1

Mainstream’s COVID Narrative Comes Crashing Down | The Highwire With Del Bigtree

Source: The Highwire with Del Bigtree

The mainstream media’s narrative on COVID has come crashing down around even the most passionate lockdown and mandate enthusiasts who have been forced to turn tail and embrace tenets of the once castigated Great Barrington Declaration.

See also:




The Age of Intolerance: Cancel Culture’s War on Free Speech | John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead

Source: The Rutherford Institute  

“Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners.”—George Carlin

Cancel culture—political correctness amped up on steroids, the self-righteousness of a narcissistic age, and a mass-marketed pseudo-morality that is little more than fascism disguised as tolerance—has shifted us into an Age of Intolerance, policed by techno-censors, social media bullies, and government watchdogs.

Everything is now fair game for censorship if it can be construed as hateful, hurtful, bigoted, or offensive provided that it runs counter to the established viewpoint.

In this way, the most controversial issues of our day—race, religion, sex, sexuality, politics, science, health, government corruption, police brutality, etc.—have become battlegrounds for those who claim to believe in freedom of speech but only when it favors the views and positions they support.

Free speech for me but not for thee” is how my good friend and free speech purist Nat Hentoff used, to sum up, this double standard.

This tendency to censor, silence, delete, label as “hateful,” and demonize viewpoints that run counter to the cultural elite is being embraced with near-fanatical zealotry by a cult-like establishment that values conformity and group-think over individuality.

For instance, are you skeptical about the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines? Do you have concerns about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election? Do you subscribe to religious beliefs that shape your views on sexuality, marriage, and gender? Do you, deliberately or inadvertently, engage in misgendering (identifying a person’s gender incorrectly) or deadnaming (using the wrong pronouns or birth name for a transgender person)?

Say yes to any of those questions and then dare to voice those views in anything louder than a whisper and you might find yourself suspended on Twitter, shut out of Facebook, and banned across various social media platforms.

This authoritarian intolerance masquerading as tolerance, civility, and love (what comedian George Carlin referred to as “fascism pretending to be manners”) is the end result of a politically correct culture that has become radicalized, institutionalized, and tyrannical.

In the past few years, for example, prominent social media voices have been censored, silenced, and made to disappear from Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram for voicing ideas that were deemed politically incorrect, hateful, dangerous, or conspiratorial.

Most recently, Twitter suspended conservative podcaster Matt Walsh for violating its hate speech policy by sharing his views about transgendered individuals. “The greatest female Jeopardy champion of all time is a man. The top female college swimmer is a man. The first female four-star admiral in the Public Health Service is a man. Men have dominated the female high school track and the female MMA circuit. The patriarchy wins in the end,” Walsh tweeted on Dec. 30, 2021.

J.K. Rowling, the author of the popular Harry Potter series, has found herself denounced as transphobic and widely shunned for daring to criticize efforts by transgender activists to erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender. Rowling’s essay explaining her views is a powerful, articulate, well-researched piece that not only stresses the importance of free speech and women’s rights while denouncing efforts by trans activists to demonize those who subscribe to “wrongthink,” but also recognizes that while the struggle over gender dysmorphia is real, concerns about safeguarding natal women and girls from abuse are also legitimate.

Ironically enough, Rowling’s shunning included literal book burning. Yet as Ray Bradbury once warned, “There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.”

Indeed, the First Amendment is going up in flames before our eyes, but those first sparks were lit long ago and have been fed by intolerance all along the political spectrum.

Consider some of the kinds of speech being targeted for censorship or outright elimination.

Offensive, politically incorrect, and “unsafe” speech: Political correctness has resulted in the chilling of free speech and growing hostility to those who exercise their rights to speak freely. Where this has become painfully evident is on college campuses, which have become hotbeds of student-led censorship, trigger warnings, microaggressions, and “red light” speech policies targeting anything that might cause someone to feel uncomfortable, unsafe, or offended.

Bullying, intimidating speech: Warning that “school bullies become tomorrow’s hate crimes defendants,” the Justice Department has led the way in urging schools to curtail bullying, going so far as to classify “teasing” as a form of “bullying,” and “rude” or “hurtful” “text messages” as “cyberbullying.”

Hateful speech: Hate speech—speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation—is the primary candidate for online censorship. Corporate internet giants Google, Twitter, and Facebook continue to redefine what kinds of speech will be permitted online and what will be deleted.

Dangerous, anti-government speech: As part of its ongoing war on “extremism,” the government has partnered with the tech industry to counter online “propaganda” by terrorists hoping to recruit support or plan attacks. In this way, anyone who criticizes the government online can be considered an extremist and will have their content reported to government agencies for further investigation or deleted. In fact, the Justice Department is planning to form a new domestic terrorism unit to ferret out individuals “who seek to commit violent criminal acts in furtherance of domestic social or political goals.” What this will mean is more surveillance, more pre-crime programs, and more targeting of individuals whose speech may qualify as “dangerous.”

The upshot of all of this editing, parsing, banning, and silencing is the emergence of a new language, what George Orwell referred to as Newspeak, which places the power to control language in the hands of the totalitarian state.

Under such a system, language becomes a weapon to change the way people think by changing the words they use.

The end result is mind control and a sleepwalking populace.

In totalitarian regimes—a.k.a. police states—where conformity and compliance are enforced at the end of a loaded gun, the government dictates what words can and cannot be used.

In countries where the police state hides behind a benevolent mask and disguises itself as tolerance, the citizens censor themselves, policing their words and thoughts to conform to the dictates of the mass mind lest they find themselves ostracized or placed under surveillance.

Even when the motives behind this rigidly calibrated reorientation of societal language appear well-intentioned—discouraging racism, condemning violence, denouncing discrimination and hatred—inevitably, the end result is the same: intolerance, indoctrination, and infantilism.

The social shunning favored by activists and corporations borrows heavily from the mind control tactics used by authoritarian cults as a means of controlling its members. As Dr. Steven Hassan writes in Psychology Today: “By ordering members to be cut off, they can no longer participate. Information and sharing of thoughts, feelings, and experiences are stifled. Thought-stopping and use of loaded terms keep a person constrained into a black-and-white, all-or-nothing world. This controls members through fear and guilt.”

This mind control can take many forms, but the end result is an enslaved, compliant populace incapable of challenging tyranny.

As Rod Serling, creator of The Twilight Zone, once observed, “We’re developing a new citizenry, one that will be very selective about cereals and automobiles, but won’t be able to think.”

The problem as I see it is that we’ve allowed ourselves to be persuaded that we need someone else to think and speak for us. And we’ve bought into the idea that we need the government and its corporate partners to shield us from that which is ugly or upsetting or mean. The result is a society in which we’ve stopped debating among ourselves, stopped thinking for ourselves, and stopped believing that we can fix our own problems and resolve our own differences.

In short, we have reduced ourselves to a largely silent, passive, polarized populace incapable of working through our own problems and reliant on the government to protect us from our fears.

As Nat Hentoff, that inveterate champion of the First Amendment, once observed, “The quintessential difference between a free nation, as we profess to be, and a totalitarian state, is that here everyone, including a foe of democracy, has the right to speak his mind.”

What this means is opening the door to more speech not less, even if that speech is offensive to some.

Understanding that freedom for those in the unpopular minority constitutes the ultimate tolerance in a free society, James Madison, the author of the Bill of Rights, fought for a First Amendment that protected the “minority” against the majority, ensuring that even in the face of overwhelming pressure, a minority of one—even one who espouses distasteful viewpoints—would still have the right to speak freely, pray freely, assemble freely, challenge the government freely, and broadcast his views in the press freely.

We haven’t done ourselves—or the nation—any favors by becoming so fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, or closed-minded that we’ve eliminated words, phrases, and symbols from public discourse.

We have allowed our fears—fear for our safety, fear of each other, fear of being labeled racist or hateful or prejudiced, etc.—to trump our freedom of speech and muzzle us far more effectively than any government edict could.

Ultimately the war on free speech—and that’s exactly what it is: a war being waged by Americans against other Americans—is a war that is driven by fear.

By bottling up dissent, we have created a pressure cooker of stifled misery and discontent that is now bubbling over and fomenting even more hate, distrust, and paranoia among portions of the populace.

By muzzling free speech, we are contributing to a growing underclass of Americans who are being told that they can’t take part in American public life unless they “fit in.”

The First Amendment is a steam valve. It allows people to speak their minds, air their grievances and contribute to a larger dialogue that hopefully results in a more just world. When there is no steam valve to release the pressure, frustration builds, anger grows, and people become more volatile and desperate to force a conversation.

Be warned: whatever we tolerate now—whatever we turn a blind eye to—whatever we rationalize when it is inflicted on others will eventually come back to imprison us, one and all.

Eventually, “we the people” will be the ones in the crosshairs.

At some point or another, depending on how the government and its corporate allies define what constitutes “hate” or “extremism, “we the people” might all be considered guilty of some thought crime or other.

When that time comes, there may be no one left to speak out or speak up in our defense.

After all, it’s a slippery slope from censoring so-called illegitimate ideas to silencing the truth. Eventually, as George Orwell predicted, telling the truth will become a revolutionary act.

We are on a fast-moving trajectory.

In other words, whatever powers you allow the government and its corporate operatives to claim now, for the sake of the greater good or because you like or trust those in charge, will eventually be abused and used against you by tyrants of your own making.

This is the tyranny of the majority against the minority marching in lockstep with technofascism.

If Americans don’t vociferously defend the right of a minority of one to subscribe to, let alone voice, ideas, and opinions that may be offensive, hateful, intolerant, or merely different, then we’re going to soon find that we have no rights whatsoever (to speak, assemble, agree, disagree, protest, opt-in, opt-out, or forge our own paths as individuals).

No matter what our numbers might be, no matter what our views might be, no matter what party we might belong to, it will not be long before “we the people” constitute a powerless minority in the eyes of a power-fueled fascist state-driven to maintain its power at all costs.

We are almost at that point now.

Free speech is no longer free.

On paper—at least according to the U.S. Constitution—we are technically free to speak.

In reality, however, we are only as free to speak as a government official—or corporate entities such as Facebook, Google, or YouTube—may allow.

The steady, pervasive censorship creep that is being inflicted on us by corporate tech giants with the blessing of the powers-that-be threatens to bring about a restructuring of reality straight out of Orwell’s 1984, where the Ministry of Truth polices speech and ensures that facts conform to whatever version of reality the government propagandists embrace.

Orwell intended 1984 as a warning. Instead, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, it is being used as a dystopian instruction manual for socially engineering a populace that is compliant, conformist, and obedient to Big Brother.

The police state could not ask for a better citizenry than one that carries out its own censorship, spying, and policing.

WC: 2189

ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is the founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His books Battlefield America: The War on the American People and A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State are available at www.amazon.com. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.




AP’s Hit Piece on RFK, Jr. Symbolizes Intellectual, Moral Collapse of Mainstream News Industry

The blue check bourgeoisie is very sad right now.

They want to be in control, they want to be looked up to and they are watching in horror as their entire worldview and standing in society slips from their grasp and go down the drain.

In their shame and humiliation, the object of their ire becomes Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Kennedy is everything they are not. He is smarter and more successful than they are.

But more than that, Kennedy has moral character, something that is in vanishingly short supply in mainstream newsrooms these days. He has also more reach.

