Saturday, February 18, 2023

German Press Discusses Pfizer Vaccine Trial Fraud. Will "Covid Reckoning" Follow?

I am pleasantly surprised to see the mainstream German publication Die Welt openly asserting that clinical trials of the “Pfizer COVID vaccine” were rife with fraud.


Virtue and Terror: How the New Normal was Created

“If the mainspring of popular government in peacetime is virtue, the mainspring of popular government during a revolution is both virtue and terror; virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is powerless.


Did I just Leave a Cult?

I grew up in the era of cults. My siblings and I attended a small elementary school in Topanga Canyon back in the 1970s, when it was still a wilderness of hippies and health food stores - not a safe haven for the 1%.


NHS Director confirms Hospitals lied about Cause of Death to create illusion of ‘Covid’ Pandemic


Before Covid, four types of pneumonia added together were the highest cause of death in the UK. In a newly implemented Medical Examiner System to certify deaths, the Medical Examiner was certifying all types of pneumonia deaths as covid-19 deaths, a former Director of End-of-Life Care has said.

On Saturday, Sai, a former NHS Director of End-of-Life Care, wrote a Twitter thread which, amongst other things, gave a personal account of the changes to the system of reporting deaths implemented in the NHS:

“When four different diseases [are] grouped and now being called covid-19, you will inevitably see covid-19 with a huge death rate. The mainstream media was reporting on this huge increase in covid-19 deaths due to the Medical Examiner System being in place.

“Patients being admitted and dying with very common conditions such as old age, myocardial infarctions, end-stage kidney failure, haemorrhages, strokes, COPD and cancer etc. were all now being certified as covid-19 via the Medical Examiner System.

“Hospitals were switching to and from the Medical Examiner System and the pre-pandemic system as [and] when they pleased. When covid-19 deaths needed to be increased, the hospital would switch to the Medical Examiner System.”

In addition, “hospitals were incentivised to report covid-19 deaths over normal deaths, as the government was paying hospitals additional money for every covid-19 death that was being reported,” Sai said. “I have no doubt in my mind, that the Government has planned the entire pandemic since 2016 when they first proposed the change to medical death certification.”

You can read Sai’s thread on Twitter HERE or Thread Reader App HERE. In the event it is removed from Twitter we have copied the thread below and attached a pdf copy at the end of this article. In the following, the number at the beginning of a paragraph relates to the number of the tweet within the thread.

1. The truth about the covid-19 pandemic from within the NHS (ex-Director of End-of-Life Care at one of the largest hospital trusts in the UK)
2. In 2016, the British government proposed and piloted a change to the process of how deaths were certified across all hospitals in the UK. I have attached a link to this Department of Health (“DoH”) document below:

Reforming death certification: Introducing scrutiny by Medical Examiners, Department of Health, May 2016

3 & 4. The DoH document proposed a switch to the “Medical Examiner” (“ME”) System and was sent to a number of different audiences for feedback and consultation. The ME System was already being piloted at two hospitals up north. The results of the consultation are below:

Introduction of Medical Examiners and Reforms to Death Certification in England and Wales: Government response to consultation, Department of Health & Social Care, June 2018

5. Prior to the covid-19 pandemic, the death certification process involved treating doctors of a patient to attend Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs to discuss the death and either: a) refer the death to the Coroner or b) write a Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (“MCCD”).

6. The MCCD states the cause of death. Whereby a direct cause (1a) or contributing causes (1b) (1c) (1d) are stated along with co-morbidities (not directly causing the death) being written in (2) on the MCCD. The MCCD is only ever a probable cause of death, it is not definitive.

7. The only definitive way of determining an accurate and plausible cause of death is to refer the deceased patient to HM Coroner (if certain criteria are met), for HM Coroner to accept and take on the case, resulting in a Post Mortem (“PM”) being conducted by a Histopathologist.

8. When a death is seen as natural and there is nothing untoward, the MCCD is written by the treating doctor of a deceased patient. Usually, this is an F1, F2, SHO or Registrar that attends. It is rare for a treating Consultant to attend, but they will finalise the cause of death.

9. A strict hospital hierarchy exists within the NHS for doctors. It is as follows – from lowest to highest rank: Foundation Year 1 (FY1), Foundation Year 2 (FY2), Senior House Officer (SHO), Registrar (Reg), Consultant, Clinical Lead, Medical Director.

10. Junior doctors will very rarely speak up or challenge their seniors. A senior decision is seen as final and it will be carried out and executed without any hesitance or questioning.

11. In my 5.5 years of experience in End-of-Life Care, I have only ever seen one junior doctor disagree with a proposed cause of death and challenge their consultant.

12. With the number of deaths that occur in a hospital, as you can imagine, there is a great deal of variation with regards to causes of death, as we have numerous different doctors writing an MCCD and coming up with various different potential diseases in different orders.

13. The proposed ME system would change this, as the government would now hire and pay one Medical Examiner, to sit in every hospital and write all MCCDs for all deceased patients. This would effectively eliminate any variation in causes of death.

14. In 2016, when I heard of this proposal, I worked as a Bereavement Officer at a hospital in Central London. My mentor/line manager at the time was a former Chief Nurse who managed Bereavement Services and all hospital deaths would be controlled by her and the department.

15. We essentially carried a huge amount of power with regard to decision-making, as we would go through all patient notes following the death of a patient, and essentially guide and advise doctors on what would need to be written with regards to an MCCD or Coroners Referral.

16. In my personal opinion, our role was to sit on the fence and act in the best interests of a deceased patient (and their families), but also protect the hospital and our doctors from any potential negligence.

17. As you can imagine many battles were fought over decisions about a cause of death of a patient or a referral to the coroner with a vast [number] of doctors over the years.

18. F2s and SHOs were particularly the worst with regards to carrying an arrogance of knowing what should be written on an MCCD or stating that a patient didn’t need to be referred to the Coroner (often stating that their Consultant had given them instructions).

19. It is worth noting that Consultants are also only human and can be incorrect at times too. We have to remember that they are succeeded in hierarchy by a Clinical Lead and beyond that a Medical Director. Who have far more experience and knowledge.

