I’m posting this as I very much enjoyed viewing the selection of clips Dave has put together. I do not align with the idea that SHTF* must occur, particularly as outlined by Mike Adams in his portion. However…
Remember, “F” = Fan, so if we send Light to this whole situation, and not a “fan”, in other words, “BE the Light” and not a blowing fan, the process will proceed WITH the Light we align with. The vision for this planet is ours to hold. And I’m envisioning a smooth outworking of the Alliance’ plan to remove the deep state and its dark energies… whatever that “smooth outworking” may be.
…the more information you have, the better off you will be , when the sh_t hits the fan, and it looks like that is what’s going to happen… America is in a precarious position right now, but with the right preparations, we will get through this..
Mentioned a few items here, but “Aligning with the Energies” (esp., one’s own Inner Energies”) was the key part (and pardon, but the last video was “cut off” at exactly the right time as I received a call from a VERY important Light BEing from Florida).
Be it known to all to whom these presents come, that there is a lawful and legal means provided for Texas and every other State to assemble, and that means of lawful and peaceable assembly requires the process to take place under the authority and guidance of a recognized Summoning Authority.
There are three (3) possible Summoning Authorities charged with the responsibility.
The first Summoning Authority is The President of The United States of America. This Office has been vacated since 1860.
The second is a quorum of nine (9) States in Session — used during recesses and temporary adjournment. The only State left in Session was Texas, so no quorum was possible.
The third and only remaining option is for the owner of the Great Seals to call the States into Session and operate The United States of America, our unincorporated Federation of States to do it. So that is what has been done.
It has fallen to the Federation (which is not the “Federal Government”) to call the States into Session.
That responsibility carries with it the obligation to ensure that the Assemblies thus created are “peaceable” and composed of qualified people living within the borders of each State, who have declared and recorded their adoption of their birthright political status, and from there, to provide the discipline, framework, and guidance to establish in each State a General Assembly, a Business (sometimes called “International”) Assembly, a Public Court, and a State Assembly Militia.
This is a process not given to interpretation, and we have followed it to the letter.
Please note that the Federation must ensure the legal and peaceable nature of the process and the State Assemblies that result from it, or our activities could be mistaken as hostile actions and legally suppressed by military force.
Once each Assembly has been assembled and each portion of this process has been accomplished, each Assembly will be “fully seated” — meaning that all basic functions are in place and operating. Until each Assembly is fully seated, it remains under the guidance of the Federation.
That is why the Federation is involved in the State Assembly process and why it is significantly in control of this process until such time as the State leadership is fully educated and the basic functions of American State Government are restored.
After such a long hiatus and so much confusion it is understandable that a mighty educational process is necessary, even about comparatively simple things, such as the role of the Federation as the Summoning Authority, the role of the Coordinators who act as Federation Officers— not to be confused with “Federal” Officers, the structure of the State Assemblies and the functions of the State Assemblies.
It is also understood that people will continue to be confused and need to be educated on a continuing basis as new questions and issues arise and as new people join the Assemblies.
We can and we must deal with this educational process as transparently and honestly as possible. None of it is rocket science. All of it is ultimately under the control of the people in each State.
Anyone who feels that the Federation is being heavy-handed has a clear road to get the necessary work done, establish the structures, provide the functions, and complete the assembly process.
Once fully seated, each State Assembly is responsible for performing under the treaties and constitutional agreements already established and for supporting the restored American Government, the Reconstruction thereof— and also becomes responsible for the conduct of the restored Confederation and Federal Republic. This grave responsibility also includes preserving the peace — not undermining it.
Even some Coordinators have gotten off-track, despite the simplicity of the process, and have promoted the idea that the Federation is the equivalent of the “Federal Government” — deliberately confusing the Federation with our run amok Subcontractors.
Everyone concerned needs to realize that the actual Federation is the only means that the people of this country have to control the operations of the Federal Subcontractors.
Because the Federal Subcontractors have run off-track and profited themselves greatly by doing so, they don’t want the States in Session, and they don’t want the unincorporated Federation of States breathing down their necks and forcing them to abide by their constitutional obligations.