COVID-19 information on Kennedy’s website, The Defender, is shared more often on social media than the corporate nonsense coming from CNN, NPR, New York Times, Washington Post, and the CDC (no surprise there really).

As Kennedy’s new book, “The Real Anthony Fauci” rose to the top of the bestseller list in recent weeks, the blue check bourgeoisie started to panic because his work reveals, amongst other things, that they are charlatans.

So the Associated Press (AP) assigned six “reporters” to put out a 4,000-word hit piece on Kennedy.

This appears to be part of a wave of paid retribution stemming from Kennedy’s extraordinary record of successfully challenging the dishonest Pharma narrative.

The AP hit piece reveals nothing new about Kennedy but it tells us heaps about the worldview and mindset of the corrupt white-collar class that makes their bread defending the Pharma cartel.

Whether you like him or not, Kennedy is a serious scholar. “The Real Anthony Fauci” is 480 pages and involved a team of more than 20 world-class research scholars working for more than a year.

It is perhaps the most damning indictment of a political figure in American history. It deserves a serious reading.

What’s fascinating about the AP hit piece is that they are terrified to engage with the actual argument itself. Their sole interaction with the book consists of a quick keyword search for the words “ivermectin” and “hydroxychloroquine.”

The AP writes:

“Kennedy uses the book to push unproven COVID-19 treatments such as ivermectin, which is meant to treat parasites …”

Imagine thinking that this was some sort of gotcha!? We are left with one of two unpleasant possibilities — either the AP writers are just plain dumb or they are lying. I’m not sure which is worse.

The AP seems unaware that William C. Campbell and Satoshi Ōmura won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2015 for the discovery and development of ivermectin (back in the 1970s).

The AP seems unaware that the World Health Organization has ivermectin on its list of essential medicines.

The AP seems unaware that there are 136 studies on the safety and effectiveness of ivermectin in connection with SARS-CoV-2 and they are all available (here).

The AP seems unaware that 3.7 billion doses of ivermectin have been used safely worldwide since 1987.

The AP seems unaware that ivermectin is a broad-spectrum anti-viral, anti-bacterial, anti-parasite, anti-inflammatory that also appears to have anti-cancer properties and it’s more gentle than aspirin.

Remember, the AP had six reporters working on this, and not a single one of them could locate any of these available facts???

The blue check bourgeoisie is obsessed with trying to defend vaccines and discredit ivermectin even as they refuse to read any of the underlying scientific literature because understanding the truth of this situation would reveal that everything that they believe is a lie.

Later in the article, the AP is breathless and freaked out that Kennedy is pretty good at raising money (according to the AP, Kennedy’s non-profit Children’s Health Defense brought in $6.8 million in 2020).

Okay, but Autism Speaks brought in $94.7 million in 2020 and accomplished absolutely nothing so $6.8 million for fighting global Pharma totalitarianism seems like a bargain by comparison.

The corrupt mainstream is fixated on this notion (surely invented by one of the big Pharma PR firms) that opposing vaccine mandates is somehow profitable.

It shows that these people have no ability to mentally position-switch (the foundation of empathy) and put themselves in the shoes of another.

Everyone in the movement for medical freedom who battles in the trenches every day knows that challenging the Pharma cartel results in endless bigotry from former friends, family, and colleagues — routine death threats — and a massive, lifelong decline in income.

No one would ever endure this level of abuse for the money.

This angle of attack is also strange and illogical because these reporters never question the hundreds of billions of dollars that Pharma makes from vaccines and the prescription drugs used to treat vaccine injury (EpiPens, asthma inhalers, diabetes treatments, Risperdal, etc.).

If, as the AP alleges, the lure of a modest non-profit salary is somehow corrupting then how corrupting are the trillions of dollars that Pharma is making from the pandemic!? It’s weird that these self-appointed guardians of the “Truth(TM)” never stop to think through where their logic is taking them.

The article is a sad time capsule that perfectly symbolizes the intellectual and moral collapse of the mainstream news industry in the face of the pandemic.

Reporters never challenge power anymore. They do not do any investigative research. Their jobs are not well paid and being a reporter is no longer a viable career path.

Instead, these “reporters,” many just out of college, are auditioning for a future job with a Pharma PR firm and it shows.

At some point though these stenographers for the cartel have to realize that everyone is laughing at them.

Indeed in just the last few days, one can see The Atlantic, New York Times, and Washington Post all starting to get nervous and hedging their bets with articles (usually just opinion pieces for now) that undermine some aspect of the Pharma narrative.

The public already realizes that the emperor has no clothes and the corrupt bougie media class is rightly worried that they have lost whatever credibility they once had by associating themselves with the criminal Pharma regime.

(Nope, not gonna link to the article, fascists do not deserve clicks.)

I rate the AP hit piece 12 clowns (out of 10) for its total inability/unwillingness to engage in good faith scientific discussion.

Originally published by Toby Rogers on Substack.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.




NBC/MSNBC News Anchor Brian Williams Calls Out ‘The Mob’ & Quits – Here’s Why

Video Source:

On December 9, after 28 years as an anchor with NBC networks, popular news anchor Brian Williams called it quits on air during his MSNBC show The 11th Hour. His final message was filled with warnings about a dark America, citing elected officials becoming part of a mob who have decided to burn down America with us inside, and a nation that is unrecognizable to those who came before us and fought to protect it.

My biggest worry is for my country,” Williams said. “I’m not a liberal or a conservative. I’m an institutionalist. I believe in this place. And in my love of my country, I yield to no one, but the darkness on the edge of town has spread to roads and highways and neighborhoods.

Grown men and women who swore an oath to our constitution, elected by our constituents, possessing the kinds of college degrees I can only dream of have decided to join the mob and become something they are not, hoping we somehow forget who they were,” Williams continued. “They’ve decided to burn it all down with us inside. That should scare you to no end as much as it scares an aging volunteer fireman.”

“The reality is though I will wake up tomorrow in the America of the year 2021, a nation unrecognizable to those who came before us and fought to protect it, which is what you must do now,” Williams went on to say.

“Thank you for being here with us – us meaning the people who produce this broadcast for you. Without you, there is no us. I’ll show myself out,” Williams concluded.

Many people wonder what in the heck Williams was talking about. It’s very likely he figured out that “the mob”, consisting of many (but not all) politicians (including President Joe Biden), Big Pharma, and people like Bill Gates, are using the corporate media (including MSNBC) to majorly support their globalist agenda to bring down America, reduce the population, take control of the entire planet, and essentially transform those who remain into semi-robotic slaves. In other words, his organization (MSNBC) and the other corporate news organizations play a significant role for the mob, consistently lying to the public to support the mob’s globalist agenda – and Williams no longer wants a part in it. Katherine Austin Fitts explains it all (including the role of corporate media) here:

Catherine Austin Fitts Explains how the Globalist Billionaires and Technocrats are Planning on Taking Over the Planet, and How We Can Stop It




Conflict of Interest? Bill Gates Gave $319 Million to Major Media Outlets, Documents Reveal

Up until his recent messy divorce, Bill Gates enjoyed something of a free pass in corporate media. Generally presented as a kindly nerd who wants to save the world, the Microsoft co-founder was even unironically christened “Saint Bill” by The Guardian.

While other billionaires’ media empires are relatively well known, the extent to which Gates’s cash underwrites the modern media landscape is not. After sorting through over 30,000 individual grants, MintPress can reveal that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) has made over $300 million worth of donations to fund media projects.

Recipients of this cash include many of America’s most important news outlets, including CNN, NBC, NPR, PBS, and The Atlantic.

Gates also sponsors a myriad of influential foreign organizations, including the BBC, The Guardian, The Financial Times, and The Daily Telegraph in the UK; prominent European newspapers such as Le Monde (France), Der Spiegel (Germany), and El País (Spain); as well as big global broadcasters like Al-Jazeera.

The Gates Foundation money going towards media programs has been split up into a number of sections, presented in descending numerical order, and includes a link to the relevant grant on the organization’s website.

Awards Directly to Media Outlets:

Together, these donations total $166,216,526. The money is generally directed towards issues close to the Gates’ hearts.

For example, the $3.6 million CNN grant went towards “report[ing] on gender equality with a particular focus on least developed countries, producing journalism on the everyday inequalities endured by women and girls across the world,” while the Texas Tribune received millions to “to increase public awareness and engagement of education reform issues in Texas.”

Given that Bill is one of the charter schools’ most fervent supporters, a cynic might interpret this as planting pro-corporate charter school propaganda into the media, disguised as objective news reporting.

The Gates Foundation has also given nearly $63 million to charities closely aligned with big media outlets, including nearly $53 million to BBC Media Action, over $9 million to MTV’s Staying Alive Foundation, and $1 million to The New York Times Neediest Causes Fund.

While not specifically funding journalism, donations to the philanthropic arm of a media player should still be noted.

Gates continues to underwrite a wide network of investigative journalism centers as well, totaling just over $38 million, more than half of which has gone to the D.C.-based International Center for Journalists to expand and develop African media.

These centers include:

  • International Center for Journalists — $20,436,938.
  • Premium Times Centre for Investigative Journalism (Nigeria) — $3,800,357.
  • The Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting — $2,432,552.
  • Fondation EurActiv Politech — $2,368,300.
  • International Women’s Media Foundation — $1,500,000.
  • Center for Investigative Reporting — $1,446,639.
  • InterMedia Survey institute — $1,297,545.
  • The Bureau of Investigative Journalism — $1,068,169.
  • Internews Network — $985,126.
  • Communications Consortium Media Center — $858,000.
  • Institute for Nonprofit News — $650,021.
  • The Poynter Institute for Media Studies — $382,997.
  • Wole Soyinka Centre for Investigative Journalism (Nigeria) — $360,211.
  • Institute for Advanced Journalism Studies — $254,500.
  • Global Forum for Media Development (Belgium) — $124,823.
  • Mississippi Center for Investigative Reporting — $100,000.

In addition to this, the Gates Foundation also plies press and journalism associations with cash, to the tune of at least $12 million. For example, the National Newspaper Publishers Association — a group representing more than 200 outlets — has received $3.2 million.

The list of these organizations includes:

  • Education Writers Association — $5,938,475.
  • National Newspaper Publishers Association —$3,249,176.
  • National Press Foundation — $1,916,172.
  • Washington News Council — $698,200.
  • American Society of News Editors Foundation — $250,000.
  • Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — $25,000.

This brings our running total up to $216.4 million.

The foundation also puts up the money to directly train journalists all over the world, in the form of scholarships, courses, and workshops.

Today, it is possible for an individual to train as a reporter thanks to a Gates Foundation grant, find work at a Gates-funded outlet, and belong to a press association funded by Gates.

This is especially true of journalists working in the fields of health, education, and global development, the one’s Gates himself is most active in and where scrutiny of the billionaire’s actions and motives are most necessary.

Gates Foundation grants pertaining to the instruction of journalists include:

  • Johns Hopkins University — $1,866,408.
  • Teachers College, Columbia University — $1,462,500.
  • The University of California Berkeley — $767,800.
  • Tsinghua University (China) — $450,000.
  • Seattle University — $414,524.
  • Institute for Advanced Journalism Studies — $254,500.
  • Rhodes University (South Africa) — $189,000.
  • Montclair State University —$160,538.
  • Pan-Atlantic University Foundation — $130,718.
  • World Health Organization — $38,403.
  • The Aftermath Project — $15,435.

