Category: WHO

The Self-Proclaimed Global Expert

bill-gates-event-201-feature-800x417-1

I think programming literally went to Gate’s head and he needs some reprogramming Big Time! The sight of this creepy crawler on steroids conjures up names like Mengele, Goebbels, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and say even Dr. Frankenstein; but putting it in proper perspective we’re talking about an out in the open “Globalist Psychopath!”  And I wonder; how is it that the world could have allowed this maniac to even have his own platform shoes to boost his ego high; let alone a global one!

Yea, I get it; money talks and bullshit walks, so because he got so many people interested in the “new modern world oracle” of digital computer technology on an up close and personal level, with now even handheld devices to boot! So while most people became mesmerized with this amazing technology, he received in return not only great accolades along with a fortune, but, also “carte blanche to write his own ticket” and be a “self-proclaimed expert in any field” he so chooses, without any degrees or qualification but instead by merely just appointing himself to the head of the line in “any field” be it politics or climatology, epidemiology and even human dietary sciences; by means of his Green Power! So we ask how he could do this; well, the same way Soros that evil SOB did, which is buying his way into powerful influential positions and power, paying off (bribing) a lot of the right people; and most people have a price!

I’ll put it to you this way, this is very much the way the Antichrist would and will take control of the helm on this star-ship called “earth” when you come right down to it!  I mean after all look how global populations have fallen for it already, masking up, social distancing, taking the jabs of experimental gene altering biological cocktails and whatever else the “News Media” and Govt. Officials told people to do in order to be safe; “stupid is as stupid does!”

Bill Gates Sociopath docu

I think it’s time for some reprogramming of Gates and I have no degrees in that technology, but, I can assure you that I could do a great job of instructing this “caricature of a human being” in the “fine art of being retooled” for a better use; especially in the area of fertilizers! With a little elbow grease and good old fashioned American ingenuity I believe we could give him more than a leg up or in his case is that down on this accomplishment; I can even guarantee this strategy would work as well if not better than his depopulation schematic; or that now well publicized program by the master programmer himself!

For starters under the Nuremberg Code of international law he is guilty of Crimes Against Humanity and then additionally racketeering under the RICO Statutes to which we can add Treason for violating Articles of the US Constitution as an enemy of the Republic! Typically these crimes carry the penalty of death and I’d say enough people have died to warrant that verdict!

Can I get an Amen!

Screenshot_2021-09-22 Illuminati Pictures of Dr Fauci, Bill gates, Ted Turner, Rockefeller, and George Soros Leaks (2)

All praise and glory is yours Lord above!  Your truth will prevail!

Below I quote the article to hone in on the imperative here!

“Gates was forced to answer a question addressing a Robert Kennedy Jr. book about his involvement in eugenics. Gates said, “One of the best-selling books last year was a book by Robert Kennedy, saying that I like to make money and kill millions of people with vaccines.”

Bill Gates Demonic

He didn’t dispute the author’s belief, other than to denounce everything as “misinformation.” Are Gates’ own words about excessive global population misinformation as well? Oddly enough, Gates also has a staff who track the web for things connected to the radical geek.

Why would anyone need to keep track of people who disagree with their wild ideas? Probably no one would, unless, of course, these wild ideas really are true. Gates finished by insisting that, “We’re going to have a hung election and a civil war.”

Gates is not a scientist, a medical doctor, or a political analyst. But millions of people watched as he offered radical advice during the pandemic. But remember, this same creepy rich dude predicted a global pandemic five years before it happened.

Gates Devil's Puppet

Does Gates know something the rest of us don’t? Is he already pushing buttons behind the scenes to trigger a civil war? When will the world realize that Bill Gates is dangerous? Many believe Gates is already dangerously insane, and these types of comments prove it.”

Source: Lawrence Morra III – Zero Lift-off https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/82516823

Judge Orders Fauci, Psaki, Top Officials Deposed in Big Tech Censorship Case

A federal court on Friday ordered Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top officials to testify under oath at depositions in a case that’s uncovered evidence of alleged federal government collusion with big tech companies to censor users.

The attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri and other plaintiffs allege that Fauci, director of NIAID and President Joe Biden’s chief medical adviser, and other defendants, colluded and coerced social media companies to “suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content” regarding COVID-19.

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty went a step further than a previous ruling that forced written testimonies and ordered Fauci and other defendants to testify under oath at depositions.

“After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden Administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said in a statement.

“It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise and force these officials to come clean to the American people, and this ruling will allow us to do just that. We’ll keep pressing for the truth.”

http://www.theepochtimes.com%2Fjudge-orders-fauci-psaki-top-officials-be-deposed-in-big-tech-censorship-case_4813336.html

New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) joined the lawsuit in August, representing renowned epidemiologists Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines.

NCLA attorney Jenin Younes said she looks forward to learning just how far the accused government officials went to push their COVID-19 “perspective.”

“For the first time, Dr. Fauci and seven other federal officials responsible for running an unlawful censorship enterprise will have to answer questions under oath about the nature and extent of their communications with tech companies,” said Younes in a statement to The Epoch Times.

The judge also ordered the depositions of former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, Director of White House Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, CISA Director Jen Easterly, and FBI Supervisory Special Agent Elvis Chan.

Epoch Times Photo
Protesters hold signs denouncing Facebook and CEO Mark Zuckerberg at the Humanity Against Censorship rally in front of Meta headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. on May 19, 2022. (Mrs. Hao/The Epoch Times)

Fauci’s ‘Self-Serving Blanket Denials’

In his ruling, Doughty said he agreed with plaintiffs that Fauci’s previous “self-serving blanket denials” about his role in censoring views on social media couldn’t be taken at face value.

“Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci can prove he never communicated with social media platforms about censorship, there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions.

“Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci acted indirectly or as an intermediary on behalf of others, it is still relevant to Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. The Court agrees.

“Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 ‘misinformation’ since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more.

“Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s ‘self-serving blanket denials’ that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees,” Doughty said in his ruling (pdf).

wuhan lab
Security personnel outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology during the visit by the World Health Organization (WHO) team tasked with investigating the origins of COVID-19, in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China, on Feb. 3, 2021. (Thomas Peter/Reuters)

Censoring Lab Leak Theory

The plaintiffs argued that Fauci allegedly insisted on the censorship of “speech backed by great scientific credibility and with enormous potential nationwide impact” that contradicted Fauci’s views.

Fauci, for example, communicated in a long-shielded phone call with some scientists to discredit any theory that COVID-19 was the result of a “lab leak” in Wuhan, China. The scientists went on to write a paper severely reprimanding others who were open to the theory.

If the lab leak theory were true, in turn, it would mean Fauci could be potentially implicated in funding the research on viruses that caused the pandemic which killed millions worldwide, plaintiffs argued. This is because Fauci funded risky “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through intermediaries such as EcoHealth Alliance.

In late January 2020 and early February 2020, Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in oral communications about the government’s COVID-19 response. Facebook then allegedly went on censor the lab leak theory, plaintiffs argued.

Epoch Times Photo
White House press secretary Jen Psaki speaks during a White House daily press briefing at the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington on May 4, 2022. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

‘Overwhelming’ Need to Depose Officials

The court also found that Flaherty, Slavitt, Psaki, and other officials also have personal knowledge about the alleged censorship issues and ordered them to be deposed.

Doughty said there is an “overwhelming” need for Flaherty to be deposed to determine whether fundamental rights to free speech were “abridged” as a result of alleged collusion between senior Biden administration officials and Big Tech.

Plaintiffs argued Flaherty had “extensive” oral meetings with Twitter, Meta, and YouTube on vaccine hesitancy and combatting misinformation related to COVID-19.

The judge said there is a “substantive need” for the deposition of Slavitt, who served as the White House’s senior COVID-19 advisor. Doughty noted Slavitt’s remarks on a podcast which “showed he has specific knowledge as it relates” to the issues in the lawsuit.

The court order cited a series of public comments made by Psaki when she served as White House press secretary, including calling on social media platforms for consistency in banning disfavored speakers.

“Psaki has made a number of statements that are relevant to the Government’s involvement in a number of social-media platforms’ efforts to censor its users across the board for sharing information related to COVID-19,” Doughty said in his ruling.

Source: The Epoch Times

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-orders-fauci-psaki-top-officials-be-deposed-in-big-tech-censorship-case_4813336.html

The Lie is Falling Apart

Due to a recent strike on this platform, we’re now having to censor ourselves from talking about, say, Pfizer stating that they didn’t test whether its Covid vaccine prevented transmission before it entered the market. We’ll do our best though – and you can do the rest in your own heads. Yes, that’s what it’s come to!

‘Vaccine Hesitancy’ Is 1 of WHO’s Top 10 Global Threats—but Flu Shot Data Tells a Different Story

In 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) proposed 10 threats to global health, such as air pollution, non-communicable diseases, global influenza pandemic, Ebola and other high-threat pathogens, weak primary health care, and HIV. Among them, vaccine hesitancy was also mentioned, which many people might find surprising.

The elevation of this issue to a global health threat is a rather political approach. From this perspective, it should not be acceptable to the public. Just as consumers evaluate the quality of the products they purchase, people want to know the vaccines they are getting are good in quality and effective.  If a vaccine is proven to be effective while there are minimal side effects, most people wouldn’t hesitate to get vaccinated.

Furthermore, vaccination is just one of the preventive measures aimed at protecting the vaccine recipients against certain diseases. And vaccine’s protection effects depend on the functional immune system in the vaccinated people’s bodies. There are many other ways to achieve the same outcomes, such as boosting the individuals’ innate immunity. Also, for some diseases, there are effective medications to cure the patients, alleviate their symptoms, or prevent critical illness.