As a result, certain public employees and agencies hired by them using our money, have undertaken to undermine the peaceable nature of our State Assemblies and have attempted to commandeer our efforts and to misdirect the assembly process so as to create an excuse to brand our efforts as insurrectionist activities —- and provide themselves with an excuse for crushing our activities with overwhelming military force.
It was recently discovered that Eric Dingus, former Peacekeeping Task Force Director, was deliberately engaged in disobeying our instructions and the Mission Statements for both the Peacekeeping Task Force and the Continental Marshals Service. His actions, if left unopposed, would have led to the creation of an illegal “unified” and “national” armed military force, which would have provided the needed excuse to terrorize and kill and confiscate the property of innocent State Assembly Members.
We removed him from the position of Peacekeeping Task Force Director as soon as the nature of his activities came to light, and subsequently had to remove Susan Hauck, also. We are now in the process of publishing the Mission Statements so that everyone has an absolute and clear understanding of the role of both the Marshals Service and the Peacekeeping Task Force.
It was also discovered that Eric Dingus directly threatened Texas Coordinator Le Laroi on three separate occasions and forced her to step down, and that he subsequently engineered her replacement with Kimberly Reynolds as Texas Coordinator.
We advised Kimberly Reynolds of this circumstance and instructed her to divorce herself from any continuing influence promoted by Eric Dingus. Instead of taking this as a “hold harmless” action on our parts, she chose to continue on the road of artificially induced insurrection and to promote actions in Texas that are contrary to the peaceable assembly process.
She has, accordingly, been removed as Coordinator in Texas.
Those who live in Texas know the Public Law and know that when you take a job, you have to ride for the brand.
Our brand is devoted to the peaceful and lawful enforcement of the Constitutional Guarantees, and the protection of the lives and property rights of Texans and all other Americans.
We do not and we will not condone or participate in any form of insurrection, rebellion, or creation of armed forces other than the lawful State Assembly Militias, operated as they are supposed to be operated within each State, and our land-based Continental Marshals Service, which is our jurisdictional interface with the U.S. Marshals Service.
These actions removing Eric Dingus and Kimberly Reynolds are regrettable. We would far rather have good faith and service in the common cause of restoring our lawful government, than a lot of illegal interference in the process; however, with trillions of dollars worth of land and other assets at stake, we must be prepared for the ongoing attempts to mischaracterize us and our efforts.
Those who have benefited themselves and their cronies at our expense for the last 160 years are not likely to let go without trying to get a fight going — a fight that they would surely win.
Our steady course remains— to use international law and Public Law to rein in the brigands and the politicians responsible for abusing the Public Trust, to enforce the Constitutional Guarantees and Protections— and to do this peaceably, honorably, and lawfully via the processes and agreements established to secure these ends.
Unless you wish to see this country and its people engulfed in yet another unnecessary, deliberately provoked, and self-interested Civil War, you will immediately understand the necessity that prompts us to expel those who propose any other course of action.
If any Assembly or member of an Assembly hears anyone in their Assembly or any other Assembly promoting violence, preaching against the Federation “as if” the Federation was the de facto Federal Government, moving to incorporate any function of any Assembly, setting up any foreign structures apart from the General Assembly, International Business Assembly, Public Courts, and the lawful State Assembly Militia, refusing to record political status of members, taking money from foreign corporations, selling information about the Assemblies or Assembly Members, using the Assemblies or Assembly Members for unjust enrichment, promoting Ponzi schemes, Trust schemes, memberships in Secret Societies or otherwise remaining out-of-step with the simple program outlined above—- you are encouraged to notify us directly, so that prompt corrective action can be taken. Use the email: email@example.com and the subject line: “Jim”.
James Clinton Belcher, Head of State
The United States of America
We have recently suffered a security breach and an attempt to undermine and commandeer the Continental Marshals Service as well as to redefine the clearly stated functions of the Peacekeeping Task Force.
We also discovered that the same person responsible for this activity threatened the original Texas Coordinator on three occasions and forced her to step down. He also was instrumental in placing Kim Reynolds as her replacement.
