically always appropriate and for everyone – as well as be very careful with how we talk about what's happening in, you know, on the ground, as that relates to public trust, because that's ultimately the crisis we have. I mean, across America, but in our community. That's my concern.”
As far as Blima Marcus is concerned, her life is not complete until every Orthodox Jew – men, women and children – takes the Covid shots. They are always appropriate, and there are no exceptions.
Clearly, her obsession with a syringe in every arm far transcends science.
At the same time, she recognizes that she and her needle-wielding comrades have to be very careful about how they present their message. After all, there are those pesky issues with “public trust” they have to navigate.
Those who speak the truth, whose positions are firmly rooted in truth, tend not to agonize over “public trust”. They tend not to worry about it at all.
Blima Marcus, despite calling her organization EMES (truth), who is promoting the most wonderful life-giving products, and whose opponents allegedly spread “pure lies”, seems to be having great difficulty with “public trust”. It's a crisis!
Remarkable, isn't it?
Now comes the real bombshell.
“There was an MMWR [Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report] today...the New York Times reported it, so I expect to get slammed with that, which found that people with prior COVID infection...they found that when it came to the Delta variant, those who had prior infection and no vaccines fared the best in terms of lowest cases, and possibly lowest hospitalizations.”
One would have expected a religious person, a medical professional, a person of truth who rails against spreaders of false information, to embrace this data. But Blima Marcus prefaced her remarks about this data by doubling down on her position that the COVID shot “is basically always appropriate and for everyone”. The fact that a new report indicated the precise opposite – that for at least a significant number of people the best outcome correlated specifically to not having taken the shots – was not cause for Marcus to modify her position accordingly. Rather, it presented a logistical problem with continuing to push the shots for all people, all the time.
“So that brings us back to, you know, the conversations we've all had in the past, and keep raising, which is, you know, how do we tailor this message to a community that has had high infection rates and very low vaccination rates, when they see this data?”
Blima Marcus then acknowledged Dr. Ellie Carmody, the disgraced JOWMA comrade who expressed a lack of confidence in her own sales pitch, yet had no moral qualms with continuing to push the product.
Marcus continued expressing her concerns to Jane Zucker. “So I guess I want to hear your thoughts – and I completely want to just acknowledge that you're in a very difficult situation where I fully understand what public health messaging has to remain, which is that vaccination during a pandemic is the way forward, and I fully agree with that, while also acknowledging that we serve a community that can be very challenging.”
For people of integrity, for people of science, the correct approach would be obvious: change your approach to align with reality. For vaccine-pushing prostitutes targeting the demographic least advised to take the shots, however, this was a serious problem. The people would see the data. One way or another, however, reality would have to be altered to suit the agenda. The “public health messaging” must stay the same, irrespective of inconvenient new information.
Nothing would have made Blima Marcus happier than for the data to be buried, or for her target population – a “challenging” bunch of people – to remain unaware of it.
The EMES “cheat sheet” declares that “You deserve honest information.” It decries those who demonstrate bias, cherry pick information, mislead people, spread false information, and engage in “irresponsible actions”.
Maybe she can get a government grant for a mirror. It's time she and her comrades took a long, honest look at themselves.