The term “vaccine hesitancy” is not scientific per se. Rather, it is a political term. In fact, it has become a label that can be used to attack people. In many cases, people who are described as “vaccine hesitant” are also labeled as “anti-science.” This is irrational and shouldn’t be promoted, especially by such an authoritative international health organization as the WHO. This is because the qualities of different vaccines vary greatly. Labeling people “vaccine hesitant” is a practice to violate their right to self-determination.  Therefore, people should question whether there are political operations or interest groups behind the campaigns to attack people for “vaccine hesitancy.”

One such example is the WHO’s promotion of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, in the name of eliminating cervical cancer on a global scale. However, prior to the development of cervical cancer, there are already pre-cancerous cells in many females, which can be caused by various internal mechanisms of the human body. Vaccination alone cannot prevent the development of all cervical cancer cases. Therefore, the WHO’s proposal to eliminate cervical cancer through HPV vaccination is unscientific and sounds like a marketing campaign for the vaccine products. The HPV vaccines would reduce the occurrence of cervical cancer, but cannot eliminate it.

Flu Vaccines Have Varying Effects on the Immune Responses of Different Age Groups

Currently, the most commonly used production method of influenza vaccines is the egg-based approach, in which flu viruses grow and replicate themselves. They are then isolated, purified, and inactivated, before being added to the formulation to produce vaccines. Although cost-effective, this method is prone to mutations, which can lower the vaccines’ effectiveness and cause potential problems, such as weakening the vaccine recipients’ immune system.

Epoch Times Photo

When implementing flu vaccines, the more responses from T cells and B cells, the better. From the graph below, we can see that among children aged 5 to 9, in terms of T-cell response stimulation, inactivated flu vaccines are less effective than live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs) (pdf).

Epoch Times Photo

Furthermore, vaccines are not a panacea that works for everyone or every age group. This graph shows the changes in the T cells of children and adults after their immunization with one dose of LAIV. We can see that although the same type of flu vaccines were administered, in terms of T cell response, the vaccines are more effective in children aged 5 to 9 years than in adults. In addition, different vaccine platforms also have different effects on vaccine recipients.

Therefore, we can conclude that these flu vaccines have varying effects on different age groups. The same vaccines may not have the same protection for everyone, as individual factors such as age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and response to vaccines are also involved, and they may vary greatly among different populations. So, when designing vaccination policies, there should be some adjustment for different age groups. This also further illustrates our points earlier that people should have the self-determination for vaccinations based on their own individual factors, such as the age factor here.

New Generation of Flu Vaccines Will Also Have Mutations and Challenges

Although LAIVs are more effective than inactivated flu vaccines when providing protection, they are not as widely promoted as inactivated vaccines, due to their side effects. Therefore, the next generation vaccines are expected to have better stimulation of T cell responses through new technologies, such as the DNA recombinant technology. One example of a next generation flu vaccine is Wyeth/IL-15/5Flu, which is a T cell-activating vaccine based on the H5N1 flu strain and produced by the pharmaceutical company Wyeth.

However, this T cell-activating vaccine induces a higher incidence and degree of mutation on the influenza A virus genome. That is, even if the virus strains used in the production of the vaccine are not grown from eggs, there will still be mutations at important hemagglutinin-receptor binding sites. For example, in the flu virus strain used in Wyeth/IL-15/5Flu vaccine production, it was found that the mutation at position 34 (involved in receptor binding) in HA protein is 10 times higher than virus strains used for inactivated vaccines.

For instance, when producing these new vaccines, once the mutation-prone virus hemagglutinin’s head domain is removed, its hemagglutinin (HA) stem region, which has a relatively low mutation frequency, will now mutate more. And beneficial adaptation mutations on the polymerase basic 2 (PB2) gene/protein can occur, as the virus adapts to the new production method and environment. As breakthroughs are produced, the stem, which was previously not prone to mutations, would also mutate.

In addition to the mutations brought about by the immune environment, the vaccine companies would also deliberately select the fast-growing strains of influenza virus. This is because for high volume virus production, the choice of virus strains with higher reproduction efficiency is also important. So, it is necessary for vaccine companies to select strains that reproduce fast, in order to grow more viruses with fewer resources.

During this virus strain screening process, mutations concerning gene segments such as the viral enzymes PB1 and PB2 are introduced, and this changes the strains’ replication capability. Also, many of the new generation vaccines are in Vero cells, which are a lineage of monkey kidney epithelial cells and the most popular cell lineage for manufacturing human vaccines.  However, Vero cells are not human cells.  The virus still needs to adapt to a different host when using Vero cells.

The Impact of Annual Vaccination on the Human Immune System and the Flu Virus

In the 1970s, T.W. Hoskins and colleagues observed a phenomenon in a British boarding school for the first time. That is, flu vaccination in prior influenza seasons can reduce the effectiveness of the vaccine in the current season. This phenomenon, known as the “Hoskins effect,” has also been identified by some other studies.

Although academics have been exploring the “Hoskins effect” for decades and scratching their heads over this phenomenon, the general public is not aware of this issue.

Many people believe that the benefits of flu vaccination outweigh its drawbacks. This is why they are promoting the implementation of flu vaccines. Although there have always been questions about the effectiveness of flu vaccines, there haven’t been any large-scale studies on this issue so far.

Currently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends people over the age of 6 months to receive seasonal flu vaccines. However, what are the impact of annual flu vaccination on our immunity?

According to the journal Frontiers in Immunology, a human cohort vaccine study has been conducted since the 2016-2017 flu season with adult (over the age of 18) and teenage (12 to 18 years old) participants, who are vaccinated annually against the seasonal flu. Every flu season, the subjects’ sera samples and personal information are collected and analyzed at the University of Georgia.

Epoch Times Photo

Their immune responses to repeated annual influenza vaccination is tested by hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) composite scores. The participants are enrolled in early September every year, without having received the seasonal flu vaccine. In the teenage participant group, during the 2017-2018 flu season, the hemagglutination inhibition was relatively adequate. However, the inhibition came down in the following flu season. The same phenomenon took place in the adult group, as well.

It can be interpreted that at the beginning of the 2017-2018 flu season, the participants were not vaccinated, and the flu vaccine later provided them with useful protection. However, in the subsequent 2018-2019 flu season, with repeated flu vaccination, the protection offered by the vaccine actually decreased. It has also been observed that the vaccine had become less and less effective among the repeatedly vaccinated participants.

Overall, the HAI composite scores declined significantly from one flu season to the next in teenagers, but somehow remained steady in adult participants. In addition, a comparison of the mean HAI composite scores of prior vaccinated teens and those newly enrolled in the 2018-2019 flu season implies that repeated annual vaccination resulted in reduced immune responses.

Therefore, repeated vaccination strains are associated with reduced boosting of immune responses and thus protection.

The annual flu vaccine contains four different virus strains. It was discovered that if the virus is the same, to very similar year to year, the decline in immune response would be more obvious if the vaccine had been given continuously year to year. In addition, if there is a change in the choice of virus strains between seasons, the vaccine’s protection effect would be better. This may be because the immune system has been fatigued by the repeated vaccination.

The immune system may use the immunological memory based on the previous vaccination when a second slightly different vaccine is administered, leaving the immune system stuck with its first immune responses and unable to generate more effective responses to the second vaccination. However, as flu viral strains change from year to year, the antigens in the vaccine are also adjusted. There has been no tracking of the immune fatigue associated with a particular strain of virus. And the specific mechanism of this phenomenon has not been studied in particular detail.

Epoch Times Photo

In addition, repeated vaccination also forces the virus to undergo mutation, as it guides the virus to develop in a certain direction, as it screens the virus strains. This is called immune escape.

During the natural evolution process, pathogens experience random mutations that change their antigens. Therefore, the vaccine loses its effectiveness against the mutated pathogens. Nevertheless, during the vaccine-driven evolution process, after the vaccine is administered, certain pathogens die, and the surviving ones replicate themselves. After several rounds of repeated vaccination, the surviving pathogens would have gone through several rounds of screening, and the vaccine then has less effect on them. And eventually, vaccine-escape mutants will be screened out.

Epoch Times Photo

Vaccine escape does not just occur for flu vaccines. There are many examples for other bacteria vaccines. Lessons were not rare.

For example, Bordetella pertussis is the bacterium causing pertussis (whooping cough). As the design of the vaccine against Bordetella pertussis was targeting one of its surface-associated proteins called pertactin, through self-screening, more and more pertactin-negative bacterial isolates were replicating themselves more than the other ones.

This immune escape phenomenon may explain the fact that since the 2009-2010 flu season, the effectiveness of the flu vaccines has been below 50 percent most years.

Do Flu Shots Reduce the Rate of Severe Illness?

Many people get the annual flu jabs, because they believe that they can prevent severe illness. However, the results of a Japanese study may disappoint. This study, published in the journal Vaccine in 2014, shows that flu vaccination doesn’t reduce the risk of subsequent hospitalization or prevent severe illness.

Epoch Times Photo

As shown in the table, within 14 days of flu infection, around 40 percent of people who had previously been vaccinated with the flu vaccine were infected with the flu virus. And the percentage of cases in which the individuals got vaccinated and became hospitalized was 9 percent, while this figure was 4 percent for the hospitalized patients who were unvaccinated. Therefore, the flu vaccine doesn’t always reduce disease severity or prevent critical illness as the general public believes, a belief driven by the annual flu vaccination campaigns.

Epoch Times Photo

The CDC also conducted a study on flu-caused critical illness among a vaccinated population recently. The patients with life-threatening illness included those who used invasive ventilation, vasopressor, dialysis, and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

According to this study, the flu vaccine was effective in 75 percent of the cases with life-threatening illness and in 57 percent of the cases with non-life-threatening illness.