20. When I asked my mentor in 2016, how the ME system would change things, I was told that Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs would become purely administrative and that the clinical judgement would fall to the Medical Examiner.

21. The power and decision-making with regards to MCCD/Coroners Referrals was being taken away not only from treating doctors but also from Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs/Bereavement Officers/Bereavement Service Managers/Directors of End-of-Life Care.

22. This decision-making power was being handed solely to the Medical Examiner, who has not been involved in the treatment of a patient during an admission.

I took all this information in at the time and acquired as much knowledge as I could from my mentor/line manager.

Read More: NHS Director confirms Hospitals lied about Cause of Death

The Trap



Friday, February 17, 2023

The AMA Said 'Trust Your Doctor' On Smoking

The AMA Said 'Trust Your Doctor' On Smoking

Authored by Kevin Homer via The Brownstone Institute,

The American Medical Association (AMA) urges physicians to promote COVID-19 vaccines and bivalent boosters

The AMA even supplies members with social media talking points and strategies to deal with vaccine detractors

It is not the first time that my profession has endorsed a product that may be hazardous to your health.

For most of the 20th century, the AMA turned a blind eye toward the dangers of tobacco use. During the 1930s, 40s and 50s, tobacco companies paid handsomely to advertise cigarettes in AMA’s journal, JAMA. In a 1948 editorial minimizing the ill effects of smoking and justifying tobacco advertising in its publications, JAMA noted that “cigarette business is a tremendous business,” as if the size of the bottom line can mitigate a conflict for an organization founded for the “betterment of public health.”

The connection between smoking and lung cancer was recognized early in the century. At the same time, the AMA became increasingly dependent on money generated by tobacco sales. Tobacco companies sponsored meetings of medical societies, setting up their booths alongside exhibitions of the latest medical treatments. Free cartons were distributed at physician meetings. Cigarette makers even paid for publication of pseudoscientific reports claiming the health benefits of their products.  

Doctors who opposed smoking faced ridicule from their colleagues. Dr. Alton Ochsner, a renowned surgeon and sentinel voice warning of the dangers of tobacco, began publishing on the connection between smoking and lung cancer in the early 1940s. His 1954 book Smoking and Cancer: A Doctor’s Report was negatively reviewed in prominent medical journals, characterized as a medieval model of logic that belongs in the nonscience section of a library. Prior to his appearance on Meet the Press, Dr. Ochsner was told he could not discuss the relationship between smoking and lung cancer on air.

Yet the mounting evidence was hard to ignore. In 1954, JAMA stopped accepting cigarette advertisements and published an editorial rebuking tobacco company advertising practices. But five years later, a JAMA editorial was still skeptical of the evidence linking smoking to cancer, and a 1961 Nebraska State Medical Journal editorial dismissed the evidence as merely “statistical.” Tobacco companies continued to sponsor state medical meetings as late as 1969. By then most people were aware of the dangers of smoking.

In 1964, the Surgeon General concluded that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer and other life-limiting health conditions. The next year, a warning label was required on packages of cigarettes. By 1971, the government banned cigarette advertisements on television and radio. Instead of taking the lead against an obvious threat to public health, the AMA asked for time and money to study the effects of tobacco. 

Between 1964 and 1976, the AMA received more than $20 million from the tobacco industry to fund research. Instead of using the money for smoking cessation programs, many of the funded studies focused on ways to make a safer cigarette. To keep money flowing into its Education and Research Foundation the AMA delayed, stating in a confidential 1971 report that, “AMA is not prepared to make any statement regarding termination of the smoking-health research program.” The report went on to complain that tobacco companies are “in arrears on 1970 contributions.” The dependency on tobacco money created a political alliance between doctors and cigarette makers as their lobbyists joined forces in Washington. 

The delay benefitted tobacco sales and maintained the AMA’s “research” payments, but it angered Dr. Ochsner, who accused the AMA of being derelict. The AMA called Dr. Ochsner’s position “extreme.” But name-calling could not stall the inevitable conclusion any longer. In 1978 the AMA finally agreed with what most people had already realized: smoking causes lung cancer, and many other health problems. The romance with big tobacco was over.

Or was it?

As late as 1982, JAMA publications were warned to steer clear of “politically sensitive” topics like tobacco use. After most of a century of being on the tobacco dole, the AMA could not make a clean break. The AMA portfolio contained investments in tobacco companies until the late 1990s. 

In 1998, the tobacco industry settled lawsuits filed by state governments with a massive Master Settlement Agreement. In exchange for perpetual annual payments and tight regulatory control, the tobacco industry could continue to sell its products protected from future lawsuits brought by participating states and jurisdictions.  

But who really benefitted from the Tobacco Settlement? Only 2.6 percent of the money has been used for smoking prevention and cessation programs. Some states have used the tobacco money to fill budget gaps. South Carolina gave money to tobacco farmers affected by a drop in prices. Altria Group, a global tobacco company, is on the US News & World Report 10 best-performing stocks list. Altria, Phillip Morris, and British American Tobacco have all grown annual dividends consecutively since the settlement. According to Dr. Ed Anselm, “The most addictive thing about tobacco is money.”

Tobacco use remains the number one preventable cause of death in the United States. In the first fifty years after the Surgeon General’s 1964 report, more than 20 million Americans died of smoking. How many of these deaths would have been prevented if doctors had not been conflicted by financial entanglements with the tobacco industry?

Money blinds objectivity. When money drives decisionscontroverting evidence is ignoreddissenting voices are ridiculedopen debate is suppressedtalking points are distributedconclusions are delayed, and people die from a product with liability protection

The New York State Journal of Medicine published a retrospective of tobacco’s relationship to medicine in its December 1983 issue. Flipping through the pages is enlightening.  Surrounding the articles describing the greed and politics of Big Tobacco are advertisements from medicine’s new love—Big Pharma.  Doctors have exchanged one bedfellow for another.