This situation was explained to Kim and she has chosen to continue her association with this person and to base plans for the Texas Assembly on his advice, which is diametrically opposed to the program of restoration of the American Government we have promoted throughout.
Recently, she announced that we were a threat to the security of the Texas Assembly. This follows in a long line of similar behavior on the part of Corporatists who always blame the victims for what they are doing themselves. The only security breach is the one described and we have done our best to counteract the effects left behind.
We had hoped that Kim would be wise enough to distance herself from this damaging person, especially as she is somewhat implicated in his nefarious agenda, as the beneficiary of his threats against the original Texas Coordinator.
The only danger to Texas or any other Assembly derives from their own actions and inactions. Seeking to set up war-like organizations in a State of the Union, especially a Southern State, and being willing to take corporate money for doing so, is one of the fundamental dangers, as it allows the de facto corporate governments to claim that we were working at war and insurrection instead of peace and restoration.
That then gives them the excuse they need to attack us.
We have thoroughly researched the status and impacts of this individual and his activities carried out “in our names” but against our directives.
Kim has been removed as Texas Coordinator as a result of her continued close association with the person responsible for that actual security breach and her recent disparaging and dangerous statements attempting to claim that the Federation caused the security breaches— when in fact the Federation has cleaned up the security breaches.
We have taken the action of removing Kimberly Reynolds as Texas Coordinator as part of the effort to close the security breaches and the misdirection resulting from them.
We are a peaceful and effective and lawful organization. We have gained the support of the world in our efforts to restore the lawful American Government. We do not intend to be undermined by persons who either don’t understand or refuse to honor the actual mission which is the restoration of the traditional and intended American Government.
What has been called The Matrix is a series of layers. These layers compose what we call Reality. Reality is not merely the consensus people accept in their daily lives. It is also a personal and individual conception of limits. It is a perception that these limits are somehow built into existence. But this is not true.
What I’ve done here is remove the lid on those perceived limits. This isn’t an intellectual undertaking. It’s a way to open up space and step on to a new road, with new power.
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
We’re seeing the rapid emergence of two sets of people — those who are vaccinated against COVID-19 and those who are not. A distinction need not be made, as whether or not to receive medical procedures is a personal choice that should remain private if you so choose.
But increasingly, people are being required to prove that they’re vaccinated in order to go about their daily lives, while those who are unvaccinated are losing privileges.
While many countries have suggested that the COVID-19 vaccine will not be mandated, by giving special privileges to the vaccinated, such as the ability to travel, attend social events or even enter a workplace, it essentially amounts to the same thing and insinuates a “cleaner” class of people in those who have been vaccinated.
Make-A-Wish Grants Wishes Only to Vaccinated Children?
Make-A-Wish is a nonprofit organization that’s well-known for granting wishes, such as travel or meetings with celebrities, to children with critical illnesses. However, a widely circulated video featured Make-A-Wish Foundation CEO Richard Davis stating that certain wishes would only be granted to vaccinated children and families:1
“I’m excited to share that Make-A-Wish will resume granting air travel wishes within the United States and its territories, as well as granting wishes involving large gatherings, for vaccinated Wish families as soon as September 15, 2021.
All Wish participants, including your Wish kid and any siblings, will need to be two weeks past completion of either a one-dose or a two-dose vaccine.
While we won’t ask for proof of vaccination, we’ll ask for any adult participant to sign a letter of understanding that certifies that they, and any minors participating in the wish, are vaccinated and understand the risks of traveling at this time.”
Backlash quickly ensued, not only because of the discrimination against those who choose not to get vaccinated, but also because children under 12 cannot be vaccinated for COVID-19 at this time, and even those within the eligible age range may be too ill to be vaccinated. Celebrities such as actor Rob Schneider said that if Make-A-Wish wasn’t going to grant wishes to unvaccinated children, they would no longer support the organization.2
In response, Make-A-Wish backpedaled their statements, claiming that “misinformation and falsehoods on social media and in some media outlets” took the comments out of context and led to the confusion.3 In an updated statement Make-A-Wish clarified that all critically ill children are eligible, including those who are unvaccinated:4
“We understand that there are many families whose children aren’t eligible for the vaccine yet, and we also know that there are families who are choosing to not get the vaccine. We respect everyone’s freedom of choice. Make-A-Wish will continue to grant wishes for all eligible children. Make-A-Wish will not require anyone to get vaccinated to receive a wish.”