The BMGF also pays for a wide range of specific media campaigns around the world. For example, since 2014 it has donated $5.7 million to the Population Foundation of India in order to create dramas that promote sexual and reproductive health, with the intent to increase family planning methods in South Asia.

Meanwhile, it allocated over $3.5 million to a Senegalese organization to develop radio shows and online content that would feature health information.

Supporters consider this to be helping critically underfunded media, while opponents might consider it a case of a billionaire using his money to plant his ideas and opinions into the press.

Media projects supported by the Gates Foundation:

Total: $97,315,408

$319.4 million and (a lot) more

Added together, these Gates-sponsored media projects come to a total of $319.4 million.

However, there are clear shortcomings with this non-exhaustive list, meaning the true figure is undoubtedly far higher. First, it does not count as sub-grants — money given by recipients to media around the world.

And while the Gates Foundation fosters an air of openness about itself, there is actually precious little public information about what happens to the money from each grant, save for a short, one- or two-sentence description written by the foundation itself on its website.

Only donations to press organizations themselves or projects that could be identified from the information on the Gates Foundation’s website as media campaigns were counted, meaning that thousands of grants having some media element do not appear in this list.

A case in point is the BMGF’s partnership with ViacomCBS, the company that controls CBS News, MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon, and BET. Media reports at the time noted that the Gates Foundation was paying the entertainment giant to insert information and PSAs into its programming and that Gates had intervened to change storylines in popular shows like ER and Law & Order: SVU.

However, when checking BMGF’s grants database, “Viacom” and “CBS” are nowhere to be found, the likely grant in question (totaling over $6 million) merely describes the project as a “public engagement campaign aimed at improving high school graduation rates and postsecondary completion rates specifically aimed at parents and students,” meaning that it was not counted in the official total.

There are surely many more examples like this. “For a tax-privileged charity that so very often trumpets the importance of transparency, it’s remarkable how intensely secretive the Gates Foundation is about its financial flows,” Tim Schwab, one of the few investigative journalists who has scrutinized the tech billionaire, told MintPress.

Also not included are grants aimed at producing articles for academic journals. While these articles are not meant for mass consumption, they regularly form the basis for stories in the mainstream press and help shape narratives around key issues.

The Gates Foundation has given far and wide to academic sources, with at least $13.6 million going toward creating content for the prestigious medical journal The Lancet.

And, of course, even money given to universities for purely research projects eventually ends up in academic journals, and ultimately, downstream into mass media. Academics are under heavy pressure to print their results in prestigious journals; “publish or perish” is the mantra in university departments.

Therefore, even these sorts of grants have an effect on our media. Neither these nor grants funding the printing of books or establishment of websites counted in the total, although they too are forms of media.

Low profile, long tentacles

In comparison to other tech billionaires, Gates has kept his profile as a media controller relatively low. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’s purchase of The Washington Post for $250 million in 2013 was a very clear and obvious form of media influence, as was eBay founder Pierre Omidyar’s creation of First Look Media, the company that owns The Intercept.

Despite flying more under the radar, Gates and his companies have amassed considerable influence in media.

We already rely on Microsoft-owned products for communication (e.g., Skype, Hotmail), social media (LinkedIn), and entertainment (Microsoft Xbox). Furthermore, the hardware and software we use to communicate often come courtesy of the 66-year-old Seattleite.

How many people reading this are doing so on a Microsoft Surface or Windows phone and doing so via Windows OS? Not only that, Microsoft owns stakes in media giants such as Comcast and AT&T. And the “MS” in MSNBC stands for Microsoft.

The Faux Generosity of the Super-Wealthy: Why Bill Gates is a Menace to Society

Media Gates keepers

That the Gates Foundation is underwriting a significant chunk of our media ecosystem leads to serious problems with objectivity. “The foundation’s grants to media organizations … raise obvious conflict-of-interest questions: How can reporting be unbiased when a major player holds the purse strings?” wrote Gates’s local Seattle Times in 2011.

This was before the newspaper accepted BMGF money to fund its “education lab” section.

Schwab’s research has found that this conflict of interests goes right to the very top: two New York Times columnists had been writing glowingly about the Gates Foundation for years without disclosing that they also work for a group — the Solutions Journalism Network — that, as shown above, has received over $7 million from the tech billionaire’s charity.

Earlier this year, Schwab also declined to co-report on a story about COVAX for The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, suspecting that the money Gates had been pumping into the outlet would make it impossible to accurately report on a subject so close to Gates’s heart.

Sure enough, when the article was published last month, it repeated the assertion that Gates had little to do with COVAX’s failure, mirroring the BMGF’s stance and quoting them throughout. Only at the very end of the more than 5,000-word story did it reveal that the organization it was defending was paying the wages of its staff.

“I don’t believe Gates told The Bureau of Investigative Journalism what to write. I think the bureau implicitly if subconsciously, knew they had to find a way to tell this story that didn’t target their funder.

The biasing effects of financial conflicts are complex but very real and reliable,” Schwab said, describing it as “a case study in the perils of Gates-funded journalism.”

MintPress also contacted the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for comment, but it did not respond.

Gates, who amassed his fortune by building a monopoly and zealously guarding his intellectual property, bears significant blame for the failure of the coronavirus vaccine rollout across the world.

Quite aside from the COVAX fiasco, he pressured Oxford University not to make its publicly-funded vaccine open-source and available to all for free, but instead to partner with private corporation AstraZeneca, a decision that meant that those who could not pay were blocked from using it.

That Gates has made over 100 donations to the university, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, likely played some role in the decision. To this day, fewer than 5% of people in low-income countries have received even one dose of the COVID vaccine. The death toll from this is immense.

Unfortunately, many of these real criticisms of Gates and his network are obscured by wild and untrue conspiracy theories about such things as inserting microchips in vaccines to control the population.

This has meant that genuine critiques of the Microsoft co-founder are often demonetized and algorithmically suppressed, meaning that outlets are strongly dissuaded from covering the topic, knowing they will likely lose money if they do so. The paucity of scrutiny of the world’s second-richest individual, in turn, feeds into outlandish suspicions.

Gates certainly deserves it. Quite apart from his deep and potentially decades-long ties to the infamous Jeffrey Epstein, his attempts to radically change African society, and his investment in controversial chemical giant Monsanto, he is perhaps the key driver behind the American charter school movement — an attempt to essentially privatize the U.S. education system.

Charter schools are deeply unpopular with teachers’ unions, which see the movement as an attempt to lessen their autonomy and reduce public oversight into how and what children are taught.

All the way to the bank

In most coverage, Gates’s donations are broadly presented as altruistic gestures. Yet many have pointed to the inherent flaws with this model, noting that allowing billionaires to decide what they do with their money allows them to set the public agenda, giving them enormous power over society.

“Philanthropy can and is being used deliberately to divert attention away from different forms of economic exploitation that underpin global inequality today,” said Linsey McGoey, Professor of Sociology at the University of Essex, U.K., and author of “No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy.” She adds:

“The new ‘philanthrocapitalism’ threatens democracy by increasing the power of the corporate sector at the expense of the public sector organizations, which increasingly face budget squeezes, in part by excessively remunerating for-profit organizations to deliver public services that could be delivered more cheaply without private sector involvement.”

Charity, as former British Prime Minister Clement Attlee noted, “is a cold grey loveless thing. If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly, not dole out money at a whim.”

None of this means that the organizations receiving Gates’ money — media or otherwise — are irredeemably corrupt, nor that the Gates Foundation does not do any good in the world.

But it does introduce a glaring conflict of interest whereby the very institutions we rely on to hold accountable one of the richest and most powerful men in the planet’s history are quietly being funded by him.

This conflict of interest is one that corporate media have largely tried to ignore, while the supposedly altruistic philanthropist Gates just keeps getting richer, laughing all the way to the bank.

Originally published by MintPress News.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.




UNBELIEVABLE! There’s A DEEPER Reason For The Lies!

Video Source: WeAreChange

In this video, Luke Rudkowski covers different examples of the MSM making up events to fit their own narratives, as well as launching personal attacks against Kyle Rittenhouse.

Luke also gets into deeper purposes of these lies about Kyle Rittenhouse and what happened in Kenosha, Wisconsin on that tragic night. And, he discusses how these lies are creating chaos to sow division to further the divide and conquer agenda – especially by inflaming things over the issue of race.

Finally, Luke previews what you can expect in the coming days as we expect a decision in the case to come. Plus, I let you know where I personally will be during this time.




Big Bird, CNN Push Vaccine Propaganda on Kids

Sesame Street’s Big Bird is making headlines today after tweeting he had received the COVID vaccine.

The fictional children’s character is supposed to be 6 years old, which if he were real, means he became eligible for the COVID vaccine last week when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for emergency use in children ages 5 through 11.

Big Bird’s endorsement of the COVID vaccine for children isn’t an isolated incident — it’s just the latest example of Sesame Street endorsing federal health agencies’ COVID messaging for young children, with the help of corporate media.

But the announcement was met with backlash from elected officials and media pundits who accused the character of spreading government propaganda.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) tweeted:

Lisa Boothe of Fox News tweeted:

On Nov. 6, Sesame Street and CNN collaborated on a special the news outlet described as, “Familiar faces from Sesame Street and experts from CNN and across the country will be ready to answer children’s questions about the Covid-19 vaccine and staying healthy, and coping with big feelings as they continue to face unprecedented challenges in their young lives.”

The program featured Sesame Street muppet Rosita, who after getting her first COVID shot, told CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Sesame Street viewers, “My mommy and my Papi said that it will help keep me, my friends, my neighbors, my Abuela all healthy.”

Commenting on the use of popular children’s characters to promote vaccines, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of Children’s Health Defense, today said:

“The use of trusted and beloved figures in this propaganda assault to induce children into submitting as guinea pigs to injections with an experimental high-risk zero-liability medical product with no proven benefits for kids is unconscionable and revolting.

”Big Pharma has turned Big Bird into a child predator.”

The Nov. 6 program is the most recent example of the CNN and Sesame street collaboration that began early on in the pandemic.

In October 2020, Sesame Street collaborated with CNN to create pandemic-centered content for children by producing a 10-part series, “The ABCs of COVID.” The series featured Elmo, Big Bird, Cookie Monster, and other Sesame Street characters.

In several episodes of the series, Dr. Leana Wen, former Baltimore health commissioner, is a guest who fields COVID-related questions from fictional Sesame Street characters and children.

When the news broke that the FDA authorized the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for emergency use in children, Wen described it as “fantastic news” that “gives much-needed peace of mind to so many parents who want additional protection for their kids.”

Wen, an advocate for stricter vaccine mandates, national digital proof-of-immunity certificates, is a Young Global Leader at the World Economic Forum, and a fellow at the Brookings Institute, a think tank heavily funded by Johnson & Johnson and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — potential conflicts of interests she does not disclose in her media appearances.

During an Oct. 20, 2020, episode of “ABC’S of COVID,” CNN’s Gupta stressed the importance to Sesame Street viewers of “wearing a mask outdoors.” When a child asked Gupta if they can go to the store with their mom if they have a mask, Gupta said no, saying “it’s important to just stay home.”

Dr. Amy Acton, director of health at the Ohio Department of Health, told Elmo “wearing a mask makes you a superhero.”