By endorsing irrelevant COVID-19 vaccines and poorly tested bivalent boosters, the AMA is pushing a product without concern for its potential negative health effects. Like before, the medical profession lags behind public opinion. According to recent Rasmussen Reports, 7 percent of vaccinated individuals report a major side effect, and nearly half of Americans believe that COVID-19 vaccines have caused unexplained deaths, about the same proportion who believed that smoking caused cancer in the 1960s while the AMA was studying the issue.

conflicted profession cannot honestly evaluate data. Nowadays, the pharmaceutical business is a tremendous business. An organization benefitting from product sales cannot be trusted to evaluate that product. 

If doctors could not recognize the health dangers of tobacco for most of the last century, why should we trust them when they say novel vaccines are safe and effective?

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/17/2023 - 20:20


Republicans introduce bill to prevent discrimination based on Covid-19 vax status


The following is an excerpt from Just the News. Sen. Rand Paul and Rep. Dan Bishop, Republicans, introduced the "Covid-19 Vaccination Non-Discrimination Act" to prohibit federal funds from being given to medical facilities that refuse to treat patients based on their Covid-19 vaccination status. Paul, a Kentucky Republican, said his legislation would "protect the rights of […]


Youngkin calls for ‘full transparency’ from FBI over memo targeting Virginia Catholics

‘Religious freedom is a foundational tenet of our great nation.’


And just like that, Bing Chat (GPT) has already gone off the rails

One of the biggest threats to Google’s stranglehold on the search industry is definitely ChatGPT; more specifically, Bing’s inclusion of ChatGPT as Bing Chat.


mRNA "vaccines" fail again

Moderna’s leading mRNA influenza jab has failed, the company said yesterday. In a large clinical trial, the vaccine appeared LESS able to stimulate the immune system than older flu jabs for two of four flu strains, the company said.


Mainstream Media Continues To Push False 'COVID Heart' Narrative To Explain Excess Deaths

CBS joins the chorus of mainstream media outlets promoting the false narrative that covid is the cause of a sharp increase in excess heart failure deaths around the world.


Florida Surgeon General Joe Ladapo sends scathing letter to FDA and CDC

Here is the letter Joe Ladapo sent to the FDA and CDC yesterday. It speaks for itself. He also issued this Health Alert on mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Safety.


Thursday, February 16, 2023

How a town in Missouri was destroyed by Dioxin 40 years ago. Possible CDC coverup then.

A Town, a Flood, and Superfund: Looking Back at the Times Beach Disaster Nearly 40 Years Later Times Beach in 1990 (left) and 2009. (Photo credit: U.S.


WARNING: Florida Department of Health Alert

The COVID-19 pandemic brought many challenges that the health and medical field have never encountered.


The Federal Government Is Tracking the Unvaccinated

Via Mercola Story at-a-glance The U.S. government has secretly been tracking those who didn’t get the COVID jab, or are only partially jabbed, through a previously unknown surveillance program designed by the U.S.


Wrongly censored scientist seeks COVID-19 truth commission to expose 'propaganda,' censorship

A respected medical scientist whose accurate analysis on COVID-19 was improperly censored during the early days of the pandemic says the federal government and Big Tech played a "malign role" and placed public health at risk by colluding to create a false picture that all Americans faced the same ri


Wednesday, February 15, 2023

1 in 45,000 [Google blocked original posting]

We have known almost since the beginning of the coronavirus epidemic that young people face much lower risks from Covid than the elderly.

Leaders leaving: Two World Economic Forum female acolytes resign their jobs as Prime Minister. Why did each mention a gas tank? [Google blocked original posting]

I could be all wrong about this. But something about the vagueness of their speeches told me that both Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland and Jacina (Vaccinda) Ardern of New Zealand had gotten a message from higher up that it was time to resign: no ifs, ands or buts.

WHO whistle-blower shut down at Stockholm conference while presenting her research on the “virus fear to digital control” agenda [Google blocked original posting]

The organisers of the international conference held in Stockholm, Sweden, cut off Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger’s microphone two-thirds of the way through her presentation. It was at the point Dr.

Over 60 Scientists & Drs. confirm Covid Vaccines contain ‘Toxic Substances’ that cause strange & dangerous changes to Blood [Google blocked original posting]

The German Working Group for Covid Vaccine Analysis has made its ‘Summary of Preliminary Findings’ publicly available.

Palestine, Ohio train wreck: It's the dioxin [Google blocked original posting]

The introduction of dioxin to the slow kill bioweapon injections will turn the current VAIDS-induced turbo cancer trend into hyperdrive cancer. The below post provides more color on just how deadly the toxic train wreak really is.

SCOTUS to reconsider hearing case alleging Biden, Harris, lawmakers ignored 2020 fraud, broke oaths [Google blocked original posting]

The Supreme Court is set to reconsider whether to hear a lawsuit alleging President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, former Vice President Mike Pence, 291 House members, and 94 senators violated their oaths of office by refusing to investigate evidence of fraud in the 2020 election before certi

Mother denied heart transplant due to vaccination status, doctor says he 'stands by the rules' [Google blocked original posting]

A woman from Melbourne, Australia, has found herself in an unthinkable situation after doctors refused her treatment due to her vaccination status. The woman, Vicki Derderian, a mother of two, suffered severe heart failure back in 2020 and was kept alive by a Ventricular Assist Device.

Watch – Citizen Journalists Break Through Media Blackout on Toxic Ohio Train Derailment [Google blocked original posting]

Social media users took to TikTok and other platforms to get attention on the devastating fallout caused when 50 train cars derailed in East Palestine, Ohio, causing noxious chemicals like vinyl chloride to spew into the region.

The Federal Government Is Tracking the Unvaccinated [Google blocked original posting]

Via Mercola Story at-a-glance The U.S. government has secretly been tracking those who didn’t get the COVID jab, or are only partially jabbed, through a previously unknown surveillance program designed by the U.S.

Damar Hamlin Refuses to Disclose the Official Reason Doctors Gave Him for His Heart Stopping: “That’s Something I Want to Stay Away From” (VIDEO) [Google blocked original posting]

In January, Buffalo Bills player Damar Hamlin collapsed on the field after making a tackle on Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Tee Higgins in the first quarter. The game was suspended with 5:58 left in the first quarter, with the Bengals ahead 7-3, and later was postponed by the NFL.