However, this study is not very rigorous, as its sample size is very small. More importantly, the factor of underlying medical conditions was not included in the evaluation of the patients’ disease severity, as many of them already had respiratory, cardiovascular, and/or neurological conditions prior to flu infection. The data of disease severity was not stratified based on different types and degrees of underlying medical conditions. The data shown in this paper only pointed out how many people, whether vaccinated or not, have underlying medical conditions. Therefore, this study is very biased and it draws more conclusions than its data can suggest.

So, in summary, objective evaluation of vaccine efficacy and safety are critical to provide unbiased information to the public.  And international organizations or health regulators should avoid politicizing the people who carefully evaluate of their choice of vaccinations.  “Vaccine Hesitancy” is a political label that should be abandoned by health agencies and international organizations like WHO.

Source: The Epoch Times

https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/vaccine-hesitancy-is-1-of-whos-top-10-global-threats-but-flu-shot-data-tells-a-different-story_4790041.html?

Bringing the COVID-19 Cabal to Justice

Dr. Mercola recently interviewed Dr. Francis Boyle for the third time since the COVID-19 outbreak. Boyle, as you may recall, is a noted anti-war and anti-biological weapons legal expert. He is the author of the 1989 federal law, the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act, passed unanimously by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by the White House, banning the production of biological weapons and dangerous “gain-of-function” experimentation, including genetically engineered pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2. The BWATA Act basically serves as implementing legislation for the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention, signed by the U.S., China, and most nations.

In Mercola’s interview in March of 2020, Boyle was among the first to argue that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, precipitating COVID 19, was not a natural zoonotic spillover from coronaviruses in bats, but rather a genetically engineered bioweapon, deliberately constructed by an international cabal of U.S. and Chinese scientists, funded by the Chinese and U.S. military, as well as Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes of Health and the Chinese Centers for Disease Control. Knowing of course that producing bioweapons are a serious violation of international law, punishable by life in prison, Chinese and U.S. officials pretended that weaponizing SARS in North Carolina and Wuhan, China and other labs was a form of legal medical and bio-defense research.

In his most recent interview with Dr. Boyle, Mercola summarizes:

“Early on in the COVID pandemic, Francis Boyle, Ph.D., was sure it was the result of a lab leak. He believes monkeypox is another lab creation, as it now suddenly has 30 mutations from the wild monkeypox found in Africa.

President Biden recently signed the Executive Order on ‘Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing: Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and Secure American Bioeconomy,’ and this order basically promises we’ll see additional manmade pandemics.

Section 12, paragraph VII in Biden’s executive order states that the purpose of the order is to “develop and work and promote and implement … dual-use research of concern, and research involving potentially pandemic and other high-consequence pathogens.”

That means they intend to perform gain-of-function research on deadly pathogens, any one of which could be released to create a global pandemic when a scare event is necessary to trick populations into choosing a false sense of safety over freedom. Boyle believes there’s no doubt there will be additional pandemics, because they’re intentionally creating them.

Boyle believes monkeypox was engineered and released in an effort to scare governments and populations into accepting the World Health Organization’s pandemic treaty, which would make the WHO the sole decision-maker in pandemic situations…”

Learn more: Why Additional Engineered Pandemics Are To Be Expected

Watch the Mercola video interview with Francis Boyle on BitChute

Source: Organic Consumers Association

California’s Misinformation Epidemic Pt. 1

by Midwestern Doctor

Throughout human history, one of the most valuable commodities has always been ownership over the “truth,” as so much power and profit results from holding a truth that aligns with your vested interests. Once larger societies formed, determining “truth,“ was always a key societal need, and excluding a few enlightened societies, the method of determining truth normally evolved as follows:

  1. Might makes right.
  2. Judging the preponderance of evidence.
  3. A growing, and eventually unsustainable corruption of most “evidence.”
  4. Societal collapse or evolution.

Note: This trend roughly follows the 250 year life cycle of empires mapped out by a British general some suspect the U.S. is nearing the end of.

In many ways, forcing two opposing viewpoints to present their evidence and then having the appropriate parties determine which side presented the preponderance of evidence and thus “wins” is the best solution our species has developed for settling otherwise irreconcilable differences of opinion.

Unfortunately, as our times have shown, the natural response to having our society place a heavy weight on “evidence” is to have dishonest parties “win,” not by being on the side with the best evidence, but rather by buying out the entire evidence base and censoring the opposition — effectively creating a much more sophisticated form of “might makes right.”

In many ways, the anatomy of corruption within “science-based” medicine is quite simple and like many other things in business, continually reuses the same formulas. As a result, once you understand how corruption plays out in a few areas, it becomes feasible to understand how things will play out in many others.

I thus would argue many of the events we witnessed throughout COVID-19 (e.g. the sudden extreme censorship of scientific debate recently detailed by Pierre Kory), simply represents all of this longstanding corruption metastasizing to a degree which finally became visible to the general public.

Public Relations

Although Sigmund Freud is typically thought of as the most influential psychologist in history, his nephew Edward Bernays created an invisible industry that has had a far greater influence than Freud. To create his mark on the world, Bernays argued that the principles of psychology should be utilized not for individual psychotherapy but rather to control the population so that the irrational impulses of the masses could not derail the progress of society, and not surprisingly, the power-hungry elite fully embraced his narrative.

When you study the organizational structure of modern society, you will continually come across hierarchal pyramids being utilized that allow the top of the pyramid to exert a massive influence over the rest of society.

This is for instance why in medicine, doctors are expected to follow “guidelines” created by unaccountable committees that are typically composed of individuals being paid off by the pharmaceutical industry, and why in most cases it is nearly impossible for a patient to have any type of care provided to them without the approval of a doctor. Thus, by buying out a few committees, it becomes possible to exert a massive influence on the general public.

Public relations is essentially the science of how to create a pyramidal hierarchy throughout the media and to leverage that control so the general public can be manipulated into serving the interests of the sponsor.

We recently witnessed what I believe to be the most aggressive PR campaign in history and the collective effort to pull out every possible stop to sell the COVID-19 vaccines to the American public (ironically one of the individuals I know who became disabled from these vaccines worked in the industry and worked with a passionate zeal for over a year beforehand on the PR campaign for Moderna).

Studying the PR industry is quite depressing because it shows how much of the news is “fake,” just how manipulative much of it is, and how many foundational beliefs we hold in the culture are simply the product of a corporation’s public relations campaign. For those interested in this subject, an excellent book can be found here, a youtube documentary here, and an article here.

One of the most common tactics utilized in public relations is to take a complex subject and distill it down to a simple phrase that reframes it in terms that are favorable to the sponsor and removes the critical nuances from a debate (frequently this process is equated to weaponizing language).

Because the entire PR process is based around creating a pyramidal hierarchy that defers to the top, you can frequently observe these messages or scripted phrases that were developed by a PR firm be simultaneously disseminated on countless networks, including the “independent” ones:

Note: This behavior exists on both sides of the political spectrum; I am citing this one because it is the best montage I have come across.

“Misinformation”

During Obama’s presidency, the term “misinformation” started to come into vogue and was deployed to sink Trump’s presidential campaign (which failed as Trump managed to make the “fake news” meme every media platform was promoting stick to CNN instead of him). Before long, this steamrolled into “misinformation” being used as a justification to censor any viewpoint that challenged the status quo.

Initially, easy to disparage groups such as members of the far-right were targeted for censorship by Silicon Valley, before long liberal friends I knew who practiced holistic medical approaches (and had supported the initial censorship) were targeted, and by the time COVID-19 happened, this behavior had metastasized to the point it was nearly impossible to publicize any treatment for the disease or any potential harm from the vaccines.

Governments have continued their relentless push for censorship, best illustrated by the recent U.N. speech by New Zealand’s prime minister that declared free speech on the internet a weapon of war and called for the international community to work towards curating (censoring) all online information that questions government narratives.

Prior to Obama’s presidency, I had heard there was a push to establish a pyramidal hierarchy for all information on the internet, with a few major tech companies serving as the “gatekeepers” the public could access the information through, but until 2016, this always seemed like something that would happen in the far distant future. Recently, I learned that Sharyl Atkinson was able to identify when and where this all began:

“I first heard the term [curated] applied to controlling news and information in October 2016 when President Obama introduced the concept at an appearance at the private research university Carnegie Mellon. Obama claimed a “curating” function had become necessary.

The public at large had not been asking for any such thing. Instead, it was the invention of powerful interests that apparently felt the need to get a grip on public opinion — interests that were losing the information war online. But the concept is contrary to the nature of a free society and an open Internet. It would take some clever manipulation to convince the public to allow such “curating.”

“We’re going to have to rebuild, within this Wild, Wild West of information flow, some sort of curating function that people agree to,” said Obama. “… [T]here has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.”

As far as I know, that signaled the start of what would become a global media initiative to have third parties insert themselves as arbiters of facts, opinions, and truth in the news and online [prior to this they were viewed as a joke and fortunately still are by half of the electorate].”

Credible Sources

Most of our modern hierarchies operate on the basis of being “credible.” For example, in journalism, about a century ago during the era of Bernays, the concept of “professional journalism” was created and a standard was set that news could not be considered credible unless it was disseminated by someone who belonged to a corrupt credible news organization that served the bidding of those in power.

This article for example discusses the profound consequences of the monopolization of journalism, and how as the decades have gone by, the issue has only gotten worse and worse.

Sharyl Attkisson’s book (the source of the above quotation) describes how pervasive corruption gradually entered her industry, and how despite her clout in the network as a premier news anchor, more and more of her investigations were not permitted to air by her superiors.