Episode 5 introduced the idea of death-by-COVID to the young children by presenting a collage of people who supposedly died from the virus. “There are people getting very sick and sometimes the people who got sick are no longer with us,” Gupta told Big Bird.

In Episode 6, Gupta is asked by a child if they can go back to school without a COVID vaccine. Underscoring that children will in fact be getting the shot eventually, Gupta responds by saying the “COVID vaccine is certainly going to help [go back to school]…”

In the series finale, the featured guest was none other than Dr. Anthony Fauci, who facilitated a child-oriented conversation around COVID vaccines. Fauci told children not only do they need a COVID vaccine to stay safe, but it’s possible they will need a shot every year because “we don’t know how long protection lasts.”

Fauci then told Sesame Street viewers the COVID vaccine is the reason they’re getting Christmas presents this year.

“I took a trip up to the North Pole and vaccinated Santa Claus myself,” Fauci said. “So now he can come down the chimney and safely leave the presents.”

Sesame Street’s corporate leadership and their fictional characters have been featured on The World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset Podcast,” where Sesame Street’s Grover sat alongside Sesame Workshop’s President of Global Impact, Sherrie Westin, as she told listeners that the “pandemic has created an [financial] opportunity” for investors.

Sesame Street’s private foundation of the co-founder and permanent board director, Joan Ganz Cooney, is funded by those with a direct vested interest in the uptake of COVID vaccines. The foundation, called Sesame Workshop’s Joan Ganz Cooney Center, receives “generous funding” from The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and from the philanthropic foundation of pharmaceutical behemoth Johnson & Johnson.




Mass Psychosis Is a Real Global Pandemic

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com  

Story at-a-glance

  • Mass psychosis is defined as “an epidemic of madness” that occurs when a “large portion of society loses touch with reality and descends into delusions”
  • We’re now in the middle of mass psychosis, induced by relentless fearmongering coupled with data suppression and intimidation tactics
  • In the U.K., psychiatric referrals for first-time psychotic episodes increased 75% between April 2019 and April 2021
  • Rates of anxiety and depression worldwide increased dramatically in 2020. Estimates suggest the COVID pandemic resulted in an additional 76 million cases of anxiety and 53 million cases of major depressive disorder, over and above annual norms, with women and younger individuals being disproportionally affected
  • Mental health referrals among children have doubled in the U.K. since the start of the pandemic; 16% of children between the ages of 5 and 16 were diagnosed with a mental disorder in 2020, compared to 10.8% in 2017

Mass psychosis is defined as “an epidemic of madness” that occurs when a “large portion of society loses touch with reality and descends into delusions.” The witch trials of the 16th and 17th centuries are a classic example. We’re now in the middle of another mass psychosis, induced by relentless fearmongering coupled with data suppression and intimidation tactics of all kinds.

The 20-minute video above, “Mass Psychosis — How an Entire Population Becomes Mentally Ill,” created by After Skool and Academy of Ideas,1 explains the tactics used to seed and nurture mental illness on a grand scale.

Fearmongering Breeds Insanity

A number of mental health experts have expressed concern over the blatant panic mongering during the COVID-19 pandemic, warning it can have serious psychiatric effects. For example, in a December 22, 2020, article2 in Evie Magazine, S.G. Cheah discussed the emergence of mass insanity caused by “delusional fear of COVID-19.”

“Even when the statistics point to the extremely low fatality rate among children and young adults (measuring 0.002% at age 10 and 0.01% at 25), the young and the healthy are still terrorized by the chokehold of irrational fear when faced with the coronavirus,” Cheah wrote, adding:3

“Instead of facing reality, the delusional person would rather live in their world of make-believe. But in order to keep faking reality, they’ll have to make sure that everyone else around them also pretends to live in their imaginary world.

In simpler words, the delusional person rejects reality. And in this rejection of reality, others have to play along with how they view the world, otherwise, their world will not make sense to them. It’s why the delusional person will get angry when they face someone who doesn’t conform to their world view …

It’s one of the reasons why you’re seeing so many people who’d happily approve the silencing of any medical experts whose views contradict the WHO or CDC guidelines. ‘Obey the rules!’ becomes more important than questioning if the rules were legitimate, to begin with.”

In a December 2020 interview (below), psychiatrist and medical-legal expert Dr. Mark McDonald4 also went on record stating “the true public health crisis lies in the widespread fear which morphed and evolved into a form of mass delusional psychosis.”

He went so far as to refer to the outside of his home or office as the “outdoor insane asylum,” where he must assume “that any person that I run into is insane” unless they prove otherwise.5

Reports of Psychotic Episodes Soar in Great Britain

Now, after some 19 months of abnormal “pandemic life,” the data are starting to reflect McDonald’s fears. For example, in the U.K., psychiatric referrals for first-time psychotic episodes have skyrocketed. As reported by The Guardian, October 17, 2021:6

“Cases of psychosis have soared over the past two years in England as an increasing number of people experience hallucinations and delusional thinking amid the stresses of the Covid-19 pandemic.

There was a 29% increase in the number of people referred to mental health services for their first suspected episode of psychosis between April 2019 and April 2021, NHS data7 shows. The rise continued throughout the spring, with 9,460 referred in May 2021, up 26% from 7,520 in May 2019.

The charity Rethink Mental Illness is urging the government to invest more in early intervention for psychosis to prevent further deterioration in people’s mental health from which it could take them years to recover.

It says the statistics provide some of the first concrete evidence to indicate the significant levels of distress experienced across the population during the pandemic.”

Psychosis Takes a Heavy Toll on a Person’s Life

Deputy chief executive of Rethink Mental Illness, Brian Dow, commented on the findings:8

“Psychosis can have a devastating impact on people’s lives. Swift access to treatment is vital to prevent further deterioration in people’s mental health which could take them years to recover from. These soaring numbers of suspected first episodes of psychosis are cause for alarm.

We are now well beyond the first profound shocks of this crisis, and it’s deeply concerning that the number of referrals remains so high. As first presentations of psychosis typically occur in young adults, this steep rise raises additional concerns about the pressures the younger generation have faced during the pandemic.

The pandemic has had a game changing effect on our mental health and it requires a revolutionary response. Dedicated additional funding for mental health and social care must go to frontline services to help meet the new demand, otherwise thousands of people could bear a catastrophic cost.”

According to a spokesperson for the British Department of Health and Social Care, the agency will expand the NHS mental health services budget by £2.3 billion ($3.1 billion) per year by 2023/2024. They’ve also added £500 million ($691 million) to the 2021 budget to provide services to those hit hardest by pandemic measures.9

Anxiety and Depression Have Increased Dramatically Worldwide

Another study,10,11 looking at the rates of anxiety and depression worldwide, found both conditions increased dramatically in 2020. The researchers estimate the COVID pandemic resulted in an additional 76 million cases of anxiety and 53 million cases of major depressive disorder, over and above annual norms, with women and younger individuals being disproportionally affected. According to The Guardian:12

“… the team estimate there were 246m cases of major depressive disorder and 374m cases of anxiety disorders worldwide in 2020, with the figure for the former 28% higher, and for the latter 26% higher, than would have been expected had the crisis not happened.

About two-thirds of these extra cases of major depressive disorder and 68% of the extra cases of anxiety disorders were among women, while younger people were affected more than older adults, with extra cases greatest among people aged 20-24.”

Lead author Damian Santomauro, Ph.D., of the University of Queensland, told The Guardian:13

“We believe [that] is because women are more likely to be affected by the social and economic consequences of the pandemic. Women are more likely to take on additional carer and household responsibilities due to school closures or family members becoming unwell.

Women also tend to have lower salaries, less savings, and less secure employment than men, and so are more likely to be financially disadvantaged during the pandemic. Youth have been impacted by the closures of schools and higher education facilities, and wider restrictions inhibiting young people from peer interactions.”

Increased prevalence of domestic violence may also be a contributing factor that places women at increased risk of mental problems, while young adults are more likely to become unemployed.

Massive Rise in Mental Health Problems in Children

Children are bearing a particularly heavy burden as adults succumb to irrational fears. It’s not surprising then that mental health referrals for children have nearly doubled in the U.K. since the start of the pandemic.14 According to British authorities, 16% of children between the ages of 5 and 16 were diagnosed with a mental disorder in 2020, compared to 10.8% in 2017.15 As noted in a September 23, 2021, press release by the Royal College of Psychiatrists:16

“Eighteen months after the first lockdown and after warnings from the mental health sector about the long-lasting mental health impact of the pandemic, the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ analysis of NHS Digital data found that:

  • 190,271 0–18-year-olds were referred to children and young people’s mental health services between April and June this year, up 134% on the same period last year (81,170) and 96% in 2019 (97,342).
  • 8,552 children and young people were referred for urgent or emergency crisis care between April and June this year, up 80% on the same period last year (4,741) and up 64% in 2019 (5,219).
  • 340,694 children in contact with children and young people’s mental health services at the end of June, up 25% on the same month last year (272,529) and up 51% on June 2019 (225,480).”

Eating disorders are also more prevalent than ever, and the rapid increase has left many children waiting for months for treatment — delays that could have life-threatening consequences — as facilities are at capacity. The press release quotes a mother whose teenage daughter relapsed into anorexia during the pandemic:17

“The pandemic has been devastating for my daughter and for our family. She has anorexia and was discharged from an inpatient unit last year, but the disruption to her normal routines and socializing really affected her recovery. She was spending a lot less time doing the things she enjoys and a lot more time alone with her thoughts.

Unfortunately, she relapsed, becoming so unwell she was admitted to hospital and sectioned. After 72 days in hospital with no specialist eating disorder bed becoming available, we brought her home where I had to tube feed her for 10 weeks.

My daughter urgently needed specialist help for this life-threatening illness, but services are completely overwhelmed because so many young people need help. It’s a terrifying situation for patients and families to be in.”

Mass Delusional Psychosis Traumatizes Children

Indeed, the widespread insanity on display among adults can have severe and lasting effects on children as they grow up. According to McDonald (see interview above), the mental states of the children he’s treated during this pandemic are far worse than he’s used to seeing in these age groups. This tells us the trauma inflicted by pandemic measures is very serious.

One of the worst traumas inflicted on children has been the ridiculous idea that they might kill their parents or grandparents simply by being around them. They’re also being taught to feel guilty about behaviors that would normally be completely normal — as just one example: hysterical adults calling a toddler who refuses to wear a mask a “brat,” when resisting having a restrictive mask put across your face is perfectly normal at that age.

It’s extremely abnormal for children to grow up thinking that they’re a danger to people around them and that everyone around them is a danger to them. It’s completely abnormal to grow up thinking that facemasks, gloves, and physical separation are required to stay alive.

Adults have also twisted irrational fear into a virtue, which is doubly tragic and wrong. Wearing a mask has become a way to demonstrate that you’re a “good person,” someone who cares about others, whereas not wearing a mask will have you branded as an inconsiderate lout, if not a prospective mass murderer, simply by breathing.

What’s more, by encouraging us to remain in fear and allow it to control and constrain our lives, the fear has become so entrenched that anyone who says we need to be fearless and fight for our freedoms is attacked for being both stupid and dangerous.

Adults Must Be Healed to Save the Children

It’s adults who are mindlessly inflicting this emotional trauma on an entire generation. As noted by McDonald in his interview, a primary cause of depression among children is feeling disconnected from family and friends.