Pentagon ‘Refuses To Rule Out Possibility Of Aliens’ After US Downs Third UFO [Google blocked original posting]

The Pentagon has refused to rule out the possibility that the unidentified objects which were recently shot down could be extraterrestrial – after another UFO was downed over Lake Huron in Michigan on Sunday.

THE CDC KNEW [Google blocked original posting]

Insurance analyst reveals massive increase in mortality among the fake vaccinated

‘The One Chart That Tells the Entire Story’: Analysis Shows 26% Worse Mortality Among the Vaccinated And “The people who are under the age of 50 who took the vaccine now have a 49% higher mortality rate.” -Josh Stirling pic.twitter.

Killing Children for Profit: Europe suffers 1580% spike in Child Deaths following EMA approval of COVID Vaccine for Children

The alleged COVID-19 pandemic has affected every aspect of our lives, and the approval of the COVID-19 vaccine for children was seen as a ray of hope by those who believe everything that their television tells them.

Covid injections are ineffective and don’t block transmission, says Bill Gates AFTER selling his shares in BioNTech for a massive profit

In 2021, Bill Gates called mRNA injections “game changers.” Contrast that with his latest statements, after turning his $55 million investment into $550 million, acknowledging the injections’ failures. What evil plan is he hatching next?

Two hidden reasons why they warp-sped the COVID killshot

I record this for Now and for Posterity. And no, I’m not being melodramatic. Gaining authorization for the first RNA-tech medical product in history, they will now remake all traditional vaccines as RNA shots, which are much faster and easier and cheaper to produce.

Questions for a Congressional Inquiry

Other than a few dead-end doom addicts on social media, most people agree that the COVID-19 pandemic is over.

CENSORED: Millions of People Worldwide Take to the Streets to Protest Against Tyranny

Most Americans living in the U.S. today are probably unaware of the massive protests that are currently happening in Europe and other places around the world. This past week has seen literally millions of people hit the streets to protest in France, Spain, Denmark, Israel, the U.K.


Tuesday, February 14, 2023

Chinese spy balloons + Chinese high powered lasers = targeted fire starting, first on west coast then on food production facilities

Are they teasing us to see if we'll figure this out one our own? 

A Shocking 30% of High School Girls ‘Seriously Considered’ Suicide Last Year



<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

A staggering 30% of high school girls in the United States who were surveyed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said they had “seriously considered attempting suicide” in 2021, up from (a still shocking) 19% in 2011.

Panning back, almost 60% of high school girls surveyed said they felt ‘persistent sadness or hopelessness’ in 2021, an increase of roughly 60% over the same time period.

Though both high-school girls and boys reported experiencing mental-health challenges, girls reported record high levels of violence, sadness and suicide risk, the CDC said. In 2021, 57% of high-school girls reported experiencing persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in the past year, compared with 36% in 2011. Thirty percent reported they seriously considered attempting suicide in 2021, up from 19% in 2011. -WSJ

When it comes to boys in high school, 29% reported persistent feelings of sadness and hopelessness in 2021 vs. 21% in 2011, while 14% reported seriously considering a suicide attempt, up from 13% in 2011. 

Following the survey, federal officials noted a spike in mental health among young people – particularly girls, in new data released on Monday which was gathered from a biennial survey spanning 2011 to 2021, of 9th through 12th-graders across the country.

According to mental health experts, girls are particularly vulnerable to anxiety and depression, given higher rates of harassment and discrimination they face compared with boys. And of course, now they’re all competing with TikTok Barbies who set even more unrealistic and unhealthy standards.

And as the Wall Street Journal notes, the evidence suggests that the stress, isolation and loss during the pandemic amplified mental health issues among young people who were already struggling.

“These data show our kids need far more support to cope, hope and thrive,” said CDC chief medical officer, Debra Houry.

According to the CDC, there LGBTQ teens are showing ‘ongoing and extreme distress,’ with more than half of these students reporting a recent episode of poor mental health, and 22% reporting an actual suicide attempt in the past year.

European Central Bank contractor confirms bail-ins are coming


Fact-Check This, Facebook

fact check this Facebook

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote an article entitled, “How the “Unvaccinated” Got It Right." It received more attention than anything I have written in many years, being reposted on many sites. 

A little while ago, people who shared my article on Facebook discovered that no one could open it without first being psychologically primed to distrust it. 

Missing context Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people.”

I’m not sure who Mark Zuckerberg thinks he is. Nor do I know much about Tom Kertscher, the gentleman who wrote the article that Facebook provides to its users to read to save them from being “misled” by my work. 

Let us allow the possibility that Mr. Zuckerberg and Mr. Kertscher are sincerely concerned about Truth and examine the points they claim weight against my article by that standard.

• Data has consistently shown that unvaccinated people are at greater risk than vaccinated people of getting infected by COVID-19 and dying from it.

Since my article made no argument to the contrary and Mr. Kertscher’s claim is entirely irrelevant to any argument that I did make, the suggestion that the claim is relevant is itself misleading. 

Obviously, if you are in a high-risk group and the vaccine has any positive effect whatsoever, then “unvaccinated” people will be at greater risk of dying of COVID than “vaccinated," all things being equal. However, my article – if Facebook’s censors had actually bothered to read it – was specifically a response to the claim made by Scott Adams that the “vaccinated” now face a worry concerning the long-term consequences of “vaccination” that the “unvaccinated” do not. That worry is reasonable for all the reasons stated in my piece. Those reasons include the fact that the “vaccine” had not undergone long-term testing when it was pressed upon the population, its manufacturers were protected from liability for harm, and the data regarding effectiveness and safety were systematically compromised in the multiple ways that I outlined.

More importantly, though, my article was clear that the decision-making process it lays out regarding “vaccination” applies to a healthy individual with no comorbidities. According to the CDC, which my piece quoted, “the overwhelming number of deaths – over 75% – occurred in people that had at least four comorbidities. So really these were people who were unwell to begin with.” Since my article was expressly not about that group, Mr. Kertscher’s claim is not only irrelevant: it misleads, ironically, by entirely ignoring the the very group (individuals at very low risk of serious harm from COVID per the available data) that I explicitly stated my argument applied to. In other words, I provided the necessary context and Facebook’s censorship ignores it – and then falsely claims missing context. 