Dating Apps Give Premium Content to Vaccinated
In 2021, it’s not enough to divulge your likes and dislikes to get a date — you’ve also got to display personal medical data, like whether or not you’ve been vaccinated.
Dating app giants including Tinder, Hinge, OKCupid, BLK, Chispa, Plenty of Fish, Match, Bumble and Badoo now allow users to filter matches according to vaccination status and also announced that those who are vaccinated will get access to premium content such as “like boosts, super likes, and super swipes” — but only with proof of vaccination.5
The move comes via an unlikely partnership with the White House, which is targeting dating apps in an effort to increase COVID-19 vaccinations in the U.S.
“We believe that it’s particularly important to reach young people where they are in the effort to get them vaccinated,” a White House press release noted. They cited OKCupid, which reported that people who display their vaccination status are 14% more likely to get a match. Further, according to the White House:6
“Social distancing and dating were always a bit of a challenging combination. So today, dating sites like Bumble, Tinder, Hinge, Match, OkCupid, BLK, Chispa, Plenty of Fish, and Badoo are announcing a series of features to encourage vaccinations and help people meet people who have that universally attractive quality: They’ve been vaccinated against COVID-19.
These sites cater to over 50 million people in the U.S. and are some of the world’s biggest nongaming apps … We have finally found the one thing that makes us all more attractive: a vaccination.
These dating apps will now allow vaccinated people to display badges which show their vaccination status, filter specifically to see only people who are vaccinated, and offer premium content — details of which I cannot get into, but apparently, they include things like boosts and super swipes. The apps will also help people locate places to get vaccinated.”
Concerts, Travel Only for the Vaccinated
Unvaccinated people are also being excluded from certain concert venues, including S. James Theater in New York City, which recently featured Bruce Springsteen. Jujamcyn, which operates the theater, stated that guests must be “fully vaccinated with an FDA or WHO approved vaccine in order to attend SPRINGSTEEN ON BROADWAY and must show proof of vaccination at their time of entry into the theatre with their valid ticket.”7
Exceptions were only made for people under the age of 16 or “those who need reasonable accommodations due to a disability or sincerely held religious belief.” Protestors arrived to the show’s opening night, with signs stating “no vax passports” and “Bruce Springsteen is for segregation on Broadway.”8
Protestors also arrived outside a Foo Fighters concert at the Canyon Club in Agoura Hills, California, which was also closed to unvaccinated fans. In addition to calling the vaccination requirement a form of segregation, one protestor told KCAL news, “Those of us who have healthy immune systems should be able to enjoy these freedoms just like anybody else.”9
In other examples of loss of privileges for the unvaccinated, in Hawaii only those with proof of vaccination are allowed to travel between counties without pretravel testing and quarantine restrictions, while New York requires you to be vaccinated or have a recent negative COVID-19 test to enter certain sports arenas and large performance venues.
If you’re planning to travel on a cruise ship, there are also different requirements depending on vaccination status. Royal Caribbean recently announced that unvaccinated guests would need proof of COVID-19 related travel insurance to board and would also be banned from certain areas of ships. On the Freedom of the Seas, for instance, unvaccinated travelers would not be able to enter certain spas, casinos, parties, pools, bars and restaurants.10
A Florida law prohibits Royal Caribbean from asking if guests are vaccinated, so to get around this anyone who doesn’t show proof of vaccination will be considered unvaccinated. The segregation of vaccinated and unvaccinated guests will be obvious, as those who are vaccinated will receive a wristband while those who are not will have a hole punched in the card needed to access certain areas of the ship.11
In other cases, people have lost their jobs due to their vaccination choice, including at Houston Methodist hospital, where employees were forced to either resign or be fired if they chose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine.12
What About People With Natural Immunity?