Everyone, but children in particular, needs face-to-face contact, physical contact, and emotional intimacy. We need these things to feel safe around others and within our own selves. Digital interactions cannot replace these most basic human needs and are inherently separating.

McDonald cites U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics showing there was a 400% increase in adolescent depression during 2020 compared to the year before, and in 25% of cases, they contemplated suicide. These are unheard of statistics, he says. Never before have so many teenagers considered committing suicide.

According to McDonald, parents, and adults, in general, are to blame, because they are the ones scaring children to the point they don’t feel life is worth living anymore. This is why we can’t just treat the children. We must also address the psychosis of the adult population that is causing all this trauma.

Mass Delusion Is Leading Us Into Slavery

The mass delusion must also be addressed because it’s driving us all, sane and insane alike, toward a society devoid of all previous freedoms and civil liberties, and the corrupt individuals in charge will not voluntarily relinquish power once we’ve given it to them.

Clearly, many of our political leaders know COVID-19 isn’t the deadly plague it’s been made out to be. They issue stay-at-home orders from their vacation homes in the Caribbean and repeatedly break their own mask and lockdown mandates.

They ride their bikes, stroll through the park, have family gatherings, and dine out without a care. They’re simply playing along, following the narrative coming from technocratic strongholds like the World Health Organization, because it benefits them.

You could say the ruling class suffers from a different kind of psychosis. As explained in “Mass Psychosis — How an Entire Population Becomes Mentally Ill,” totalitarianism actually begins as psychosis within the ruling class, as the individuals within this class are easily enamored with delusions that augment their power. And no delusion is greater than the delusion that they can and should control and dominate others.

Whether the totalitarian mindset takes the form of communism, fascism, or technocracy, a ruling elite that has succumbed to their own delusions of grandeur then sets about to indoctrinate the masses into their own twisted worldview. All that’s needed to accomplish that reorganization of society is the manipulation of collective feelings.

Sadly, many citizens are unwittingly aiding and abetting the global power grab that will result in our enslavement. Fear fueled hysteria, which led to mass delusional psychosis and group control were citizens themselves support and press for the elimination of basic freedoms.

There’s no doubt at this point that a totalitarian society is the ultimate end of this societal psychosis unless we do something about it. The truth is, we’re as safe now as we ever were. We must not allow our freedoms to be taken from us due to delusional fears. As noted by Cheah in her article:18

“It’s not unthinkable that the final outcome would be total societal control on every aspect of your life. Consider this — the endpoint of a mentally ill person is for them to be put under a controlled environment (institutionalized like an asylum) where all freedoms are restricted. And it’s looking more and more like that’s the endpoint of where this mass psychosis is heading.”

We Must Restore Sanity

Once a society is firmly in the grip of mass psychosis, totalitarians are free to take the last, decisive step: They can offer a way out, a return to order. The price is your freedom. You must cede control of all aspects of your life to the rulers because unless they are granted total control, they won’t be able to create the order everyone craves.

This order, however, is a pathological one, devoid of all humanity. It eliminates the spontaneity that brings joy and creativity to one’s life by demanding strict conformity and blind obedience. And despite the promise of safety, totalitarian society is inherently fearful. It is built on fear and is maintained by it too. So, giving up your freedom for safety and a sense of order will only lead to more of the same fear and anxiety that allowed the totalitarians to gain control in the first place.

Knowing this, we must remember to embrace courage, truth, honesty, and freedom as we move forward — not just in our thoughts and words but also in our actions. People cannot think logically when in a state of delusional psychosis, which is why sharing information, facts, data, and evidence tends to be ineffective except in cases where the person was acting out of peer pressure rather than a delusional belief.

Typically, the best you can do is stand firm and act in alignment with truth and objective reality, much like you would if you were a first responder faced with an accident victim who is responding hysterically to what you know is only a minor injury.

In short, to help return sanity to an insane world, you first need to center yourself and live in such a way as to provide inspiration for others to follow — speak and act in such a way as to demonstrate that you are not afraid to live life and return to normalcy.

Sources and References



Secret Documents Reveal FDA’s Attack On Ivermectin

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

Story at-a-glance

  • Mainstream media have incorrectly insinuated that ivermectin is purely a veterinary drug that could be dangerous to humans; CNN falsely stated that Joe Rogan took “horse dewormer”
  • Rogan recently interviewed CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, getting him to admit CNN lied
  • The FDA started the “horse dewormer” fallacy based on a Mississippi health department report that said 70% of poison control calls were related to veterinary ivermectin. It was actually 70% of ivermectin-related calls, six in all, four of which were about the accidental use of ivermectin in livestock. Overall, these calls made up only 2% of all poison control calls
  • A total of 20 deaths have been linked to ivermectin since 1992. Compare that safety profile to Remdesivir, the primary drug used by hospitals across the U.S. against COVID-19. Since the spring of 2020, VigiAccess has received 7,491 adverse events in all attributed to the drug, including 560 deaths, 550 serious cardiac disorders, and 475 acute kidney injuries
  • Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson has issued a legal opinion on the off-label use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. According to this legal opinion, health care providers in Nebraska can legally prescribe these medications for off-label use for the treatment of COVID, provided they have informed consent from the patient. The only causes for disciplinary action are failure to obtain informed consent, deception, and/or prescribing excessively high doses

In early September 2021, Oklahoma’s KFOR news ran a falsified story about emergency rooms being overrun with patients who had overdosed on horse ivermectin.1 Other mainstream media followed suit — all incorrectly referring to ivermectin as a dangerous veterinary drug.

In the real world, ivermectin is a human drug that has been safely used by 3.7 billion people since the early 1990s.2 In 2016, three scientists received the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine for their discovery of ivermectin against parasitic infections in humans.3 It’s also on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.4

There’s absolutely no reason whatsoever to disparage ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” that only a loony person would consider taking. Yet that’s what mainstream media have done, virtually without exception.

When comedian and podcast host Joe Rogan revealed5 he’d treated his bout of COVID-19 with ivermectin and other remedies — fully recovering within three days — NPR reported Rogan had taken “ivermectin, a deworming veterinary drug that is formulated for use in cows and horses,” adding that “the Food and Drug Administration is urging people to stop ingesting” the medication, saying animal doses of the drug can cause nausea, vomiting and in some cases severe hepatitis.6

Sanjay Gupta Admits CNN Lied

CNN, among many others, also reported on Rogan’s use of “horse dewormer.” In mid-October 2021, Rogan interviewed CNN medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta, grilling him on why CNN would outright lie about his use of ivermectin.

“It’s a lie on a news network,” Rogan said, “and it’s a lie that they’re conscious of. It’s not a mistake. They’re unfavorably framing it as a veterinary medicine …

Don’t you think a lie like that is dangerous … when they know they’re lying? They know I took medicine [for humans] … Dude, they lied. They said I was taking horse dewormer. It was prescribed to me by a doctor, along with a bunch of other medications.”

Gupta finally relents and agrees that ivermectin should not be called horse dewormer. When asked, “Does it bother you that the news network you work for out and out lied about me taking horse dewormer?” Gupta replied, “They shouldn’t have said that.”

When asked why they would lie about such an important medical issue, Gupta replied “I don’t know.” Gupta also admits he never asked why they did it, even though he’s their top medical correspondent.

FDA Attacks Ivermectin

While CNN and mainstream media are certainly at fault for spreading disinformation here, they got the idea from a supposedly reputable source — the FDA. In August 21, 2021, tweet,7 the FDA linked to an agency article warning against the use of ivermectin, saying “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

This blatantly misleading post seeded the lie that then spread across mainstream media. In an article posted on RESCUE with Michael Capuzzo substack, two independent investigative health journalists, Mary Beth Pfeiffer and Linda Bonvie, detail how the FDA’s anti-ivermectin campaign began:8

“Within two days, 23.7 million people had seen that Pulitzer-worthy bit of Twitter talk. Hundreds of thousands more got the message on Facebook, LinkedIn, and from the Today Show’s 3 million-follower Instagram account.

‘That was great!’ declared FDA Acting Commissioner Janet Woodcock in an email to her media team. ‘Even I saw it!’ For the FDA, the ‘not-a-horse’ tweet was ‘a unique viral moment,’ a senior FDA official wrote to Woodcock, ‘in a time of incredible misinformation’ …

When CNN retweeted ‘not-a-horse,’ FDA was gleeful. ‘The numbers are racking up and I laughed out loud,’ wrote FDA Associate Commissioner Erica Jefferson in one email … There was one problem, however. The tweet was a direct outgrowth of wrong data — call it misinformation — put out the day before by the Mississippi health department.

The FDA did not vet the data, according to our review of emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and questions to FDA officials. Instead, it saw Mississippi, as one email said, as ‘an opportunity to remind the public of our own warnings for ivermectin.’”

The now infamous tweet was born out of a single sentence in a Mississippi poison control health alert, which stated that “At least 70% of the recent calls have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers.” The problem? That wasn’t accurate either.

Much Ado About Nothing

As it turns out, the real percentage of recent calls to poison control related to veterinary ivermectin was 2%, not 70%. In an October 5, 2021, correction, the Mississippi health department clarified that it wasn’t 70% of all poison control calls that involved veterinary ivermectin, it was 70% of all ivermectin-related calls.9

In absolute numbers, there were six such calls, and four of those calls actually related to livestock accidentally receiving the drug. An investigation by Pfeiffer and Bonvie also revealed that between July 31 and August 22, 2021, 40%, 10 of 24 ivermectin-related calls to the Mississippi poison control center were mere requests for information, which is a common occurrence.

“Without question, people should not take drugs made for animals, given issues of dosing and medical oversight, to name just two. That much is clear,” Pfeiffer and Bonvie write.10

“But in hopping on the Mississippi bandwagon, the FDA … turned ivermectin, which doctors and health ministers in several countries say has saved many from covid-19, into a drug to be feared, human form or not.

This highly effective bait-and-switch began last March with a webpage, to which the FDA tweet linked, that conflates the two ivermectins. On one hand, the FDA tells of receiving ‘multiple reports of patients who have required medical attention’ after taking the animal product.

On the other, it describes the fate awaiting people who take large amounts of any ivermectin, ending a long list with ‘dizziness, ataxia, seizures, coma and even death.’

The medical literature,11 nonetheless, shows ivermectin to be an extremely safe medicine … Last March, a safety review12 of ivermectin by a renowned French toxicologist could not find a single accidental overdose death in the medical literature in more than 300 safety studies of the drug over decades.

The study was performed for MedinCell, a French pharmaceutical company … Since 1992, twenty deaths have been linked to inexpensive, off-patent ivermectin, according to a World Health Organization drug tracker called VigiAccess …

So how big was the surge that FDA described as ‘multiple’? Four, an agency spokesperson said just after the page went up. Three people were hospitalized, but it wasn’t clear if that was for COVID itself.

When pressed for details, FDA cited privacy issues, and said in an email, ‘Some of these cases were lost to follow up.’ This is how government gets away with some whoppers, and with the media’s help.”

Ivermectin Is Safe; Remdesivir, Not so Much

According to VigiAccess, the World Health Organization’s drug tracker, a total of 20 deaths have been linked to ivermectin since 1992.13 Compare that safety profile to remdesivir, the primary drug used by hospitals across the U.S. against COVID-19.