• COVID-19 vaccines have a strong safety record and infection alone provides only limited protection.

Once again, the implication that this statement contextualizes the claims in my article is misleading. 

First off, both infection and vaccines (obviously) offer “limited” protection. What makes Mr. Kertscher’s statement so (I hate to have to use these words again) ironic and misleading is that, as I stated and Mr. Kertscher apparently missed, it was only the “vaccine” that was ever falsely claimed to offer complete protection. Moreover, multiple such claims were quoted in my piece. Since those claims were false, and unretracted, they bear on the trustworthiness of the data provided by the people who made them.

More importantly, with respect to Mr. Kertscher’s claim concerning safety, one of the core purposes of my article was to carefully and extensively provide the full context of that very safety claim, which we have been hearing for years. 

My article shows, precisely why, when the full context is considered, the safety claims are themselves so unreliable as to be potentially misleading. To repeat a few reasons here: there had not been time to collect long-term safety data when the claims were made; as time proceeds, the data increasingly suggest the occurrence of vaccine injuries; previously publicized inferences from available data were systematically skewed to suit policy decisions that did not change with the data; data that disfavored the “vaccine”-and-lockdown COVID response were suppressed, ignored, and/or censored; and factual claims made by top officials (including Biden, Fauci etc.) were proved later to be false. 

Once again, the irony is evident. Mr. Kertscher’s article is offered to Facebook users to provide the context that prevents them from being misled by my own. In truth, not only does it provide no context whatsoever for my claims: my censored article provides the proper context for Mr. Kertscher and Mr. Kertscher’s article does not address any one of my own contextualizing claims. 

You cannot make it up. 

• Usually, vaccine side effects are minor and emerge within days, not years later. Some people who get COVID-19 experience "long COVID" — physical effects that can last for years.

Once again, Mr. Kertscher’s claim does not go to any of the points made in my article. 

Certainly, COVID may have long-term symptoms. I have never said otherwise. My piece is about how to balance risks in the informational environment in which we were living over the last three years. My article does not deny “long COVID exists." Rather, it discusses – rather intelligently, if he will allow me to say so myself - how that risk should be weighed against others. These others include, for example, the long-term risks of vaccine-injury and the potentially greater risk of complying with a regulatory regime that enables the mass removal of basic rights to be returned as privileges to be enjoyed only by the medically compliant under insufficiently informed consent. 

Mr. Kertscher’s further assertion, “usually, vaccine side effects are minor and emerge within days” is not disputed by my article. But again, it is ironically misleading by completely ignoring the fact that my article carefully explains the context in which that very claim must be assessed by someone considering a medical intervention. 

That context, as my article pointed out, includes the fact that the definition of “vaccine” was changed by the CDC so that the term “vaccine” could be applied to the mRNA COVID “vaccine." A historic claim about vaccines defined in one way cannot, absent other information, tell us anything about an intervention that would not satisfy that definition. 

Moreover, even putting that category error of Mr. Kertscher’s aside, and pretending that mRNA is a vaccine, Mr. Kertscher then has the problem of having to deal with the fact that his historic class of vaccines over which he makes his generalization invariably underwent clinical trials that the mRNA COVID “vaccine” did not; on top of that, the manufacturers of those other vaccines had legal liability for harm that they might have caused whereas the manufacturers of the mRNA COVID “vaccine” did not. He is not comparing like with like.

Evidently, the people who are really presenting misleading information for lack of proper context are Facebook’s fact-checkers. Who fact-checks them? 

Articles like mine, which Facebook censors - or rather (if you prefer) suppresses the effect of - are the ones that are so badly needed to help regular people find Truth, and maintain the necessary skepticism that will enable them to do so, in the higher distorted informational environment that Facebook and its ilk willfully create. 

  • For a journalist like Mr. Kertscher to mislead Facebook users by misrepresenting another writer’s article is bad.
  • For a journalist like Mr. Kertscher to help a platform impinge on the free speech of another writer is a disgrace.
  • For a journalist like Mr. Kertscher to do the first in the service of the second – and then to allow what he has done to be passed off as the very opposite of what it is – seems to me like a kind of ticket to the deepest circle of writers’ Hell. 

Mr. Kertscher has every right to disagree with me on anything – including, even, the facts. But the difference between him and me – and between Facebook and me - is that I am not allowing my work to be used to prevent his work from speaking for itself. I am not telling anyone how they must read what he writes – and I am certainly not pre-emptively reinterpreting what he writes to tip the scales of his readers’ judgment of it. 

Unfortunately, he and others like him are doing all of those things to people, like me, who are at least as knowledgeable and intellectually honest as he is, and possibly - who knows? – sometimes even more so. 

But let me try to be more generous to Mr. Kertscher. 

Let me allow that his work is being used to misrepresent mine and thus mislead the users of Facebook in ways that he never really agreed to or imagined. 

Let us assume that he is a kind of unwitting lackey – an honest man doing his best to generate helpful content to him to earn a living using the information available. Perhaps the contract he signed with Politifact – the company that he works for and whose content Facebook used to censor my own – leaves Mr. Kertscher no control over where and for what dark purposes his own best efforts are used. 

In that case, I would suggest, that poor Mr. Kertscher is an unwitting participant in a rather sinister attempt to achieve the very opposite of what he, himself is hoping to achieve.

For that reason, I feel the need to provide some of the relevant missing context to prevent his readers and Mr. Zuckerberg’s users from being misled. 

After all, I know it is what they would want me to do. 

Facebook is one of numerous social platforms that has been in direct correspondence with the government to ensure that its censors do the state’s bidding. 

Here is an example of correspondence from Facebook employees to the Department of Health following an in-person meeting between them.

“I wanted to make sure you saw the steps we took just this past week to adjust policies on what we are removing with respect to misinformation, as well as steps taken to further address the ‘disinfo dozen’: we removed 17 additional Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts tied to the disinfo dozen (so a total of 39 Profiles, Pages, Groups and IG accounts deleted thus far, resulting in every member of the disinfo dozen having had at least one such entity removed).”