A sizeable percentage of the population has made it clear that they have no intention of getting vaccinated with an experimental gene therapy. Everyone has their own reasons for this decision, including an unknown risk of side effects and death but, for some, their reasoning is that they’ve already had COVID-19 and therefore have natural immunity.
If protecting public health were really the ultimate goal in the pandemic response, people who have recovered from COVID-19 should be offered the same type of immunity “passports” and benefits being offered to those who have been vaccinated. In fact, they should be granted even more “access” since their immunity is likely superior to those with vaccine-induced immunity.
Evidence from Washington University School of Medicine shows long-lasting immunity to COVID-19 exists in those who’ve recovered from the natural infection.13 At both seven months and 11 months after infection, most of the participants had bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) that secreted antibodies specific for the spike protein encoded by SARS-CoV-2.
In addition, in 2020 it was reported that people who had recovered from SARS-CoV — a virus that is genetically closely related to SARS-CoV-2 and belongs to the same viral species — maintained significant levels of neutralizing antibodies as much as 17 years after initial infection.14 This also suggests that long-term immunity against SARS-CoV-2 should be expected,15 and natural protection is likely to continue “indefinitely.”16
This — natural immunity to COVID-19 that an unknown number of people have acquired — is completely ignored when it comes to official guidelines. Everyone is urged to get vaccinated with an experimental shot, regardless of their COVID-19 infection history and even if they’re as young as 12 years old — in some cases without parental consent.17
As Dr. Peter McCullough, vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center, has stated, “All roads lead to the vaccine,”18 and it’s possible the pandemic’s purpose was to fuel the global vaccination campaign that is now occurring. This would allow for the vaccinated population to be recorded in a vaccine database, essentially “marking” you, which could be used as a tool for population control via vaccine passports.
Vaccine Passports Will Open the Floodgates
Right now, we’re in a battle of freedom versus tyranny. Fortunately, a number of states have enacted laws that ban vaccine passport requirements in order to prevent the creation of a two-tier society based on vaccination status. It’s important to understand that the adoption of vaccine passports will only open the floodgates for further restrictions on your freedom.
The end goal here isn’t about tracking vaccination status only. Vaccine passports or any other type of tracking and tracing device or certification system are part of a much larger plan to implement a global social credit system based on 24/7 electronic surveillance to ensure compliance.
This will expand to include not just COVID-19 infection and vaccination status but also other medical data, basic identification records, financial data and just about anything else that can be digitized and tracked. There’s still time to take action to protect freedom as we know it today, and one of the best ways to do so is by speaking out via peaceful protest and civil disobedience.
DarkHorse host Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., has conducted a couple of long and really valuable interviews in recent weeks. One was with a lung and ICU specialist, Dr. Pierre Kory, who is also the president and chief medical officer1 of the Frontline COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). The FLCCC has published three different COVID-19 protocols, all of which include the use of ivermectin:
I-MASK+2 — a prevention and early at-home treatment protocol
I-MATH+3 — an in-hospital treatment protocol. The clinical and scientific rationale for this protocol has been peer-reviewed and was published in the Journal of Intensive Care Medicine4 in mid-December 2020
I-RECOVER5 — a long-term management protocol for long-haul syndrome
In another episode, Weinstein interviewed Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine technology.6 In both instances, YouTube deleted the videos. Why? Because they discussed science showing ivermectin works against COVID-19 and the hazards of COVID gene therapies. Never mind the fact that Kory and Malone are the widely recognized leading experts in their fields.
In the wake of this targeted takedown, podcast host Joe Rogan invited Weinstein and Kory in for an “emergency podcast” about the censorship of ivermectin. As noted by Weinstein in a June 23, 2021, tweet, “The censorship campaign obscuring Ivermectin (as prophylactic against SARS-CoV2 and as treatment for COVID-19) kills.”7
Indeed, we now know that early treatment is crucial to prevent complications, hospitalizations, death and/or long-haul syndrome, so censoring this information is inexcusable, and has without doubt resulted in needless deaths.
What Is Misinformation?