For example, in 1997, Clinton legalized direct pharmaceutical advertising to consumers. As the networks become beholden to their new advertisers, anything critical of that industry, such as vaccine safety, was no longer permitted to air.

In the early 2000s, Atkinson was assigned to report on the controversial military anthrax and smallpox vaccinations, and not long after, the smallpox campaign was cancelled. Now, in contrast, no criticism whatsoever is permitted of the much more dangerous COVID-19 vaccines (and now even the government is paying to incentivize this censorship).

To see how much things have shifted consider this report that was aired on the nightly news after the 1976 swine flu vaccine debacle (this vaccine was not safe and I directly know people who developed permanent complications from it that persist to this day, but at the same time, it was much safer than the COVID-19 vaccines):

Something like this could never air today.

Evidence-Based Medicine

The pyramidal hierarchy of our society requires creating faith in authoritative sources and then having each institution work in unison to promote the sanctity of those (easy to control) sources. “Professional journalism” is one such example, another is the widespread societal adherence to the CDC’s arbitrary and ineffective guidelines (best illustrated by the absurd dictates they and other Western health authorities put forward in regards to social distancing during physical intimacy).

When evidence-based medicine (EBM) started, it was sorely needed by the medical profession because many disastrous practices were unchallengeable dogmas. However, in due time, as corruption entered the process, EBM became yet another means for “[financial] might to make right” as its authority was shifted into a pyramidal hierarchy. Presently, the “authority” in EBM rests in 5 areas.

  • The sanctity of all data.
  • Conducting large randomized clinical trials.
  • Peer-reviewed publications in high-impact scientific journals.
  • Authoritative committees reviewing the previous three to produce guidelines.
  • Other institutions (e.g. the media and the courts) upholding the sanctity of the data and evidenced-based guidelines.

There have been major issues in each of these areas for decades as industry has steadily worked to expand its influence over EBM, but as many observers noted, these issues spun completely out of control during COVID-19. Let’s review each of them:

  1. The sanctity of all data — The major problem with “data” is that most of it is never made available for outside analysis, which allows those who “own” the data to only present data that casts the owner in a favorable light (which essentially makes the data worthless).The pharmaceutical industry nonetheless has been able to sustain this practice by arguing that disclosing their data would constitute a violation of proprietary trade secrets. Thus excluding the occasional instance where they are forced to open their records as part of the discovery process (e.g. in the lawsuits against the antidepressant manufacturers) that research fraud and the concealment of critically important safety data never come to light (and never has for vaccines).Previously, one of the most egregious offenders in this regard were the statin manufacturers who have deliberately withheld their data from the public for decades. A corrupt Oxford academic consortium, the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists’ (CTT) Collaboration has access to that data and has published numerous pro-industry analyses of it, but despite continual outside requests, has refused to ever make this data available for outside scrutiny.This is concerning given the significant evidence that has emerged demonstrating statins are both ineffective and harmful, and has led to many more honest academics attempting to independently obtain this critical data from regulators.Almost all of the COVID-19 vaccine data likewise was never made available to the public (although the companies have suggested it may be made available a few years from now); instead, we simply received highly curated publications in prestigious medical journals. Since the vaccines have entered the market, countless red flags on their safety and efficacy have emerged in large datasets.However, in many cases, that data has only been available because it was leaked by whistleblowers or obtained by court order, and as the recent events in Israel showed (Israel agreed to be Pfizer’s laboratory to test their vaccines and many global vaccine policies were crafted from the Israeli data), much of the incriminating data against this program was deliberately concealed by governments around the world.On one hand, I view all of this as an immensely positive development, as in the past critical data suppression like this typically remained hidden and forgotten. On the other hand, I consider it completely unacceptable the public is being forced to take a vaccination product on the basis of data they are not even permitted to review.
  2. Conducting large randomized clinical trials — We are reflexively conditioned by the educational system to assume a clinical trial has no value unless it is randomized and controlled. While it is true that controlling for the placebo effect through blinding somewhat improves the accuracy of a study, conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is immensely expensive, and the biases introduced by those costs dwarf those obtained by controlling for the placebo effect.A little known fact is that findings from study designs that do not rely on industry funding (i.e. retrospective observational controlled studies) reach the same conclusion, on average, to those of RCT’s. Yet the former are near systematically ignored by the high-impact journals and medical societies.Further, a frequent narrative parroted by high-impact journals and science news writers is that findings from studies deemed to be of a “low quality design” cannot be trusted. Not true. In a comparison of conclusions between groups of high and low quality studies, no meaningful differences were found.Put differently, RCT’s require industry funding, and industry funding has repeatedly been found to heavily bias trial data in favor of its sponsor. To highlight the absurdity of this, as the whistleblower Brooke Jackson showed, the RCT she supervised for the Pfizer vaccine was not even blinded because the trial site cut so many corners to produce a positive result for Pfizer.For those who wish to know about how the industry games clinical trials, this bookthis book and this book are the three best resources I have found on the subject.
  3. Peer reviewed publications in high-impact scientific journals — In the same way we are conditioned to reflexively dismiss anything that is not a large RCT, many people will not consider a scientific trial unless it is published in a high-impact peer-reviewed journal.Not surprisingly, there is a lot of money in this area and most of it comes from Big Pharma (which either comes from advertisements within the journal or agreements to purchase thousands of printed copies of that issue of the journal).This creates a setting where studies that support industry interests regardless of their deficiencies are published (e.g. pharmaceutical ghostwriting is a major source of fraud in the peer-reviewed literature), whereas articles that challenge their interests are never published. This has been a longstanding issue, and the earliest example I remember coming across was discussed in this 2001 book:(I unfortunately was never able to track down the referenced news story; please let me know if you have)The positions of the journal sponsors also gradually enter the medical culture, and the peer-review culture frequently censors or attacks publications that do not match industry findings. One of the best examples was Andrew Wakefield’s 1998 study which ruffled so many feathers by suggesting a link between autism and vaccination that the study was retracted and a thorough example was made of him (e.g. he lost his license) to deter further research into vaccine injuries.Many other examples also exist, such as the extreme hostility faced by researchers who publish data that is critical of other sacred cows like routine statin usage or psychiatric overmedication.Because of the systemic biases that exist against publishing anything which challenges medical orthodoxies, it can often take years or decades for bad practices to be abandoned as no one is willing to on take the risk of publishing studies refuting them.For example, a few of my Ph.D. friends who researched viral genomes knew within a day of the original SARS-CoV-2 genetic sequence being published that it came from a lab, yet not a single one was willing to expose themselves to the personal risk they would take from authoring a publication on that subject.At this point, there seems to be an unwritten understanding that the introduction and conclusion of a scientific publication must match the prevailing biases of medicine. It is hence always fascinating to see just how often an article’s conclusion is not supported by the data within it (sadly few ever read those parts of the paper).Throughout COVID-19, these problems also became much worse. To share a few memorable examples:
    • A large study was published in the Lancet which showed data from around the world indicated hydroxychloroquine killed COVID-19 patients who received it and was used by the WHO as justification to suspend clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine (along with governments forbidding its administration to patients).Outside evaluators realized the data was nonsensical (leading to serious questions over how one of the best editorial boards in the world let it be published), the company that provided the data effectively admitted fraud had been conducted, and the study was retracted. Another one of the top 5 medical journals, the NEJM, also published a study utilizing Surgisphere’s fraudulent dataset.
    • Despite a tsunami of data showing severe harm from the COVID-19 vaccines, it has been virtually impossible for any publication on the topic to enter the peer-review literature.
    • As Pierre Kory has detailed throughout the last few years, numerous large clinical trials have been conducted that clearly show a benefit from ivermectin for COVID-19 and no risks associated with the therapy. Despite the evidence for ivermectin being stronger than what can be found for almost any other drug on the market, as Kory’s recent series shows, it is nearly impossible to have a study supporting ivermectin be published (unless the conclusion says the opposite).When they are instead published as preprints they often are retracted for political reasons (retracting a preprint is absurd), and not surprisingly, ivermectin is now widely viewed by the medical community as both unsafe and ineffective.
    Currently I believe that of the top five medical journals, the BMJ is the only “prestigious” medical journal still conducting itself in a manner deserving of its reputation.
  4. Authoritative committees reviewing the previous three to produce guidelines — A common complaint from conservatives is that unelected bureaucrats are allowed to control our lives with impunity. One area where this is particularly true can be found within the committee model where “experts” are nominated to assess existing evidence and produce a consensus on what should be done.Even though those guidelines which bypassed the legislative process should not be treated as law (as was ruled by a federal judge), in most cases they are. As you might expect, the people who make it onto these committees tend to have heavy financial conflicts of interest that inevitably result in their voting for their sponsors. Consider this paraphrased example that was shared in chapter 7 of Doctoring Data:The National Cholesterol Education Programme (NCEP) has been tasked by the NIH to develop [legally enforceable] guidelines for treating cholesterol levels. Excluding the chair (who was by law prohibited from having financial conflicts of interest), the other 8 members on average were on the payroll of 6 statin manufacturers.In 2004, NCEP reviewed 5 large statin trials and recommended: “Aggressive LDL lowering for high-risk patients [primary prevention] with lifestyle changes and statins.” [these recommendations in turn were adopted around the world].In 2005 a Canadian division of the Cochrane Collaboration reviewed 5 large statin trials (3 were the same as NCEP’s, while the other 2 had also reached a positive conclusion for statin therapy). That assessment instead concluded: “Statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.”Note: The Cochrane Collaboration (prior to 2012-2016 when they began taking industry money from groups like the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and switched to defending their interests such as the HPV vaccine), was the group that best objectively evaluated existing clinical evidence.Many committees that directed the pandemic response have engaged in egregious misconduct. Consider for example the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the CDC committee that rubber stamps each new vaccine that enters the market (the only exception I know of was overruled by the current CDC director).The ACIP is the committee responsible for many of the vaccine mandates we have faced, and its rulings in favor of vaccination often bordered on the absurd. Similarly, Steve Kirsch was recently able to prove that the chair of the committee is willfully choosing to disregard Israeli data that undermines the justification for the entire vaccination campaign.I believe that the most corrupt committee during the pandemic response was the NIH one responsible for determining the appropriate therapies for COVID-19. Some (and possibly all) of its members were appointed by Anthony Fauci, many had personal ties to Fauci and almost all of them held significant financial conflicts of interest with Gilead, remdesivir’s manufacturer.Not surprisingly, that committee has consistently recommended against every therapy that effectively treats COVID-19 but is off-patent (and hence not profitable). Conversely, their recommendation for remdesivir is why it was the required treatment throughout the US hospital system despite the evidence for the drug being atrocious (a more detailed and referenced summary of this corruption can be found here).In many ways, the remdesivir story is eerily similar to the early days of HIV. There, Fauci used his influence to keep a variety of effective therapies away from dying AIDS patients so that he could win approval for AZT, a dangerous drug many believe significantly worsened the prognosis of those who received it.
  5. Other institutions (e.g. the media and the courts) upholding the sanctity of the data and evidenced-based guidelines — Many people I know used a variety of integrative therapies (e.g. intravenous vitamin C) to treat COVID-19 during the early days of the pandemic, and successfully saved many lives at the same time countless Americans were being sent to the hospitals to die (as they had no treatment for COVID-19 besides often lethal ventilators).Yet, it was those who treated COVID-19 successfully (including a few of my friends) who were targeted by the government and either served with a cease and desist or prosecuted for “endangering” the public by utilizing unproven therapies not supported by the COVID-19 treatment guidelines.The mass media was also fully complicit in this and never once mentioned any option for COVID-19 (other than needing to get more ventilators or vaccines), except when attacking the doctors who were providing life-saving outpatient therapies. However, while the new’s conduct was egregious, by far the biggest offender was Big Tech.