The use by government of large corporations to manipulate the population to achieve its ends was a big thing in the 20st century and it has a name – fascism. 

Facebook – a company that colludes secretly with government to suppress information - has the gall – nay, the dark arrogance - to tell me that my readers might be misled for lack of context?! Who the hell do its bunch of abject hypocrites think they are?

In the United States, where we are victims of what should now perhaps be called neo-fascism, collusion between the government and corporations to propagandize, on which fascism has always depended, is still a violation of the Constitution and the law (for what little that seems to be worth today). 

The First Amendment protects the rights of its citizens to speak freely. In Ashcroft v. ACLU, the Supreme Court clarified that, “Government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter or its content.” 

In Martin v. City of Struthers (1941), Justice Hugo Black wrote that the First Amendment “embraces the right to distribute literature, and necessarily protects the right to receive it.” Nearly 30 years later, Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote, “it is now well established that the Constitution protects the right to receive information and ideas” in Stanley v. Georgia (1969). 

In Bantam Books v. Sullivan (1963), the Court ruled that Rhode Island violated the First Amendment when a state commission advised book distributors against publishing certain content. In a concurring opinion, Justice Douglas wrote, “the censor and First Amendment rights are incompatible.”

So here is the useful “context” that will help to prevent Facebook’s users from being “misled” by Facebook and its lackeys: Facebook’s warnings on articles like mine are the illegal state-sanctioned output of a neo-fascistic abuse of your Constitutional rights that it was not telling you it was engaged in before others brought it to light.

I am not perfect. I am also not the smartest person I know. I make plenty of mistakes. 

On the other hand, I didn’t just come up the Hudson on a bicycle. 

For what little it is worth – and I admit it is worth very little – I have a first-class degree in Physics and a Master’s in Philosophy of Science (I know: ironic yet again, isn’t it?) from a little-known outfit called the University of Cambridge. What is worth much more than those qualifications is my integrity – intellectual and otherwise. I have never knowingly misled anyone by my writing. 

As it happens, there was a statement in the original version of my article that, a few hours after publication, I became unsure I could sufficiently defend: I had it immediately removed. I actually care about things like that.

If Mr. Kertscher or Mr. Zuckerberg et al. had read my piece, they would have seen at the beginning of it, a clear and explicit disclaimer that what they followed was a careful description of a personal decision-making process. 

Unlike Mr. Kertscher and Mr. Zuckerberg, I took the opportunity to state clearly that I was not the arbiter of truth; that nothing in my article implied that anyone else who made a different decision from mine about whether to be COVID-“vaccinated” was wrong in so doing; and that different people could make different decisions that were right for them. 

I was offering only a single perspective. In other words, I provided exactly the context that the article needed to ensure that it would not mislead anyone. I also notice that Facebook’s censors do not deny any of the factual claims I made.

May I suggest to Mr. Kertscher or Mr. Zuckerberg and people like them, that if - instead of trying to suppress the work of folks like me - they were actually to read it and engage directly with the points so carefully made in it, they might – just might – learn something. 

The censorious warnings that are now slapped over posts that contain my original article, How the “Unvaccinated” Got It Right would seem to imply that Facebook is so determined that information presented on its platform does not “mislead” for “lack of context” that it is willing to engage in illegal collusion with the government to satisfy that goal. 

I therefore look forward to Facebook immediately making available this context-providing response to its “context-providing” censorship of my original article wherever the latter is to be found on its platform – just to be sure that no one could possibly be misled by it.

(With thanks to William Spruance, from whose legal knowledge this piece has benefited.) 


Seymour Hersh Speaks Out: “You Have to Hold the President to Account”


In his first interview since publishing his bombshell Nord Stream report, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said it was “not a hard story to find” and that it was obvious that NATO was involved in the Nord Stream attack. Hersh was astonished at his colleagues, who “don’t seem to have anyone inside.”

“I saw that the Germans are starting to cope with this story,” host Gary Brecher of Radio War Nerd remarked.

“Would you call what they’re doing coping?” said Hersh.

Throughout “all of the scheming,” Brecher quoted Hersh’s source, “some working guys in the CIA and the State Department were saying, ‘Don’t do this. It’s stupid and will be a political nightmare if it comes out.’”

“Isn’t it incredibly stupid?” Brecher asked.

“But they didn’t see it that way,” Hersh said. “They saw the gas coming from Russia. Russia had pipelines supplying gas to Germany, very cheap, so much so that some of the German companies were reselling (the gas) for a profit.”

Nord Stream was owned by Gazprom “controlled by oligarchs who are respectful of Putin. But 49% were (owned by) four different European companies, who were selling gas downstream all over Europe. So you had a tremendous source of cheap gas for Europe. Germany’s a real powerhouse, with Mercedes and BASF, the largest chemical company in the world. They soak up gas.”

“And so the fear was…” Hersh said, “Biden wants this war. Don’t ask me why Presidents want war. I think it’s good for their ratings. But Biden was very big on … showing we can stand up to Russia … with Ukrainian soldiers. It’s good politically in America too.”

Biden “saw that gas as a weapon”, Hersh said. “As long as Russia was selling that much gas, they thought Russia would weaponize it if there was a war.” The planning began before the war, Hersh said.

Speaking at a press conference with German chancellor Olaf Scholz Feb. 7, 2022, Biden said, if Russia invaded Ukraine, “there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2.” Pressed to explain how, Biden doubled down: “We will – I promise you – we will be able to do it.”

On January 27, 2022, State Department Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland said that ‘With regard to Nord Stream 2, we continue to have very strong and clear conversations with our German allies, and I want to be clear with you today. If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward…. we’ve had extensive consultations at every level with our German allies. I’m not going to get into the specifics here today, but we will work with Germany to ensure that the pipeline does not move forward.’

On January 26, 2022, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price told NPR: “I want to be very clear: if Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward. I’m not going to get into the specifics. We will work with Germany to ensure it does not move forward.”

“That’s called a threat,” Hersh said. “People are asking me, ‘How did you find this story?’ A friend of mine put it this way: ‘You’re an expert at deconstructing the obvious.’ What else was it?”