Since the spring of 2020, VigiAccess has received 7,491 adverse events in all attributed to remdesivir, including 560 deaths, 550 serious cardiac disorders and 475 acute kidney injuries.14

The question is why remdesivir is being used at all, with the World Health Organization recommending15 against it and a new Lancet study16 finding “no clinical benefit.” Could it be that Fauci is involved with the fraud? Pfeiffer and Bonvie write.17,18

“The other question is why ivermectin is not. The FDA tweet arrived just as ivermectin prescriptions were soaring, up twenty-four-fold in August from before the pandemic.

These were legal prescriptions written by doctors who, presumably, had read the studies, learned from experience, and decided for themselves. Indeed, 20 percent of prescriptions are written off-label,19 namely for other than an approved use.

The effort to vilify ivermectin broadly has helped curb the legal supply of a safe drug. That’s what drove people to livestock medicine in the first place.”

State AG Calls Out Medical Establishment for Misinformation

In better news, in early October 2021, the Nebraska Department of Health asked Nebraska Attorney General Doug Peterson to issue a legal opinion on the off-label use of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19.

October 15, 2021, Peterson issued a legal opinion20,21 stating health care providers can legally prescribe these medications for off-label use for the treatment of COVID, provided they have informed consent from the patient.22 The only causes for disciplinary action are failure to obtain informed consent, deception, and/or prescribing excessively high doses.

Peterson concluded that, based on the available evidence, hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin “might work for some people.”

He highlighted studies demonstrating the safety and benefits of these drugs against COVID-19, as well as the shocking scientific fraud that led to worldwide shunning of hydroxychloroquine, and the cherry-picking and exclusion of data in studies that are critical of ivermectin. He also pointed out how illogical it is to discourage early treatment.

“Allowing physicians to consider these early treatments will free them to evaluate additional tools that could save lives, keep patients out of the hospital, and provide relief for our already strained healthcare system,” Peterson wrote.23,24

Peterson also called out the FDA and Dr. Anthony Fauci on their hypocrisy, detailing how the FDA and National Institutes of Health seeded confusion by issuing contradictory guidance. The NIH has taken a neutral position to ivermectin, which Peterson “clearly signaled that physicians should use their discretion in deciding whether to treat COVID-19 patients with ivermectin.”

NIH officials, however, have ignored the agency’s official position. At the end of August 2021, Fauci “went on CNN and announced that ‘there is no clinical evidence’ that ivermectin works for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19,’ and that ‘there is no evidence whatsoever that it works,” Peterson writes, adding:

“Yet this definitive claim directly contradicts the NIH’s recognition that ‘several randomized trials … published in peer-reviewed journals’ have reported data indicating that ivermectin is effective as a COVID-19 treatment.”

AG Blames FDA for Seeding Confusion

Peterson goes on to review the FDA’s behavior with respect to ivermectin:

“The FDA has similarly charted a course of confusion. In March 2021, the FDA posted a webpage entitled ‘Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19.’

Although the FDA’s concern was stories of some people using the animal form of ivermectin or excessive doses of the human form, the title broadly condemned any use of ivermectin in connection with COVID-19.

Yet there was no basis for its sweeping condemnation. Indeed, the FDA itself acknowledged on that very webpage (and continued to do so until the page changed on September 3, 2021) that the agency had not even ‘reviewed data to support use of ivermectin in COVID-19 patients to treat or prevent COVID-19.’

But without reviewing the available data, which had long since been available and accumulating, it is unclear what basis the FDA had for denouncing ivermectin as a treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19.”

Peterson also highlights the fact that while the FDA claims ivermectin “is not an antiviral (a drug for treating viruses),” on another FDA webpage they list a study in Antiviral Research that “identified ivermectin as a medicine ‘previously shown to have broad-spectrum antiviral activity.”

“It is telling that the FDA deleted the line about ivermectin not being ‘anti-viral’ when it amended the first webpage on September 3, 2021,” Peterson writes.

He also points out that while the FDA now claims off-label use of drugs “can be very dangerous,” and that this is why they don’t recommend ivermectin for COVID, doctors routinely use drugs off-label, and ivermectin has a well-established safety record.

So, “it is inconsistent for the FDA to imply that ivermectin is dangerous when used to treat COVID-19 while the agency continues to approve remdesivir despite its spottier safety record,” Peterson writes.

AG Puts Professional Associations Under the Microscope

Peterson also questioned the stance of professional associations such as The American Medical Association, American Pharmacists Association, and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, which in September 2021 issued a joint statement25 opposing the use of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID outside of clinical trials.

Their statement, Peterson points out, relied on the FDA’s and CDC’s “suspect positions,” and a statement by Merck, in which they opposed the use of the drug due to a “concerning lack of safety data in the majority of studies.”

“But Merck, of all sources, knows that ivermectin is exceedingly safe, so the absence of safety data in recent studies should not be concerning to the company,” Peterson writes, adding:

“Why would ivermectin’s original patent holder go out of its way to question this medicine by creating the impression that it might not be safe? There are at least two plausible reasons.

First, ivermectin is no longer under patent, so Merck does not profit from it anymore. That likely explains why Merck declined to ‘conduct clinical trials’ on ivermectin and COVID-19 when given the chance.

Second, Merck has a significant financial interest in the medical profession rejecting ivermectin as an early treatment for COVID-19. [T]he U.S. government has agreed to pay [Merck] about $1.2 billion for 1.7 million courses of its experimental COVID-19 treatment [molnupiravir], if it is proven to work in an ongoing large trial and authorized by U.S. regulators.

Thus, if low-cost ivermectin works better than, or even the same as molnupiravir, that could cost Merck billions of dollars.”

Another excellent article26 detailing the FDA’s questionable actions, and Merck’s incentives to disparage their old drug, ivermectin, was published by the American Institute for Economic Research.

“While we can all be happy that Merck has developed a new therapeutic that can keep us safe from the ravages of Covid-19, we should realize that the FDA’s rules give companies an incentive to focus on newer drugs while ignoring older ones,” David Henderson, a senior fellow with AIERS, writes.27

“Ivermectin may or may not be a miracle drug for Covid-19. The FDA doesn’t want us to learn the truth. The FDA spreads lies and alarms Americans while preventing drug companies from providing us with scientific explorations of existing, promising, generic drugs.”

Early Treatment Is Crucial

There’s no doubt that many have died unnecessarily due to our health authorities’ incomprehensible decision to discourage all prevention and early treatment of COVID-19. As noted by many doctors, early treatment is absolutely crucial for preventing hospitalization, death, and long-term side effects of the infection.

There are several proven protocols to choose from at this point, including the following. Whichever treatment protocol you use, make sure you begin treatment as soon as possible, ideally at the first onset of symptoms.

  • The Zelenko protocol28
  • The MATH+ protocols29
  • Nebulized hydrogen peroxide, as detailed in Dr. David Brownstein’s case paper30 and Dr. Thomas Levy’s free e-book, “Rapid Virus Recovery
Sources and References



Pushback to COVID Tyranny is Spreading, but the Mainstream Media Doesn’t Want You to Know That

By John-Henry Westen | LifeSiteNews 

The good news that happens day to day is hidden by the mainstream media. It is out there, but the bad news can be overwhelming.

Especially in light of the COVID vaccine mandate insanity, it can seem sometimes like the evil is totally overwhelming and that there is no sense in fighting it, no sense in standing strong, no sense in pushing back. Well, that is just not true and these last couple of weeks showed us that. However, most of us would have missed the great news because the mainstream media these days hate real good news.

It deems good news evil and evil news good. We have seen great pushback against the COVID health dictatorship and the abortion dictatorship. You need to hear this. You need to be encouraged and inspired.

The predominantly African-American City of Marianna, Arkansas just passed a resolution to become a “Pro-Life city.” The city council declared in the resolution, “It is the policy of the City of Marianna to promote and protect the dignity and humanity of all persons at all stages of life from conception until natural death. The City of Marianna declares itself to be a Pro-Life City.”

Now, of course, this does not mean the city can shut down all its abortion mills or ban abortion. It does, however, send a message about the values of Marianna as efforts to create “sanctuary cities” for preborn babies grow. 

Texas has nearly become a sanctuary state and has given us much cause to celebrate in the past week. We may have been heartbroken when the heartbeat bill that banned most abortions was blocked by a lower court after a request from the Biden administration. However, just days later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the life-saving law.  lo; would withhold up to $175 million in funding from the city for violating state laws enacted by Republicans earlier this year. 

It’s not just the state administrations and officials that are pushing back, it’s also the people.  

In Los Angeles, 871 Los Angeles firefighters, representing roughly 25% of the total personnel on the department, filed a notice of intent to sue the city for its COVID-19 vaccine mandate. One in every four LAFD firefighters has signed on to the filing, arguing that the city has ignored their due process rights in an effort to “intimidate, frighten, coerce and force” them into taking the experimental COVID-19 drug.

There is power in resistance. Last week, it began with a trickle – and then became a flood – of tweets on Sunday about Southwest Airline pilots calling in sick to protest their company’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate, and then a cascade of reports that pilots from other airlines, as well as critical employees in other segments of the transportation industry, are preparing to follow suit.

And here is a real treat. Watch what this pilot has to say about the whole Covid-19 mandates: 

And speaking of standing up … at thousands of locations across North America on the first Sunday of October, pro-lifers stood up for life. LifeChain Sunday saw tens of thousands standing up and praying for life. In Canada alone, there were 269 Life Chains taking to the streets in cities and towns to protest the murder of over 100,000 babies every year by abortion.  

This resistance is not just in North America, it’s a global fight. In the Netherlands, Dilay Willemstein, who was to represent her country at the Miss World competition in Puerto Rico in December, made the personal choice not to participate because she says she is “not ready” to get the COVID experimental vaccine.

She stated, “At this point, I’m not ready yet to take the vaccine, and I have no choice. If I don’t take the vaccine, this means I’m not allowed to go, and that really helped my choice because, really, I’m not ready for it and for me, this means I’m not allowed to join the Miss World election even though I’m the finalist. For me, this is really the biggest reason that I’m not going any longer. If I did do it, I’d go against my own principles and that’s something I’ve never done and I won’t do it now.” 

Washington Wizards basketball star Bradley Beal said he is not interested in getting the COVID shot.

Pro-life Republican Senator Rand Paul, who is a medical doctor, grilled Biden health secretary Xavier Beccera on natural immunity, telling him bluntly, “You are the one ignoring the science.” You’ve got to see this. 

And all of this pushback does not and will not go in vain. On October 12, U.S. District Judge David N. Hurd granted a preliminary injunction to 17 medical health professionals who hold religious objections to the COVID-19 vaccines. The preliminary injunction prevents the state of New York from enforcing a vaccine mandate.  

And the fruit of this pushback is also seen within the Church. U.S. Military Archbishop Timothy Broglio issued a statement against forcing American service members to take the COVID-19 jab, saying that “no one should be forced to receive a COVID-19 vaccine if it would violate the sanctity of his or her conscience.” That seems a change from Archbishop Broglio’s March statement in which he described being vaccinated as “an act of charity to our sisters and brothers.”  

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE…




Corporate Media Largely Silent as Millions Protest Vaccine Mandates Worldwide

By Matt Agorist

When protests in the United States happen that help the establishment in some way, whether by stoking divide or pushing an establishment agenda, corporate media is all over them, bombarding us with news of packed streets. However, when massive crowds take to the streets to have their anti-establishment voices heard, it’s crickets on FOXSNBCNN.