Curating Information

As I think through all the things that had to come together to enable the pandemic profiteers to destroy our economy, withhold life-saving treatments from the American public, and mandate a disastrous vaccination on the populace, I believe Obama’s push for the Silicon Valley to become the arbiter of what we were allowed to see online was by far the most consequential.

Since that time, I have observed a remarkable decline in the quality of discourse on many social media websites (as many worthwhile topics are now censored or flooded with bots — Substack is a rare exception) and it has become much more difficult to find the information I am looking for online (to the point I sometimes need to use Russia’s search engine to find it).

Throughout history, freedom of speech has always been a hotly contested subject as people tend to support it, except for viewpoints they disagree with, and frequently lack the insight to recognize why those positions are at odds with each other. Societies likewise follow cyclical trends towards and away from totalitarianism and fascist censorship.

The earliest example I know of was shared with me by a scholar who had reviewed the plays of ancient Greece and had found that as censorship (e.g. political correctness) entered the plays, it immediately preceded the fall of Greek democracy and an authoritarian government taking over. From studying countless iterations of this cycle, I now believe the following:

  • It must be acknowledged that any position you hold could be wrong or based on erroneous information.
  • It is important to defend the right of those you disagree with to speak and not hate them because they hold viewpoints you adamantly oppose.
  • If you refuse to defend your position in an open and fair debate, you are probably wrong.
  • Very strict stipulations must exist on what speech can be outlawed, and those stipulations must be agreed upon by (nearly) the entire society. Some things such as shouting “fire” in a movie theater as a prank everyone can agree on. Anything everyone cannot agree on I would argue does not meet the standard that must be met for censorship.
  • The government may incentivize speech it agrees with, but it cannot restrict speech it disagrees with.
  • Any attempt you make to censor a viewpoint you disagree with is not worth it because the censorship you helped create will inevitably be turned on you in the future.

During Obama’s presidency, two major changes emerged in Silicon Valley. The first many are aware of was an obsession (by these otherwise evil companies) with saving the world through social justice that I would argue was analogous to the well known practice of Greenwashing, where an egregious polluter conducts a token environmental initiative and through doing so successfully recasts themselves as protectors of the environment.

This social justice focus was particularly problematic as it was used to justify the censorship of anything that was not politically correct and I would argue that many of the tech employees who helped spearhead the movement are now directly experiencing the consequences of the climate they created.

Note: This focus on censorship in lieu of debating opposing (“unsafe”) viewpoints also creeped into the university system and then the culture during Obama’s presidency and I believe was a direct consequence of policies enacted by his Department of Education.

The second, much more important one was that Big Tech became a key financial supporter of the Democrat party, and to varying degrees merged with the pharmaceutical industry and biotech. Because of this, there was a seismic realignment in the priorities of the Democrat party and it began ardently supporting those industries.

It is important to recognize how these two trends dovetailed. Big Tech was able to use their “altruistic” focus on social justice to distract the public from the more sinister direction their industry was moving in by using the standard for censorship they had established in the name of creating a “safe” (politically correct) environment; while at the same time targeting threats to their partners in the pharmaceutical and biotech industry by censoring any voices suggesting dangers were associated with those products.

From watching each piece of the plan that has been rolled out throughout my career, I suspect the vision of these three industries is to transform medicine into an algorithmic practice where most medical “decisions” in patient care are made by an AI system and the human body is treated as a genomic software code that can be “solved” by programmers.

Although this approach will have the ability to overcome certain issues we presently face in medicine, it is also fundamentally incapable of addressing many of the needs of each human being who goes through the healthcare system and will likely prove disastrous to our species.

Antitrust Activity

At the time Bill Gates founded the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation he was one of the most disliked individuals in America. This was because he had leveraged the power of his operating system Windows, which was on almost every computer in America, to also monopolize the software market and prevent competitors like Netscape (an early internet browser) from being used by consumers.

Since this monopolistic behavior was illegal, Microsoft was sued for antitrust violations, and throughout the court process, Bill Gates was revealed to be a nasty individual who was doing everything he could to bury his competitors. To address the negative public perception of him, Gates founded the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to recast himself as a philanthropist and through this PR stunt was able to successfully remediate his public image.

From the foundation’s inception, Gates repeated the same antitrust behavior he had leveraged in the past but instead directed it toward the field of global public health. I first became aware of this behavior after I learned of the disastrous vaccination campaigns he conducted in India. For example to quote The Real Anthony Fauci:

“India’s Federal Ministry of Health suspended the [HPV vaccine] trials and appointed an expert parliamentary committee to investigate the scandal. Indian government investigators found that Gates-funded researchers at PATH committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls into the trial, bullying illiterate parents, and forging consent forms. Gates provided health insurance for his PATH staff but not to any participants in the trials, and refused medical care to the hundreds of injured girls.”

Gates also diverted a large portion of the global health budget towards eradicating the last few remaining cases of polio by giving large numbers of the (live) oral vaccine to third world countries, in some instances 50 doses by the age of five. This was disastrous around the world, for example paralyzing approximately 491,000 children over two decades in India.

In addition to vaccine fanaticism, Gates engaged in other “public health” measures that are more accurately described as colonialist practices. These included forcing poor women around the world to receive Depo-Provera (this is a long-acting injectable birth control that can permanently impair fertility) and pushing communities to abandon their traditional forms of farming and switch to genetically modified industrial agriculture (which places them at risk of starvation anytime a commodity price goes up).

One of my friends who has worked for the WHO for decades told me that the WHO has implemented a lot of good public health measures that saved lives. Unfortunately, ever since Gates got involved, those measured have fallen to the wayside and the focus has been on monopolistic public health practices that ultimately serve to enrich a few select industries at the expense of the third-world citizens the measures are alleged to help.

Similarly, many in the global health community have stated that since Gates has so much influence over the global health budget (and the WHO), it is nearly impossible to criticize or question any policy he promotes. To further entrench this monopoly, his foundation has prioritized buying out the press (be it groups like the Cochrane Collaboration or putting over 300 million into countless media outlets around the world), so that anything that challenges his vision of public health is “misinformation.”

Much more could be said about Gates (and is aptly summarized within The Real Anthony Fauci). However, we will focus on the two most important correlates to the misinformation epidemic:

  • Gates made a lot of money from the pandemic. For example, on 9/4/2019, two months before COVID-19 emerged in China, he invested 55 million in the company that produced Pfizer’s vaccine. Last year that investment was worth 550 million.
  • It has now been admitted by the mainstream media that Gates (and the Wellcome Trust) directed the pandemic response that failed disastrously from a public health perspective (but not in money-making). One quote from that article is particularly telling:“Leaders of three of the four organizations maintained that lifting intellectual property protections [which would prevent everyone from making money] was not needed to increase vaccine supplies – which activists believed would have helped save lives.”

In the second half of this series, we will show how this antitrust behavior and militant censorship metastasized within Silicon Valley and how increasingly draconian laws enforcing vaccine mandates for the pharmaceutical industry have been implemented by the California legislature.

Source: Mercola.com Accessed 11 Oct 22

Negligent COVID-19 Treatment of Unvaccinated Patients by Doctors Continues to Surface

Greg Eyerly was a perfectly healthy, unvaccinated man. On Sep. 22, 2001, he was admitted to a hospital in Oregon. The doctors subjected Eyerly to a set of protocols that made his health rapidly deteriorate. His wife, Joanne Eyerly, is convinced he was euthanized.