As Weinstein explains, there are several things in dire need of discussion. For starters, there’s the issue of YouTube’s community guidelines and posting rules, which are so vague that it’s impossible to determine beforehand if something is going to be deemed in violation.
Violations, in turn, threaten the ability of people like Weinstein to make a living. His entire family depends on the income generated through his YouTube channel. He now has two strikes against him, where YouTube claims he’s been posting “spam” and “medical misinformation.” One more, and the entire channel will be demonetized.
A central problem here is, who determines what misinformation is? YouTube has taken the stance that anything that goes against what the World Health Organization says is medical misinformation. However, the WHO doesn’t always agree with other public health agencies.
For example, the WHO does not recommend the drug remdesivir, but the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention does, and virtually all U.S. hospitals routinely use the drug on COVID-19 patients.
Another example where the WHO and the CDC are in disagreement is how the virus can be transmitted. While the CDC admits SARS-CoV-2 is an airborne virus that transmits through the air, the WHO does not list air as a form of transmission. So, is the CDC putting out medical misinformation?
Censorship Is a Disinformation Tool
As Weinstein rightly points out, if the WHO (or virtually every federal regulatory agency for that matter) has been captured and is being influenced by industry, in this case Big Pharma, and is itself putting out information that goes against medical science, then this is something that must be discussed and exposed. That is precisely what he did in the two episodes that YouTube wiped.
If an organization is putting out medical misinformation, and talking about this is censored, the end result is going to be devastating to public health. Overall, we’re in an untenable situation, Weinstein says, as people are losing their livelihoods simply for discussing the science and laying out the evidence. Licensed, practicing doctors are prevented from sharing practical knowledge that can save lives.
The fact that YouTube is making up the rules as they go is clear. One of Weinstein’s interviews was deemed to be “spam.” How can a discussion between highly respected and well-credentialed scientists and medical professionals be spam? YouTube obviously couldn’t determine what was incorrect about it so they simply made up an excuse to take the video down.
Or more likely, they knew exactly what they were doing and removed it because it countered what appears to be their primary agenda, which is to promote the COVID jab.
As noted in the featured interview, censorship is actually a form of disinformation, which is defined as “information given to hide the actual truth.” A perfect example of this is the suppression of the lab-leak theory. For a year and a half, no one was allowed to discuss the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a Wuhan lab. There’s no telling how many tens of thousands of people lost their social media accounts, including yours truly, because they violated this rule.
The lab-leak theory was “debunked,” according to all the industry-backed fact checkers. Now, all of a sudden, the evidence has somehow taken root and everyone is talking about it. Mainstream media pundits are squirming in their seats, trying to explain why they overlooked the obvious and roundly dismissed the evidence for so long. What was “misinformation” yesterday is now “fact.”
Who decided this? Big Tech censored verifiable facts for a year and a half, and there’s every reason to assume they censored it on behalf of someone. They grossly misinformed — nay, disinformed — the public, yet they’re not held accountable for any of it.
The Manufacturing of Medical and Scientific Consensus
As noted by Weinstein, the idea that medical and scientific consensus can be established seemingly from one day to another in the middle of a pandemic involving a novel virus is simply not believable. It cannot happen, because scientific and medical consensus arises over time, as experts challenge each other’s theories.
A hypothesis may sound good, but will break apart once another piece of evidence is added. So, it changes over time. What happened here, however, over the last year and a half, is that a consensus was declared early on, and subsequent evidence was simply discarded as misinformation.
The examples of this are numerous. Take vitamin D, for example. We’ve long known vitamin D influences your immune system. Yet the manufactured consensus declared vitamin D irrelevant in the case of COVID-19, and this stance remains to this day, even though dozens of studies have now demonstrated that vitamin D plays a crucial role in COVID-19 outcomes specifically.
The lab leak theory is another example. Manufactured consensus declared it bunk, and that was it. Face masks were declared effective without any evidence, and anyone pointing out the discrepancy between this recommendation and what the scientific literature was showing was simply declared to be violating some vaguely defined “community standards.”