Such is the case recently as millions of people across the world have taken to the streets to protest the draconian laws which segregate society and deprive people of their freedoms over their choice in taking a vaccine they may not even need.

One place, in particular, that is currently seeing massive protests is Italy whose government just passed the strictest vaccine mandate in Europe. Starting on October 15, Italy begins enforcing the new workplace green pass requirement. If employees cannot show proof of vaccination, they will not be allowed to go to work nor will they be able to enter any public places like restaurants, theaters, gyms, etc.

If an Italian citizen misses five days of work by failing to comply with the new mandate, the government forces their employer to stop paying them. If employees are caught working without a green pass, the state will extort them to the tune of $2,100 per instance.

https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1446867103932469251?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1446867103932469251%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.activistpost.com%2F2021%2F10%2Fcorporate-media-largely-silent-as-millions-protest-vaccine-mandates-worldwide.html

Naturally, moves like this have pissed off a lot of people. It is well known now that the antibodies from the covid vaccine fade over time, which is why Israel is now requiring boosters for all of its citizens. It is also well known that immunity from natural infection is far superior to the vaccine.

A person who had the jab back in January and likely has very few antibodies left is considered “green.” However, at the same time, a person who may have caught covid last month and recovered, thereby drastically reducing their ability to catch and spread the disease, is considered a threat and cannot go to work or public places. There is zero logic in these mandates, which proves one thing — they are about control — not your safety.

This is why people are in the streets across the country and all over Europe and Australia. Civil disobedience is their only option left as they are forced out of their jobs, denied entry into public places, and forbidden from traveling.

As the mainstream media refuses to question the idea behind mandating vaccinations, they have made their role clear in this tyranny as enablers. This should come as no surprise either given the money that pours into their coffers from the ones who stand to gain the most from vaccine mandates — big pharma.

As we are currently witnessing with their silence in regard to vaccine mandate protests, it is no secret that the pharmaceutical industry wields immense control over the government, big tech, and the media. It is their control that keeps this and any other negative press about their products from seeing the light of day. However, most people likely do not know the scope of this control.

As Mike Papantonio, attorney and host of the international television show America’s Lawyer, explains, with the exception of CBS, every major media outlet in the United States shares at least one board member with at least one pharmaceutical company. To put that into perspective: These board members wake up, go to a meeting at Merck or Pfizer, then they have their driver take them over to a meeting with NBC to decide what kind of programming that network is going to air.

We have even reported incidents in which reporters have been cut off by the network for mentioning the connection on air. In a clear example of how beholden mainstream media is to the pharmaceutical industries who manufacture and market these drugs, FOX News’ Sean Hannity was recorded in 2018, blatantly cutting off a reporter who dared mention Nikolas Cruz’s reported association with antidepressants.

In the report below, Papantonio explains how the billions of dollars big pharma gives to mainstream media outlets every year is used to keep them subservient and complicit in covering up the slew of deadly side effects from their products.

As we can see with the current censorship and narrative control in regard to those questioning the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, big pharma wields massive control over the information you are allowed to talk about and consume. Once we zoom out and see the entire situation, it becomes exceedingly evident as to why Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and the rest of Big Tech, have made it their mission to wipe out any and all content that questions the “official narrative.”

Source: The Free Thought Project

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds.




Nobel Peace Prize for Journalists Serves As Reminder that Freedom of the Press is Under Threat from Strongmen and Social Media

Thirty-two years ago next month, I was in Germany reporting on the fall of the Berlin Wall, an event then heralded as a triumph of Western democratic liberalism and even “the end of history.”

But democracy isn’t doing so well across the globe now. Nothing underscores how far we have come from that moment of irrational exuberance than the powerful warning the Nobel Prize Committee felt compelled to issue on Oct. 8, 2021, in awarding its coveted Peace Prize to two reporters.

“They are representative for all journalists,” Berit Reiss-Andersen, the chair of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, said in announcing the award to Maria Ressa and Dmitry Muratov, “in a world in which democracy and freedom of the press face increasingly adverse conditions.”

The honor for Muratov, the co-founder of Russia’s Novaya Gazeta, and Ressa, the CEO of the Philippine news site Rappler, is enormously important. In part that’s because of the protection that global attention may afford two journalists under imminent and relentless threat from the strongmen who run their respective countries. “The world is watching,” Reiss-Andersen pointedly noted in an interview after making the announcement.

Equally important is the larger message the committee wanted to deliver. “Without media, you cannot have a strong democracy,” Reiss-Andersen said.

Global political threats

The two laureates’ cases highlight an emergency for civil society: Muratov, editor of what the Nobel Prize Committee described as “the most independent paper in Russia today,” has seen six of his colleagues slain for their work criticizing Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Ressa, a former CNN reporter, is under a de facto travel ban because the government of Rodrigo Duterte, in an obvious attempt to bankrupt Rappler, has filed so many legal cases against the website that Ressa must go from judge to judge to ask permission any time she wants to leave the country.

Inevitably, Ressa told me recently, one of them says “no.” Maybe that will change now that she has a date in Oslo. But Ressa probably knows better than to hold her breath.

Last year, when I – a long-time journalist turned professor of journalism – helped organize a group of fellow Princeton alumni to sign a letter of support for Ressa, more than 400 responded. They included members of Congress and state legislatures and former diplomats who served presidents of both parties. One of them was former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, who died several months later, making a show of solidarity with Maria Ressa one of his last public acts. This show of support is a sign of what’s at stake.

Three decades after the downfall of totalitarian regimes in Eastern Europe, forces of darkness and intolerance are on the march. Journalists are the canaries down the noxious mine shaft. Attacks on them are becoming more brazen: whether it is the grisly dismemberment of Saudi dissident and writer Jamal Khashoggi, the grounding of a commercial airplane to snatch a Belarusian journalist or the infamous graffiti “Murder the Media” scrawled onto a door of the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 insurrection.

This irrational hatred of purveyors of facts knows no ideology. Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s disdain for the press is at least equaled by that of leftist Nicaraguan leader Daniel Ortega, whose response to his critics in the media has been to, well, lock ‘em up.

Digital menace

What makes today’s threats to free expression especially insidious is that they don’t come just from the usual suspects – thuggish government censors.

They are amplified and weaponized by social media networks that claim the privilege of free speech protection while they allow themselves to be hijacked by slanderers and propagandists.

No one has done more to expose the complicity of these platforms in the attack on democracy than Ressa, a tech enthusiast who built her publication’s website to interface with Facebook and now accuses the company of endangering her own freedom with its laissez-faire approach to the slander being propagated on its site.

“Freedom of expression is full of paradoxes,” the Nobel Committee’s Reiss-Andersen observed, in an interview after awarding the Peace Prize. She made it clear that the award to Ressa and Muratov was intended to tackle those paradoxes too.

Asked why the Peace Prize went to two individual journalists – rather than to one of the press freedom organizations, such as the Committee to Protect Journalists, that have represented Ressa, Muratov and so many of their endangered colleagues – Reiss-Anderson said the Nobel Committee deliberately chose working reporters.

Ressa and Muratov represent “a golden standard,” she said, of “journalism of high quality.” In other words, they are fact-finders and truth-seekers, not purveyors of clickbait.

That golden standard is increasingly endangered, in large part because of the digital revolution that shattered the business model for public service journalism.

“Free, independent and fact-based journalism serves to protect against abuse of power,” Reiss-Andersen said in the prize announcement. But it is increasingly being undermined and supplanted by what’s called “content,” served up algorithmically from sources that are not transparent in ways that are designed to addict and that drive partisanship, tribalism, and division.

This poses a challenge for public policymakers and the democracies they represent. How to regulate digital media and still protect free speech? How to support the labor-intensive work of journalism and still protect its independence?

Answering those questions won’t be easy. But democracy may be at a tipping point. With its recognition of two investigative journalists and the crucial – and dangerous – work they do to support democracy, the Nobel Committee has invited us to begin the debate.

Correction: This story has been updated to state the correct place, Oslo, where the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded.

Editor’s note: Naomi Schalit, senior politics editor at The Conversation, signed the open letter “In defense of press freedom” organized by author Kathy Kiely in July 2020.

By Kathy Kiely, Professor and Lee Hills Chair of Free Press Studies, University of Missouri-Columbia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.




HUGE! Joe Rogan Just Blew The Lid Off the Mainstream Media Lies About Ivermectin

Video Source: WeAreChange

By Luke Rudkowski

The mainstream media has absolutely lost it over the ivermectin treatment that Joe Rogan successfully used to recover from COVID.

And now that Rogan is back to hosting his podcast he is rightfully going on the offensive, even jokingly threatening to sue CNN over the garbage they are making up about him.

This is making the MSM lose it even more.

Even though ivermectin was declared a “wonder drug” and was put on the list of essential substances by the WHO, and its creators won a Nobel prize…

According to the MSM, it is just a horse dewormer. An anti-parasite horse paste. Etc.

In this video, I get into how Rogan has revealed his doctors told him to take this treatment and how there may even be a Big Pharma plot to make everyone who uses the treatment look crazy.

Something the AP, NPR, MSNBC, and Rolling Stone are engaging in, as they have all run completely bogus stories on the treatment.

Meanwhile, Jimmy Kimmel is regurgitating the fake story that people couldn’t get treatment for gunshot wounds because of horse paste.




Epstein, Gates, Vaccine Heist & Mainstream Media’s CONSPIRACY Of Silence | Russell Brand & Dr. Mercola

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | mercola.com

Story at-a-glance

  • Judy K. Brown’s book, “Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story,” details the conspiracy of silence surrounding the biggest alleged pedophile and sex trafficking mogul of our time, Jeffrey Epstein, and his network of rich and powerful people, which includes Bill Gates
  • Corruption is rampant throughout our public health agencies and medical organizations. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds the Food and Drug Administration in the U.S. and the Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in the U.K.
  • The Gates Foundation also owns shares in Pfizer and BioNTech, raising questions about corruption in the FDA and IHMA, both of which appear to have given Pfizer’s COVID shot preferential treatment despite overwhelming safety concerns and questionable effectiveness
  • The Gates Foundation is also a primary funder of the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which was responsible for the grossly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors ordering COVID patients to be sent into nursing homes
  • Gates is now calling on the western world to sacrifice itself in order to stave off climate change. But the climate change crisis, like the COVID pandemic, is a red herring, used to justify the implementation of the Great Reset

In the video above, Russell Brand discusses Judy K. Brown’s book, “Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story,” which details the conspiracy of silence surrounding the biggest alleged pedophile and sex trafficking mogul of our time, Jeffrey Epstein.

The media’s refusal to dig into the Epstein story, Brand says, suggests the media are part of a corrupted establishment that protects the rich and powerful, no matter what. One rich and powerful person who enjoys the legacy media’s protection is Bill Gates.

Gates and Epstein

Brand cites an article in The Daily Beast,1 claiming Gates had dozens of meetings with Epstein between 2011 and 2014 alone, typically at Epstein’s Manhattan home. When news of Gates’ relationship with Epstein emerged in 2019, Melinda Gates reportedly contacted a divorce attorney.

According to The Daily Beast, Gates “encouraged Epstein to rehabilitate his image in the media.” If true, this suggests Gates may indeed have been closer to Epstein than he’s been letting on. An anonymous source who claims to have been present at several of the meetings has said the two were “very close.”