This is not an isolated case. The Epoch Times talked to a registered nurse in New Jersey. Gloria Kniesler was fired for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine. She now volunteers to review cases like Greg Eyerly’s and says that she has seen “thousands upon thousands” of medical documents that describe what he went through.

The Epoch Times reached out to the World Health Organization, the CDC, and the NIH to get a clarification on which organization is responsible for making up these protocols. The NIH wrote back and said that the agency is not the source of the protocols, and that it doesn’t recommend “the use of fentanyl, sedatives, or malnourishment” to treat COVID-19.

Today on Frontline Health, we look at two stories of hospital negligence and what could be its source of motivation.

Read the full report here.

View the video here: https://www.theepochtimes.com/negligent-covid-19-treatment-of-unvaccinated-patients-by-doctors-continues-to-surface_4705150.html?

Source: The Epoch Times

Why Government Health Care Kills More People Than It Helps

  • August 17, 2022, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky publicly admitted the agency’s COVID response “fell short,” and that an internal reorganization has been launched to improve response times and data sharing, and to make health guidance easier to understand. Six days before this announcement, the CDC published updated COVID guidance, now matching what “misinformation spreaders” have called for all along
  • The vow to revamp fails to take into account the real reasons why people no longer trust the CDC, namely their dishonesty, their suppression of science that doesn’t fit the Great Reset narrative, and their protection of Big Pharma at the expense of American lives, including children and pregnant women
  • Despite widespread failures and blatant corruption within the CDC, the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug Administration, the Health and Human Services’ (HHS) is asking for a bigger budget. Its proposed budget for 2023 is $1.7 TRILLION in mandatory spending and another $127.3 BILLION in discretionary spending
  • Of those budgeted trillions, the CDC will in 2023 receive about 1% of the HHS budget, or $10.6 billion — $2.3 billion more than its 2022 appropriation — and this includes “mandatory funding to establish a Vaccines for Adults program”
  • The CDC being wrong on everything about the pandemic — and taking two and a half years to admit even a fraction of it — is proof positive that centralizing health care decisions is a bad idea. Ideally, all that HHS money should be divided among the states. We’d be far better off with local community programs handling current HHS services — including pandemic response

After botching the COVID response in every possible and improbable way, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now wants more money — and more power.

August 17, 2022, CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky publicly admitted the agency’s COVID response “fell short,” and that an internal reorganization has been launched to improve response times and data sharing, and to make health guidance easier to understand.1,2

“My goal is a new, public health action-oriented culture at CDC that emphasizes accountability, collaboration, communication, and timeliness,” Walensky said in a statement.

The problem is that reorganization will not fix the foundational problem, which is that the CDC can’t seem to quit protecting Big Pharma the expense of public health. Americans have lost faith in the CDC for the simple reason that it’s been lying to us day in and day out for two and a half years.

They’ve flouted basic rules and regulations, they’ve redefined well-established medical terms to suit the chosen narrative, they’ve made recommendations without scientific support while telling us to “trust the science.” They’ve completely ignored massive, unprecedented safety signals for both the COVID jabs and remdesivir, flatly refusing to answer questions about the mounting deaths and injuries from these drugs.

They’ve refused to take into account other public health parameters such as suicides and alcoholism caused by lockdowns, and deaths due to lack of treatment for chronic conditions such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer. They’re also refusing to address what is clearly deteriorating immune function among the COVID-jabbed. The list goes on.

In March 2022, Walensky admitted they “never suspected” the effectiveness of the shots might wane, despite clear and abundant evidence — shared on alternative media platforms — that the shots were not working.

What’s more, she admitted her source for the “95% effective” claim was a CNN report (which in turn pulled its information directly from a Pfizer press release). That’s the level of data gathering for decision making we’re dealing with here.

I guess that’s what happens when the vast majority of CDC employees, including Walensky herself, work from home for years on end. Considering Walensky STILL works from home to this day,3,4 one also wonders how effective these supposed reorganization efforts can actually be.

The CDC is a wholly captured agency, beholden to Big Pharma, and as long as a single decision maker remains, they can reorganize and restructure to their hearts’ content. It won’t change a thing. As noted by The Defender,5 the CDC needs to be replaced with “a public health model that operates independently from Big Pharma.”

Health and Human Services to Get $1.7 Trillion

Failures and ineptitudes be damned, the Health and Human Services’ (HHS) proposed budget6 for 2023 is now an eye-popping $1.7 TRILLION in mandatory spending (up from 1.5 trillion in 20227), and another $127.3 BILLION in discretionary spending (down from 131.8 billion in 20228).

Operating divisions9 under the HHS include not only the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, but also the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid and several others. In total, the HHS employs some 80,000 people.10

Of those budgeted trillions, the CDC will in 2023 receive 1% of the HHS budget or $10.6 billion11 — $2.3 billion more than its 2022 appropriation — and this includes “mandatory funding to establish a Vaccines for Adults program.”

Yet with all that supposed brain power and money, what exactly do they accomplish? I would argue “precious little,” and the CDC’s COVID response is a perfect example of how our taxpayer funds are being wasted on advice that range from bad to worse.

The problem with concentrated power is that it gets corrupted. After 69 years, it seems the HHS is finally entering its death throes, as corruption within many of its operating divisions is now shockingly blatant.

The same goes for the World Health Organization. Incidentally, its biannual budget for 2022-2023 of $6.7 billion12 is dwarfed by the HHS budget. Still, the WHO is now seeking to gain control over health decisions globally. I explain why this is such a horrendous and unworkable idea in “The WHO Is a Corrupt, Unhealthy Organization.”

Ideally, all that HHS money should be divided among the states. We’d be far better off with local community programs handling current HHS services — including pandemic response.

The CDC being wrong on everything about the pandemic, and taking two and a half years to admit even a fraction of it, is proof positive that centralizing health care decisions is a bad idea. Ideally, all that money should be divided among the states. We’d be far better off with local community programs handling current HHS services — including pandemic response.

CDC’s Botched Test Kits

The errors of the CDC are too numerous to recount in a single article, but let’s take a look at one of the doozies, namely its botched COVID test. As reported by HealthDay reporters Robert Preidt and Robin Foster, back in December 2021:13

“Along with being contaminated, there was also a basic design flaw in COVID-19 testing kits created by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention early in the pandemic, a new agency review shows.

It was already known that the PCR kits were contaminated, but the CDC’s findings published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE14 are the first to note a design error that caused false positives.

When the CDC’s test kits were developed and distributed in the early weeks of the pandemic, there were no other authorized tests available … The agency started shipping the test kits to public health laboratories in early February 2020, but many labs soon told the CDC that the tests were producing inconclusive results.

The CDC acknowledged later that month that the kits were flawed, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration officials said in April that poor manufacturing practices had caused contamination of the kits …”

So, the tests had not just one but two problems. First, they were contaminated with synthetic fragments, sequences of genetic material from the virus that are used to ensure the test is working properly. These synthetic sequences are thought to have contaminated the kits during quality testing, as they were being manufactured in the same CDC lab where quality testing took place.

Secondly, the CDC failed to catch a serious design flaw. The test was designed to detect the presence of three specific genetic regions or sequences of the virus. The test kit included a set of primers that bound to and made copies of those regions (when they were present in the patient, indicating exposure to the virus), as well as probes that fluoresced to signal that copying was taking place.

To work properly, these primers and probes had to bind to the genetic sequences, but not to each other. Here, one of the probes had a tendency to bind to one of the primers, thereby triggering a fluorescent signal, suggesting a positive result. This is how the test ended up producing an unacceptable number of false positives.

Eventually, smaller private companies ended up providing most of the PCR tests — without encountering these contamination and design flaw problems. The fact that the PCR test cannot identify an active infection and were used to create a false “casedemic” is another story, which we’ve covered multiple times. Here too, the CDC displayed shocking dishonesty, alternatively hiding and manipulating data to make the pandemic out to be something it really wasn’t.

They also recommended mask wearing despite overwhelming scientific evidence showing masks don’t prevent the spread of viruses. Time and again, CDC leadership made public health decisions on what appears to have been nothing more than assumption, personal opinion or fear — and that’s if you’re kind enough to exclude the possibility of fraud and collusion to benefit Big Pharma and the globalist Great Reset agenda.

Did HHS Create the Problem?

As mentioned, the HHS runs the NIH and CDC, both of which are implicated in the creation of SARS-CoV-2. So, basically, the same circle of people who may have created the problem are also in charge of solving it and providing a cure.

We’ve already seen how “effective” they’ve been in that regard. They’ve devastated public health with useless lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing, and killed an as-yet undetermined but extraordinarily high number of people with improper, dangerous and experimental treatments.

As noted in “Why the COVID Jab Should Be Banned for Pregnant Women,” the CDC to this day insists pregnant women get the COVID shot,15 despite trial data suggesting it may cause miscarriage in 8 out of 10 cases.16,17,18 Will reorganization eventually correct this murderous advice?

In an August 2, 2022, Current Affairs interview,19 professor Jeffrey Sachs, chair of The Lancet’s COVID-19 Commission, said he believes the U.S. government is preventing a thorough investigation into the origin of the pandemic, for the simple reason that the virus was the result of U.S. research. Indeed, there are patents spanning decades to suggest that’s true (see “Patents Prove SARS-CoV-2 Is a Manufactured Virus”).

If our very worst suspicions are true, then the U.S. government funded not only one bioweapon but two — the original SARS-CoV-2 and the gene transfer injections misrepresented as “COVID vaccines.” And the HHS divisions of the FDA and CDC went along with all of it, not even pausing at the possibility of killing or injuring 6-month-old infants and toddlers.