Manufactured consensus declared hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin dangerous and/or useless, saying we can’t possibly risk using these drugs unless they’re proven safe and effective in large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As noted by Weinstein, they willingly roll the dice when it comes to the novel COVID shots, yet apply ridiculously high standards of safety and effectiveness when it comes to off-patent drugs that have decades of safe use.
There’s something very unnatural and unscientific about all of this, and that raises serious questions about intent. What is the intent behind these manufactured consensuses that by any reasonable standard have been proven flawed or incorrect?
For all the talk about preventing dangerous misinformation being spread by the average person, governments, Big Pharma, Big Tech and nongovernmental organizations that have a great deal of influence over nations, have in fact engaged in the biggest disinformation campaign in human history. The question is why?
As noted by Kory, over time, he has developed a deep cynicism about many of the agencies and organizations that are supposed to protect public health, because their recommendations and conclusions do not comport with good science. And, if we trust them exclusively, we can get into real trouble.
The thing is, there must be a reason for why they don’t follow the science, and that, most likely, is because they’re beholden to financial interests. If the science doesn’t support those financial interests, it’s disregarded.
This is why, by and large, there’s a very clear dividing line between those who promote the ideas of the WHO, the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and those who don’t.
Those who disagree with the manufactured consensus are almost exclusively independent, meaning they’re not financially dependent on an organization, company or agency to which the facts are inconvenient.
“Heretics” also tend promote products that they cannot make a profit from, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, two drugs that have been used for so long they’re off-patent. Alternatively, they recommend natural products like vitamin D, which is virtually free, especially if you get it from optimal sun exposure.
Gold Standard Evidence Supports Ivermectin
As noted by Kory, while the WHO insists large RCTs must be completed before ivermectin (or hydroxychloroquine) can be recommended, RCTs actually are not the gold standard in terms of scientific evidence. Meta-analyses are.
The reason for this is because any given trial can be skewed by any number of protocol factors. When you do a meta-analysis of several trials, even if those trials are small, you have the best chance of detecting signals of danger or benefit because it corrects for flaws in the various protocols.
In the case of ivermectin, FLCCC recently conducted a meta-analysis8 of 24 RCTs, which clearly demonstrates that ivermectin produces “large statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance.”
They also found that when used as a preventive, ivermectin “significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19.” In one study, of those given a dose of 0.4 mg per kilo on Day 1 and a second dose on Day 7, only 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 10% of controls who did not get the drug.
In another, family members of patients who had tested positive were given two doses of 0.25 mg/kg, 72 hours apart. At follow up two weeks later, only 7.4% of the exposed family members who took ivermectin tested positive, compared to 58.4% of those who did not take ivermectin.
In a third, which unfortunately was unblended, the difference between the two groups was even greater. Only 6.7% of the ivermectin group tested positive compared to 73.3% of controls. Still, according to the FLCCC, “the difference between the two groups was so large and similar to the other prophylaxis trial results that confounders alone are unlikely to explain such a result.”
The FLCCC also points out that ivermectin distribution campaigns have resulted in “rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality,” which indicate that ivermectin is “effective in all phases of COVID-19.” For example, in Brazil, three regions distributed ivermectin to its residents, while at least six others did not. The difference in average weekly deaths is stark.
In Santa Catarina, average weekly deaths declined by 36% after two weeks of ivermectin distribution, whereas two neighboring regions in the South saw declines of just 3% and 5%. Amapa in the North saw a 75% decline, while the Amazonas had a 42% decline and Para saw an increase of 13%. Importantly, ivermectin’s effectiveness also appears largely unaffected by variants, meaning it has worked on any and all variants that have so far popped up around the world.
Kory also points out that once you can see from clinical evidence that something really is working, then conducting RCTs becomes unethical, as you know you’re condemning the control group to poor outcomes or death. This is, in fact, the same argument vaccine makers now use to justify the elimination of control groups by giving everyone the vaccine.
All of that said, RCT evidence for ivermectin will hopefully come from the British PRINCIPLE trial,9 which began June 23, 2021. Ivermectin will be evaluated as an outpatient treatment in this study, which will be the largest clinical trial to date.