“Particularly the German newspapers are very nasty to me,” Hersh said. “The New York Times and the Washington Post just ignore me.” The mainstream media want Hersh to reveal his source’s name and “get him put in jail,” Hersh said. “Which would end my career. I‘ve been doing this for 50 years… I protect people. I have a source. I’m taking heat, but that’s my job. But it’s their job to understand the business a little better,” Hersh said.

“They understand the business at the New York Times and the Washington Post,” Hersh said.

“The problem is, it’s all been cheapened. Because now the New York Times and the Washington Post think an unnamed source can be a press guy, a press secretary, that whispers something to them on the side. I don’t know, they don’t seem to have anyone inside,” Hersh said.

The coverage of the Ukrainian war, “compared to what I’m hearing from my friends, who have access to the information… The war I know about is not the war you’re reading about,” Hersh said.

In Germany, BASF has shuttered factories and is “talking to China bout moving facilities there, Hersh said. Crippling the German economy was “shooting off your left foot for no reason whatsoever,” Hersh observed. “It’s stupid beyond belief. Is it criminal? It’s unquestionably a wonderful degree of stupidity at the White House and on the part of the President. It’s just damn stupid.”

“You have to ask yourself, what is it with Presidents? Why do they like war so much? (Maybe) because it’s politically useful,” Hersh said. “It’s colossally bad. Inexcusable.”

“The White House has the New York Times, Washington Post, MSN and CNN fronting for them,” Hersh said. “The enemy is Fox News. The only reporter that called me from any TV station … was Tucker Carlson.”

“He’s a smart guy. I wouldn’t go on his show,” Hersh said about Carlson, “but he’s been dead right… on the war in Ukraine,” Hersh said.

The Nord Stream story “stunned me because it was such an obvious story,” Hersh said. “The Russians didn’t do it. And if the Russians didn’t do it, which country in NATO (did?)… I was joking with a friend: Maybe Macedonia did it. Are they in NATO?”

“It’s not even a hard story to understand,” Hersh said. “The President of the United States, the Undersecretary of State both said they were gonna do it. And they did it.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken “within a month of the event, he gave a speech in which he talked about stopping Russia from weaponizing oil and gas… He clearly was among the people who knew what happened.”

“The New York Times has a lot of terrific reporters, but when it comes to this type of reporting, they underestimate the American people. We’re ready to accept the fact the President did this,” Hersh said. “You have to hold the President to account.”

Hersh stands by his story while insisting on protecting his sources, while indicating they may be related to the pipeline industry: “The one thing government’s good at is tracking down people.”

“This isn’t a hard story to find”, Hersh said. “There’s something called the pipeline industry. American companies. They build pipelines around the world. They know what happened.”

Regarding the media onslaught on him from state-funded media sources like Bellingcat, Hersh said: “I can’t care about Bellingcat. Once you get to a certain level with the intelligence community, you get to know who’s who. I can’t worry about that. But there are legitimate people who complain.”

Glenn Greenwald had noted Bellingcat is funded by the National Endwoment for Democracy, founded by the CIA and State Department (Gateway reported).


The post Seymour Hersh Speaks Out: “You Have to Hold the President to Account” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.


Ohio Chemical Train Derailment

East Palestine, Ohio, a community of around 5,000 people located close to Pennsylvania’s border, has been affected by the derailment of a train carrying pressurized vinyl chloride, a highly flammable carcinogenic gas. Did Damar Hamlin Suffer From Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis?


The Secret Blacklist Used To Defund Alternative News

Documents and emails that were stolen have revealed how Xandr used a secret blacklist used to defund alternative news by targeting unpopular speech and blocking conservative websites. Did Damar Hamlin Suffer From Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis?


Snowden Says UFO Hysteria Is "Engineered" Distraction From Nord Stream Pipeline Bombshell

Snowden Says UFO Hysteria Is "Engineered" Distraction From Nord Stream Pipeline Bombshell

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden says the hysteria over UFOs being shot down over America and Canada is a distraction from Seymour Hersh’s story about the U.S. being responsible for blowing up the Nord Stream pipelines.

Over the past week, there have been at least four instances of U.S. fighter jets destroying unidentified flying objects, in one case over Alaska, an object that had no means of propulsion but was spotted flying at 40,000 feet and pilots said interfered with the sensors of their aircraft.

Yesterday, the White House denied that the objects were extraterrestrial in nature, although the glib dismissal if anything only continued to feed into speculation online that ET had paid a flying visit.

In reality, as most people have pointed out, the shootdowns are likely a show of force to save the Biden administration’s blushes from questions as to why the Chinese spy balloon was allowed to monitor America in the first place.

According to Edward Snowden, the UFO flap is also a misdirection to wipe the infinitely more awkward Seymour Hersh story from the headlines.

Snowden tweeted that the hysteria was an “engineered” bait and switch to prevent the media from covering the pipeline explosion revelations.

it's not aliens

i wish it were aliens

but it's not aliens

it's just the ol' engineered panic, an attractive nuisance ensuring natsec reporters get assigned to investigate balloon bullshit rather than budgets or bombings (à la nordstream)

until next time

— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) February 13, 2023

Last week, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published an article in which he asserted that the pipelines were destroyed by the US as part of a covert operation.

According to Hersh’s sources, the explosives were planted in June 2022 by US Navy divers under the guise of the BALTOPS 22 NATO exercise and were detonated three months later with a remote signal sent by a sonar buoy.

One source told Hersh that the plotters knew the covert operation was an “act of war,” with some in the CIA and State Department warning, “Don’t do this. It’s stupid and will be a political nightmare if it comes out.”

In an update to the story, Hersh gave an interview with Radio War Nerd in which he slammed the mainstream media for criticizing him personally rather than investigating the story.

“It’s amazing to me how they fall in line, my colleagues,” said Hersh, referring to the New York Times and the Washington Post.

As we previously highlighted, Snowden chided the White House’s denial that it was involved in the pipeline attack by pointing out it also denied previous false flags.

“Can you think of any examples from history of a secret operation that the White House was responsible for, but strongly denied?” Snowden tweeted.