Waging War on Pathogens Is a Failed Strategy

In an August 10, 2022, Brownstone Institute article, Aaron Vandiver, a wildlife conservationist, writer and former litigator, reviews why the global war on pathogens is a failed strategy that needs to end:20

“Bill Gates has called the global response to COVID-19 a ‘world war.’ His militaristic language has been echoed by Anthony Fauci and other architects of COVID-19 policy for the last two and half years … I believe that an ecological perspective reveals many of the flaws inherent in an aggressive high-tech attack on a pathogen…

To me, the ‘war’ on COVID-19 has been characterized by a destructive set of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that appear to be deeply engrained in our political and economic institutions, and which form a pattern that should be recognizable to conservationists and ecologists.

1.Aggressive intervention in complex natural processes using new, poorly understood technologies designed to achieve narrowly defined short-term goals, with disregard for the potential long-term ramifications;

2.Profiteering by private interests that own the technologies, enabled by government entities and ‘experts’ that have been financially captured by those interests;

3.Followed by a cascade of unintended consequences.”

In the remainder of the article,21 Vandiver goes into several aggressive and destructive COVID interventions in greater detail — and their consequences. I recommend reading through it.

Importantly, when we go to war against pathogens, we go to war against ourselves, because without pathogens we cannot exist. The key to health is balanced co-existence with bacteria, viruses and other pathogens, which exist by the trillions in and on our bodies.

The Twisted Logic Behind Gain-of-Function Research

Vandiver, like Sachs, also points out that gain-of-function research funded by the NIH appears to be the most logical and most heavily supported theory as to the origin of the pandemic, and that denial of the lab leak theory is underpinned by reckless scientists unwilling to recognize the risks inherent in their work.

“Most fail to realize that Fauci and other proponents of ‘gain of function’ have long shown reckless disregard for the risks of tampering with natural viruses, expressing a paranoid attitude toward nature that is the antithesis of respect for ecology,” Vandiver writes.

“Fauci and others claim that ‘Mother Nature Is the Ultimate Bioterrorist’ to justify their Frankenstein-like efforts to hunt down the most dangerous viruses that exist in wild nature, take them to labs like the one in Wuhan, and tinker around with them to make them more dangerous and deadly.

Their twisted logic seems to be that if they intentionally create superviruses, they can somehow anticipate and prepare for natural pandemics. Most objective observers, however, say that ‘gain of function’ is a military-industrial boondoggle that has no practical benefit whatsoever and dramatically increases the risk of pandemics …

It remains inconclusive whether ‘gain of function’ research actually caused the COVID-19 pandemic, but its potential to have done so is a vivid example of how powerful actors like Fauci use technological tools to interfere with natural processes, with disregard if not outright contempt for the long-term ecological consequences, thereby creating opportunities to exercise more power.”

In conclusion, Vandiver notes:22

“If we carefully analyze each aspect of ‘world war’ on COVID-19, we can see how each tactic and high-tech ‘weapon’ has harmed human health, destabilized civil society, and possibly disrupted the ecological balance between the human population and the virus, while enriching private interests and empowering financially captured government regulators.

The ‘war’ has been characterized the distinct pattern that I described at the beginning of this essay … This destructive pattern appears to be deeply ingrained in our institutions and in the outlook of our leaders. It largely defines our society’s dysfunctional relationship with the natural world.

An ecological perspective that keeps this pattern in mind, and takes into account all of the consequences of launching high-tech ‘wars’ on pathogens or any other part of our environment may help us avoid similar catastrophes in the future, or at least to recognize them.”

Death by Medicine

In “Are Medical Errors Still the Third Leading Cause of Death?” I review the now decades-long history of modern medicine being a leading cause of death, at times spinning up to take first place, and rarely dipping below fourth. Several studies and investigations over the years have placed medicine and medical errors as the third leading cause of death in the U.S.

The pandemic has revealed just how dangerous it is to listen to dog whistles like “trust the science.” Which science? The one Big Pharma concocts to make money or the one that double checks and investigates claims independently?

The CDC’s COVID policies were all wrong — consistently 180 degrees from helpful — and have only recently been updated23 to match what all of us “misinformation spreaders” have been saying for well over two years. That update was published August 11, just six days before Walensky announced the CDC’s reorganization plans.

I’m not buying the idea that the CDC suddenly realized it was going in the wrong direction. They knew it from the start, and they did it intentionally. I suspect they’re only now starting to course correct because mainstream media are losing its grip on the public.

Mainstream media were their cover for every obnoxious, unscientific recommendation, and without that brainwashing arm, the CDC has no way to turn but back. Like Dr. Anthony Fauci, they probably realize that the political tide is turning, people are fed up with the “1984” double-speak, and if Republicans take the House in November, the CDC could well be facing any number of investigations.

Senators Promise Investigations

August 23, 2022, two U.S. senators promised a “full-throated investigation” of Fauci’s and former NIH-chief Francis Collins’ potential roles in the origin of the pandemic, and issued a formal request for the HHS and NIH to preserve documents and communications.24

Leadership at the CDC and FDA also need to be investigated and questioned about the ins and outs of their decision making. Not that I think they’ll ever admit to “working for the devil,” meaning the Deep State cabal that is using COVID as a cover for a global takeover, but there needs to be a reckoning nonetheless.

Those willing to sacrifice the lives, futures and Constitutional rights of Americans on behalf of these transhumanist psychopaths need to be ruthlessly weeded out. And then, we need to implement new public health systems, perhaps new agencies, with powers that are more limited in scope and state-run rather than federal.

Never, ever, should an agency like the CDC be allowed to ban doctors from treating patients, for example, based on their own expertise and experience. What has happened during this pandemic, and is still happening, is a true crime against humanity. We must never forget how health officials, government officials, media and other influencers tried to foment hatred against the unvaccinated, and how they’ve been willing to discriminate to the point of death.

The CDC has now backtracked on discrimination, agreeing people should not be treated based on their vaccination status. But we remember the calls for “re-education camps” and no-fly lists. Backtracking is not going to erase the attempts to destroy the lives of those who refused to play their Russian roulette.

I, for one, would love to hear the CDC explain why they have ignored the blaring safety signal of nearly 1.3 MILLION reports of COVID jab injuries in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).25 Wouldn’t you?

– Sources and References

Source: Mercola.com Accessed 1 Sept 22

The Man Who Sold the World to Big Pharma Steps Down

Fauci Announces He Is On His Way Out

  • August 22, 2022, Dr. Anthony Fauci announced he will resign from his posts as director of the National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) — a position he’s held for 38 years — and chief medical adviser to the White House, come December
  • Fauci is making sure to get out before new Republican congressional members take their seats. He’s probably banking on being able to plead the Fifth Amendment as a private citizen and never have to answer to anything he did while in public office, should Republicans decide to investigate his role in the pandemic
  • Fauci’s misdeeds include but are not limited to disastrous and contradictory COVID policies, funding of banned gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China, colluding to destroy the reputations of scientists who called for focused protection rather than lockdowns, and lying to Congress
  • One of the darkest stains on Fauci’s career was his handling of the HIV epidemic. Suppressing the use of repurposed drugs, Fauci zeroed in on AZT, a toxic drug that killed an estimated 300,000 AIDS patients. He followed the same script during the COVID pandemic, with devastating consequences
  • Ever since the COVID outbreak became apparent, Fauci has seemingly done everything in his power to confuse the public and strip us of our human and civil rights in order to further the agenda of the technocratic, transhumanist cabal

August 22, 2022, Dr. Anthony Fauci announced he will resign from his posts as director of the National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) — a position he’s held for 38 years — and chief medical adviser to the White House, come December.1

He noted he is “not retiring” but rather will “pursue the next chapter” of his career, presumably within the private sector. I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up working with Bill Gates and/or the World Health Organization.

Timing Is Everything

His departure is just in time, seeing how Republicans may end up controlling the House come January 2023. They then will control which kinds of hearings and investigations will be held.

So far, Fauci has benefited from the protection of the Democratic Party and mainstream media — which went so far as to dub him the “sexiest man alive”2 in 2021, in an apparent effort to polish his increasingly tarnishing image — and sharp questioning by Republican Sen. Rand Paul aside, nothing has been done to hold Fauci responsible for any of his misdeeds, which include but are not limited to:

  • Disastrous and contradictory COVID policies3
  • Funding of banned gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China (discussed in the Sky News report above from June 2021)
  • Colluding to destroy the reputations of scientists who called for focused protection rather than lockdowns, and
  • Lying to Congress (below)

So, it appears Fauci is making sure to get out before new Congressional members take their seats. He’s probably banking on being able to plead the Fifth Amendment as a private citizen and never have to answer to anything he did while in public office, should Republicans decide to investigate him.

As noted by Batya Ungar-Sargon during an August 22, 2022, episode of The Hill’s “Rising” (video below), when asked about whether he had any regrets about his pandemic response, Fauci denied having made any mistakes — a surprising stance, considering his many flip-flopping and contradictory recommendations.https://www.youtube.com/embed/MmO5YULUWY8?wmode=transparent&rel=0

Amazon Protects Fauci’s Reputation by Censoring Book Reviews

When Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s best selling book “The Real Anthony Fauci4 came out in November 2021, there were 20,000 reviews of the book on Amazon but mine was number one with 7,500 “liking” the review. The reason I mention it is that this was my headline last summer: “The Details Exposed in This Book Will Lead to Fauci’s Resignation.”

Then, at some point, Amazon censored the reviews, and now the top critical review has 2,485 “likes” and the top positive review has a measly five and my review is nowhere to be seen. Nice job of censoring, Amazon.