How Ivermectin Works
While ivermectin is best known for its antiparasitic properties, it also has both antiviral and anti-inflammatory properties. With regard to how it can help against SARS-CoV-2 infection, studies10 have shown ivermectin lowers your viral load by inhibiting replication.
In “COVID-19: Antiparasitic Offers Treatment Hope,” I review data showing a single dose of ivermectin killed 99.8% of SARS-CoV-2 in 48 hours. A recent meta-analysis11 by Dr. Tess Lawrie found the drug reduced COVID-19 infection by an average of 86% when used preventatively.
An observational study12 from Bangladesh, which looked at ivermectin as a preexposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 among health care workers, found only four of the 58 volunteers who took 12 mg of ivermectin once per month for four months developed mild COVID-19 symptoms between May and August 2020, compared to 44 of the 60 health care workers who had declined the medication.
Ivermectin has also been shown to speed recovery, in part by inhibiting inflammation through several pathways and protecting against organ damage. This, of course, also lowers your risk of hospitalization and death, which has been confirmed in several studies.
Meta-analyses have shown average reductions in mortality ranging from 75%13 to 83%14,15 The drug has also been shown to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 when taken before or after exposure. When you add all of these benefits together, it seems fairly clear that ivermectin use could vaporize this pandemic.
Where You Can Learn More
While ivermectin certainly appears to be a useful strategy, which is why I am covering it, it is not my primary recommendation. In terms of prevention, I believe your best bet is to optimize your vitamin D level, as your body needs vitamin D for a wide variety of functions, including a healthy immune response.
As for early treatment, I recommend nebulized hydrogen peroxide treatment,16,17 which is inexpensive, highly effective and completely harmless when you’re using the low (0.04% to 0.1%) peroxide concentration recommended.
All of that said, ivermectin and several other remedies certainly have a place, and it’s good to know they exist and work well. On the whole, there’s really no reason to remain panicked about COVID-19. If you want to learn more about ivermectin, there are several places where you can do that, including the following:
Twelve medical experts20 from around the world — including Kory — shared their knowledge, reviewing mechanism of action, protocols for prevention and treatment, including so-called long-hauler syndrome, research findings and real world data. All of the lectures, which were recorded via Zoom, can be viewed on Bird-Group.org21
• An easy-to-read and print one-page summary of the clinical trial evidence for ivermectin can be downloaded from the FLCCC website22
• A more comprehensive, 31-page review of trials data has been published in the journal Frontiers of Pharmacology23
• The FLCCC website also has a helpful FAQ section where Kory and Dr. Paul Marik, also of the FLCCC, answer common questions about the drug and its recommended use24
• A listing of all ivermectin trials done to date, with links to the published studies, can be found on c19Ivermectin.com25
Mark Your Calendars for VERY Important Interview!
Please be sure to mark your calendar so you don’t miss my groundbreaking interview with Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, July 4, 2021. We discuss the very distinct possibility that everyone who receives the COVID jab may die from complications in the next two to three years.
You should have plenty of time to view this vitally important exchange of information as it is the national Fourth of July holiday. We literally share life-changing information, so please be sure to read it and share with your friends.
This is largely because getting the jab now immediately places the injected individual in the very high risk of dying from COVID. Most have the false assurance that they are protected but, in reality, they are far more vulnerable and as a result will not take very aggressive proactive measures to avoid dying from pathogenic priming or paradoxical immune enhancement before it is too late.
(Natural News) Dr. Jane Orient, M.D., the executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), wants to know why the medical system is refusing to perform autopsies on the bodies of people who died not long after getting “vaccinated” for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19). All last year, we were told by the…
(Natural News) Reports of injuries following Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination have surpassed 400,000, according to U.S. government data. As of July 5, there have been 411,931 vaccine injuries reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Of the more than 400,000 reports, 6,985 of these were deaths following inoculation. The most recent VAERS data…
(Natural News) Fear is perhaps the most effective, reliable and proven weapon for tyrants to control people. The same is true in medical tyranny. Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behavior (SPI-B) expressed regret about the “unethical” and “totalitarian” tactics in a new book about the role of psychology in the UK government’s…