The Daily Beast also claims that “people familiar with the matter said Gates found freedom in Epstein’s lair, where he met a rotating cast of bold-faced names and discussed worldly issues between rounds of jokes and gossip — a ‘men’s club’ atmosphere that irritated Melinda.”

Speaking with CNN anchor Anderson Cooper, Gates dismisses his relationship with the notorious sex trafficker of minors as nothing more than a naïve attempt to secure funding for his public health efforts.

Seeing how the extent of Epstein’s interest in public health seems to have been an obsession with the idea of creating his own race of superhumans by having sex slaves give birth to his babies,2 this excuse seems flimsy at best. Epstein also donated money to the Worldwide Transhumanist Association.3

Gates is now trying to wiggle out from beneath Epstein’s dark shadow, calling their meetings “a mistake.” Brand may be right, however, when he says that the story of Gates’ relationship with Epstein really highlights the importance of retaining our autonomy, and not blindly follow people who claim superiority over us.

Gates is as flawed as anyone else, and perhaps more so, as wealth and power breed corruption, and allow people to pursue interests that would not or could not be pursued unless you have the money and influence to ensure secrecy.

Gates Funds UK and US Public Health Organizations

If we’ve learned anything over the past year and a half, it’s that corruption is rampant throughout our public health agencies and medical organizations. As reported by Armstrong Economics, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funds — and therefore has significant influence over — public health agencies in both the United States and the U.K.:4

“The [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] has given full approval to Gates’s vaccines because it has been under tremendous political pressure to do so. Even CNBC reported that ‘Federal health officials had been under mounting pressure from the scientific community and advocacy groups to fully approve Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine …’

Meanwhile, in London, an investigation has revealed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are the primary funders of the UK’s Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency just as they are [of] the FDA in the United States.

The SEC has done absolutely NOTHING about insider information since Gates is also a MAJOR shareholder in Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA. There are reliable medical organizations opposing these vaccines despite the approval by two regulatory agencies that are taking money from Gates which only introduces conflicts of interest and potential corruption …

The FDA has NEVER approved a completely new type of medicine in less than one year, which raises serious questions about corruption. The average time it takes to get approval from the FDA is 12 years!”

The London investigation they’re referring to was published in The Daily Expose August 20, 2021.5 The MHRA, the British version of the U.S. FDA, actually receives most of its funding from the Gates Foundation, the investigation found.

June 4, 2021, the MHRA extended its emergency use authorization of the Pfizer jab to children between the ages of 12 and 15, despite known risks of heart inflammation. The Daily Expose writes:6

“At the time, the Chief Executive of the MHRA, Dr. June Raine said the MHRA had ‘carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits outweigh any risk.’

We are left wondering if Dr. June Raine and the MHRA have even read the results of the extremely short and small study.7 If they have then they would have seen that 86% of children in the study suffered an adverse reaction ranging from mild to extremely serious.8

Just 1,127 children took part of the trial, however only 1,097 children completed the trial, with 30 of them not participating after being given the first dose of the Pfizer jab. The results do not state why the 30 children did not go on to complete the trial … Can we really trust the MHRA to remain impartial when its primary funder is the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who also own shares in Pfizer and BioNTech? We don’t think so.”

Gates Is Heavily Invested in Drug Companies

The Gates Foundation also owns “major shares” in both Pfizer and BioNTech, which jointly developed a COVID shot that August 23, 2021, was granted full approval9 for use in people 16 years of age and older by the FDA.

The Gates Foundation started shifting its investments into pharmaceuticals in 2002. That year, Gates invested $205 million into nine large drug companies, including Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson. “The decision to take stakes in individual firms appears to be a shift in strategy, and for the first time aligns the charity’s interests with those of the drugs firms,” The Guardian reported at the time.10

According to The Motley Fool,11 Gates initially invested in Pfizer “with the stated intention of ‘expand[ing] access to the pharmaceutical company’s all-in-one injectable contraceptive.” Once the COVID-19 pandemic broke out, Gates predicted early on that Pfizer would be the first to get emergency use approval.

The Gates Foundation didn’t pick up BioNTech shares until September 2019, just three months before the COVID pandemic emerged, when it bought $55 million worth of shares.

Gates-Funded Forecasting Led to Nursing Home ‘Death Warrants’

The Gates Foundation has also shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars to the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which was responsible for the ill-fatedly inaccurate modeling that led to several governors issuing “nursing home death warrants.” The Strategic Culture Foundation writes:12

“New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is finally facing the heat for his botched and criminally negligent coronavirus response policies, yet no one seems to be asking why Cuomo and select governors made the fateful decisions that led to the excess deaths …

In March and early April, politicians were informed by the modeling ‘experts’ at Gates-funded IHME that their hospitals were about to be completely overrun by coronavirus patients.

Modelers from IHME claimed this massive surge would cause hospitals to run out of lifesaving equipment in a matter of days, not weeks or months. Time was of the essence, and now was the time for rapid decision making, the modelers claimed. On two separate April 1 and April 2 press conferences, Cuomo made clear that his policy decisions were based off of the IHME model.”

In one of those press conferences, Cuomo thanked the Gates Foundation “for the national service that they’ve done.” The Pennsylvania Health Department also used IHME models to navigate its response. Even federal bureaucrats like Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx, both of whom have personal ties to Gates as well, leaning on the IHME forecasts to justify lockdowns, business closures, and curfews.

In the end, the IHME models didn’t pan out. They weren’t even close. “For example, IHME used a 3+% death rate when the real number ‘from’ COVID-19 is only around 0.1%,” Strategic Culture Foundation writes, adding:13

“The buck does indeed stop with the elected leaders who made the fateful decisions to send sick COVID patients into nursing homes, lock down their states, and mask up their citizens in perpetuity, but that’s only half of the story.

The bad data they used almost exclusively came from the Gates network, which has trafficked in pseudoscience and has demonstrated complete incompetence and reckless forecasting since the beginning of last year.”

Not surprisingly, Gates has stayed mum on the gross failures of the IHME. As noted by the Strategic Culture Foundation,14 he has “seamlessly washed his hands of COVID mania and has moved on to demanding that the western world sacrifice itself in the name of the latest ‘crisis’ that is climate change.”

COVID-19 — A Launch Pad for the Great Reset

Of course, Gates’ “green” plans will also grow his own wealth, just like the COVID pandemic has done. Indeed, the so-called “climate change crisis” is nothing but another tool to implement the Great Reset, which will forever alter the face of society and commerce, shifting virtually all wealth and ownership to a few technocrats at the top, leaving regular people with no wealth or freedom to speak of.

Considering Gates’ position within the technocratic elite, it’s no surprise his fingerprints can be found on all the necessary chess pieces of this global chess game. As you may recall, the Gates Foundation co-sponsored the pandemic preparedness simulation for a “novel coronavirus,” known as Event 201, in October 2019 along with the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

The event eerily predicted what would happen just 10 weeks later, when COVID-19 appeared. Both the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum are also partnered15 with the United Nations which, while keeping a relatively low profile, appears to be at the heart of the globalist takeover agenda.

The World Economic Forum, while a private organization, works as the social and economic branch of the U.N. and is a key driving force behind modern technocracy and the Great Reset agenda. Its founder and chairman, Klaus Schwab, publicly declared the need for a global “reset” to restore order in June 2020.16

Technocratic rule, which is what the Great Reset will bring about, hinges on the use of technology — in particular, artificial intelligence, digital surveillance, and Big Data collection (which is what 5G is for) — and the digitization of industry, banking and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule (although that part is never expressly stated).

Beyond pandemic preparedness and response, the justification for the implementation of the Great Reset agenda in its totality will be climate change. The Great Reset, sometimes referred to as the “build back better” plan, specifically calls for all nations to implement “green” regulations and “sustainable development goals”17,18 as part of the post-COVID recovery effort.

But the end goal is far from what the typical person envisions when they hear these plans. The end goal is to turn us into serfs without rights to privacy, private ownership, or anything else. In short, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and “rescue” debt-ridden countries. The price for this salvation is your liberty.

The Great Reset

The Great Reset is not some wild conspiracy theory but a publicly released agenda that is moving forward, whether we like it or not.

Many world leaders have spoken about it in an official capacity, and in June 2020, Zia Khan, senior vice president of innovation at the Rockefeller Foundation penned the article19 “Rebuilding Toward the Great Reset: Crisis, COVID-19, and the Sustainable Development Goals,” reviewing the “social crisis” necessitating the world’s acceptance of new world order.

The article was co-written with John McArthur, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, which is one of several technocratic think-tanks. Keeping in mind what I’ve just said about what the Great Reset is really all about, and the justifications used to implement the theft of wealth and freedom, read how they posit these changes as being in your best interest:

“Upheaval can yield new understanding and opportunity. Outdated or unjust norms can succumb to society’s pressing need for better approaches. For example, the need for massive and urgent government intervention has drawn fresh attention to social safety nets and the possibility of dramatic policy enhancements.

Tragic consequences of racial discrimination have catapulted awareness of systemic problems and triggered prospects for much-needed social reforms. Rapid environmental improvements linked to economic shutdown have rekindled consciousness of the profound interconnections between ecosystems, economies, and societies …

Rather than passively allowing norms to evolve through inertia or randomness, we can all pursue actions for Response and, soon enough, Recovery in a manner that improve the odds of a Reset toward better long-term outcomes.

Fortunately, we already have a strong starting point for what the world’s economic, social, and environmental outcomes should be. Five years ago, in 2015, all 193 UN member states agreed on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a common set of priorities to be achieved in all countries by 2030.”

I believe the only way to stop it is through our collective responses to the various pieces and parts of the plan that are being rolled out. They want you to believe that none of the things being introduced have anything to do with each other but, in fact, they are all pieces of the same puzzle.

It would be a tragic mistake to trust Gates or any of the other players that are being brought before us as saviors of the day. They’re all wolves in sheep’s clothing. The Great Reset is at our doorstep, and your freedom, and that of future generations, hinges on you fighting to keep it.20

Our best bet right now is to involve ourselves in local governance, be it your child’s school board or local government, and engaging in peaceful civil disobedience.

Gates may be presented as an all-knowing genius whose mission is to keep us healthy and safe, but his activities are inconsistent with and fail to match his carefully manufactured persona. Again and again, Gates has wielded influence in matters where lies have been told and public health and human rights have been decimated for profit.

Sources and References



LIES! ‘Media’ Falsely Claims FL Morgues Overflowing, Refrigerator Trucks Used for Bodies

Source: Stew Peters Show

Boca Raton, FL – FLAT OUT LIES are being told by “Boca News Now”, and ‘journalist’ Andrew Colton, who said that there were so many bodies hitting the floor that two hospitals (Boca Raton Regional and the Baptist Bethesda East) had to bring in refrigerator trucks to store all of the dead bodies. Dr. Jane Ruby visited the the two hospitals and reports to Stew Peters that there were NO refrigerator trucks at the hospitals in question, and in fact they were peaceful and quiet – like a Zen garden. Two police officers told Jane that the Colton’s news report was bogus. Watch for yourself and please share.

The bogus news report is clearly meant to scare people into getting the jab. This isn’t the first time something like this has happened. Others have filmed hospitals that were reported to be overflowing with COVID patients and showed that they were nearly empty (see HERE and HERE).