“The Real Anthony Fauci” is a carefully referenced, scathing critique of Fauci’s career. As explained by Kennedy in my interview with him in mid-November 2021, Fauci is the highest-paid federal employee in the U.S., and 68% of his $437,000 a year salary comes from bioweapons research.

Instead of safeguarding public health, Fauci turned the National Institutes of Health (NIH) into an incubator for pharmaceutical products, and essentially sold the entire country to the drug industry. He was instrumental in creating the vaccine “gold rush” in the 2000s, when he partnered with Gates to vaccinate the world with a battery of new vaccines.

One of the darkest stains on Fauci’s career, aside from his role in the COVID pandemic, was his handling of the HIV epidemic. Suppressing the use of repurposed drugs, Fauci zeroed in on AZT, a toxic drug that killed an estimated 300,000 AIDS patients.

He followed the same script during the COVID pandemic, with devastating consequences. He suppressed all inexpensive and nontoxic treatments and pushed the toxic and deadly remdesivir to the front of the line, making it the only drug available to hospitals, which were financially rewarded for killing patients with it.

As noted by The Federalist in a January 2021 article5 written by civil rights attorney Ilya Feoktistov, Fauci has failed upward ever since he joined the NIH in 1984, meaning each failure was rewarded with greater influence and funding.

Did Fauci Write ‘Expect the Unexpected’?

Fauci also has a book of his own, the publication of which occurred under rather suspicious circumstances. In a 2021 interview, Fauci said he was working on a memoir, but was precluded from contracting with a publisher while still employed by the federal government.6,7

In June 2021, Fauci’s book, “Expect the Unexpected: Ten Lessons on Truth, Service, and the Way Forward,” was listed for sale on Amazon and Barnes & Noble, only to be delisted almost immediately.8 According to the publisher, National Geographic Books, the book was “prematurely posted for pre-sale.”

They also stated Fauci was not actually involved in the creation of the book and would not receive royalties from it. The original Amazon posting, however, gives a different impression:9

“In his own words, world-renowned infectious disease specialist Anthony Fauci shares the lessons that have shaped his life philosophy, offering an intimate view of one of the world’s greatest medical minds as well as universal advice to live by.”

When, in November 2021, “Fauci: Expect the Unexpected” finally came out, it had National Geographic listed as the “editor,” with no author specified.10 Is this Fauci’s own work, repackaged and sold with National Geographic as the author/editor and publisher? If so, then Fauci has flouted the rules and committed yet another illegal act.

Violators of Nuremberg Code Must Be Held Accountable

https://rumble.com/embed/v1e72fv/?pub=4Video Link

Many are now wondering if Fauci, through his resignation, will be able to slip through the fingers of accountability. Hopefully, justice will prevail on that point, in one way or another.

As noted by Children’s Health Defense president Mary Holland during an event to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Nuremberg Code (video above),11 “Those who violated the Nuremberg Code must be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.” Fauci, without doubt, deserves to be very high up on that list.

During that same event, Holocaust survivor and founder of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, Vera Sharav, also stressed that the “Nuremberg Code is our defense against abusive experimentation,” and that to prevent another mass genocide, “we must identify ominous current parallels before they poison the fabric of society.” Sharav continued:12

“Humanity is currently under siege by the global heirs of the Nazis. A posse of ruthless, interconnected, global billionaires have gained control over national and international policy-setting institutions. They have embarked on implementing a diabolical agenda:

  • Overthrow democracy and Western civilization.
  • Depopulate the global population.
  • Eliminate nation-states and establish One World Government.
  • Eliminate cash and establish one digital currency.
  • Inject digital IDs and artificial intelligence capabilities into every human being. If these objectives become a reality, we will be digitally surveilled 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

In May, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Klaus Schwab, the architect of the dystopian Great Reset declared: ‘Let’s be clear, the future is not just happening; the future is built by us, a powerful community here in this room. We have the means to impose the state of the world.’

The ultimate goal of these megalomaniacs is to gain total control of the world’s natural resources and financial resources and to replace humans with transhuman robots.

Transhumanism is a biotech-enhanced caste system — the new eugenics … Transhumanists despise human values and deny the existence of a human soul. [Professor Yuval Noah] Harari declares that there are too many ‘useless people.’ The Nazi term was ‘worthless eaters.’ This is the ‘New Eugenics.'”

Fauci’s COVID Hall of Shame

https://video.foxnews.com/v/video-embed.html?video_id=6311272948112&loc=articles.mercola.com&ref=https%3A%2F%2Farticles.mercola.com%2Fsites%2Farticles%2Farchive%2F2022%2F08%2F31%2Ffauci-resigns.aspx&_xcf=Video Link

Ever since the COVID outbreak became apparent, Fauci has seemingly done everything in his power to confuse the public and strip us of our human and civil rights in order to further the agenda of the technocratic, transhumanist cabal. Here’s a shortlist of past articles detailing his Hall of Shame activities:

Wuhan Lab Caught Deleting Files Proving Fauci Funding — At least 200 scientists have signed a statement from the Cambridge Working Group disagreeing with Fauci. May 26, 2021
The Biggest Flip-Flop Ever — He was wrong about the usefulness and need for masks and post-vaccination mask requirements, yet nothing compares to this. June 2, 2021
Fauci in the Hot Seat as Emails Reveal His Lies — Emails show Fauci helped cover up the lab origin theory and has lied about masks and the need for vaccination when you’ve already recovered from COVID-19. June 9, 2021
When Do Noble Lies Just Become Blatant Lies? — Anthony Fauci claims the lies he’s told were to protect the public and influence behavior. August 28, 2021
Will Fauci Be Held Accountable for Lying to Congress? — Right now, Tony Fauci probably wishes this research article didn’t exist — but it does, and it clearly shows the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research. September 9, 2021
New Cache of Documents Exposes Lies to Congress — In a recent hearing, senators question Dr. Fauci as to whether his institute directly or indirectly provided grants to fund gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. September 11, 2021
Fauci Must Be Fired and Arrested — Saint Anthony has been caught in a web of insidious lies that keep reaching new lows. He’s making news once again for funding research that involved abusing animals for 40 years. November 6, 2021
Disney Documentary Glorifies Fauci’s Façade — Disney+, via its streaming partner National Geographic, released a documentary on Dr. Anthony Fauci, elevating him to hero status while ignoring the lies he’s foisted upon the American people. November 8, 2021
Who’s the Real Anthony Fauci? — Should Anthony Fauci be truly praised for the work he’s doing? Here’s a look into what he may be planning. December 9, 2021
The Scheming of Bill Gates and Anthony Fauci — How did we get into the mess we’re now in? Whatever happened to WHO’s emphasis on clean water, nutrition and improving conditions of poverty around the world? December 19, 2021
Fauci Wants to Mandate the Vax to Fly — Fauci suggests that vaccines may be mandatory on domestic flights but does not cite safety as a reason for the regulation. January 9, 2022
How Anthony Fauci Controls Science Globally — Looked at as a kind of savior, the man on the white horse that would ride us out of this coronavirus crises is actually Big Pharma’s biggest servant. January 21, 2022
Fauci Likely to Birth His Own COVID Variant After Paxlovid — Fauci experienced COVID-19 rebound after taking one course of Paxlovid. July 14, 2022

Roadmap for Prosecuting COVID Crimes

https://www.bitchute.com/embed/M4ltPJxsGGNS/Download Interview Transcript | Video Link

While many worry it might not be possible to hold COVID criminals like Fauci responsible for their roles, Francis Boyle, in December 2021, laid out a viable roadmap for prosecuting these individuals.

As explained by Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law who helped write the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, this law imposes fines and prison sentences on anyone who “knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains or possesses any biological agent, toxin or delivery system for use as a weapon.”

To circumvent the corrupted federal judiciary, we need to focus on locally elected prosecutors instead. Call on your local, elected district attorney to convene a grand jury and indict the individuals suspected of being involved in the creation of SARS-CoV-2 — which includes Fauci — and those responsible for the COVID shots with ‘murder and conspiracy to commit murder.’

The problem we face is that our federal government has been captured by forces that seek to destroy the U.S. from within. As such, we cannot trust the federal judiciary to prosecute and hold those responsible for the pandemic and the toxic COVID shots accountable.

To circumvent the corrupted federal judiciary, we need to focus on locally elected prosecutors instead. Depending on the state, they may go by titles such as district attorney, state attorney, prosecuting attorney or county attorney.

Boyle recommends organizing locally to find people willing, as a group, to call on your local, elected district attorney to convene a grand jury and indict the individuals suspected of being involved in the creation of SARS-CoV-2 — which includes Fauci — and those responsible for the COVID shots with “murder and conspiracy to commit murder.”

Even if Fauci is prosecuted and convicted of crimes against humanity, with all his ties to the Deep State and intelligence community, it is highly probable he struck a deal early on and would likely receive a presidential pardon for his crimes. So don’t hold your hopes up for Fauci ever being held responsible for his crimes in this lifetime.

At this point, there are loads of evidence showing SARS-CoV-2 is a manufactured bioweapon. Dr. David Martin has identified hundreds of patents relating to its creation, spanning not years but decades, and much of this research was funded by the NIAID under Fauci’s leadership.

I reviewed some of this evidence in “Patents Prove SARS-CoV-2 Is a Manufactured Virus,” which featured Martin’s September 2021 testimony to the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee.

It will be a difficult task to hold the COVID criminals to account, but as noted by Kennedy in the interview featured at the top of this article, the tide is turning against the globalist cabal, for whom the pandemic was an ideal justification for the rollout of worldwide totalitarianism. We’re in a momentous time in history, and everyone has a role to play, even if it’s only to privately reject tyranny and peacefully disobey unconstitutional edicts.

– Sources and References

Source: Mercola.com Accessed 31 Aug 22