“Besides, you know, that little ‘mass surveillance’ kerfuffle,” he added.

Snowden included a UPI news report from April 1961 in which US Secretary of State Dean Rusk denied the Bay of Pigs had been “staged from American soil,” with Rusk telling the media, “the Cuban affair was one for the Cubans themselves to settle.

*  *  *

Brand new merch now available! Get it at

In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Get early access, exclusive content and behind the scenes stuff by following me on Locals.

Tyler Durden Tue, 02/14/2023 - 08:59


The Largest Environmental Disaster in US History?

With all of the Chyna balloons and UFOs going around, unless you live in East Palestine, Ohio or if you consume a lot of independent news, you probably don’t know that the US is currently experiencing what may be the largest ecological disaster in its history.


Monday, February 13, 2023

Sy Hersh and the Way We Live Now. “The Propaganda Apparatus that Manipulates and Controls our Society”

Coverage of the sabotage of the Nordstream pipelines helped Murray realize something important about how the Big Lie works. Craig Murray 9 February 2023 Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.


U.S. Government Sold Your Right to Jury Trial — to Insulate Big Pharma From Liability

Miss a day, miss a lot. Subscribe to The Defender's Top News of the Day. It's free. On Feb. 24, 1985, The New York Times published “Glory Days End for Pharmaceuticals.


Furious Naomi Wolf Rages At The Pain Of Listening To Twitter Censorship Testimony

Furious Naomi Wolf Rages At The Pain Of Listening To Twitter Censorship Testimony

Via 'Outspoken with Dr Naomi Wolf' Substack,

As I type, I am undergoing the excruciating experience of listening to C-SPAN, which is airing “Twitter’s Response to Hunter Biden Laptop Story.” The larger issue is: who censored Twitter, and why, and whether there was illegal collusion (there was) between Twitter and the US government.

So I finally am seeing them — up close, in real life, in person. I am finally able to look at the faces of the heretofore faceless technocrats who took it upon themselves to try to destroy my life and ruin my name.

I am witnessing, as I see them seated primly in rows in a Congressional hearing room, the very faces — the somber, ill-cut but costly blue suits, the bad wire-rimmed glasses, the judgmental expressions — of those who were personally responsible for the misery, trauma, reputational damage, shattered dreams, and loss of income, in my one life, over the course of last two and a half years.

Here at last are the very people who took it upon themselves, or who oversaw their colleagues, to single me out, to collude with the White House, and with Carol Crawford of CDC, and with DHS perhaps, to suspend me — following an accurate tweet of mine that warned women of menstrual harms following mRNA injection.

The positions of these people, the views of them — their self-regarding, self-satisfied, smug certainty that their rightness is the only rightness that could ever be — do not remind me of the testimony or views of actual Americans. They remind me rather of the affect of functionaries in a Stalinist show trial, or of the nameless bureaucrats in Kafka’s The Trial.

There, onscreen, present at last, is Yoel Roth, “Former Twitter Head of Trust & Safety” - with that oddly prim, pursed mouth that these technocrats all seem to have; with those fingertips touching each other, presenting himself as if he is the moderator of reality itself, and as if he finds himself in the presence of something that smells bad. There are his glazed defiant blue eyes, his slightly balding pate; the costly haircut; there is the sneering downward cast of his mouth. I try not ever to make critical personal remarks, but the ugliness, sorrow, loss, isolation and pain I sustained, and still sustain every day, at the hands of these until-now-faceless, self-righteous people, tend to make me see them aversively; or perhaps I see the moral ugliness of their decisions, as if manifested in their faces and body language.

Sorry — not sorry.

There he is: Mr Roth, wrongly claiming that, “paradoxically,” more speech equals more danger and not more safety for society.

There he is, this person so sure that he is so right, having tweeted that Republicans are “NAZIS”.

And here he is, sorry about that tweet now - that is, now that he is being asked about it - by those same Republicans.

There is Anika Collier Navaroli, “Former US Safety Policy Team Senior Expert,” talking about “dangerous speech”. There is her pale-gray jacket, her earnest if not bullying posture, as she leans forward, passionately describing the terrifying nature of freedom of speech. She describes a Twitter policy to address “coded incitement to violence” and to “address dogwhistles”. Overt threats of violence are of course already illegal, and they are the province of law enforcement, not of social media functionaries. Yet based on these “coded” tweets, rather than on actual threats of violence, Ms. Navaroli calls for more censorship. Thus she is already staking out and defending the Orwellian province of “thought crimes” or “pre-crime.” It was never Ms Navaroli’s role to decide if “dogwhistles” would lead to violence; that is the role of police and of the FBI. Why is she claiming that a social media platform is supposed to take on the role of maintaining physical public safety, that belongs to law enforcement?

Ms. Navaroli ends her hectoring introductory peroration with a pious, condescending conclusion that her mission is to make communication online “safe.” Her evidence of the crimes committed by speaking on Twitter, include this 1984-level sentence: “The President said he liked to send out his tweets like “little missiles”; and to me that sounded like weaponization of a platform.”’ Has the woman never taken an English class or learned about metaphors? Still later in the hearing, she accuses “fan fiction” of leading directly to the murder of people on Jan 6 — putting herself right in line with the many despots and tyrants who, since the birth of the novel, have accused the act of reading of causing social mayhem.

Here is Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), asking Yoel Roth about Twitter’s marking of certain speech as “unsafe”.

There is Rep Eleanor Holmes Norton, a leader whom I used greatly to respect, fulminating about “conspiracies.” There she is using the dangerous language of “incitement”, a meaningless word that serves only to criminalize First Amendment- protected speech. There is Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), on her first week on the job, alarmingly wrongly stating that it is her task to “protect the American people from misinformation” — a role for a member of Congress that is identified literally nowhere in the Constitution or in the Bill of Rights.

There is former Twitter counsel, former “head of legal, policy and trust” at Twitter, Ms Vijaya Gadde, with her slightly more polished look and her sapphire-colored jacket; a package that proves however only that pure evil can be as well dressed and coiffed as not. There Ms. Gadde is, prevaricating when Rep Nancy Mace (R-SC) asks her directly if Twitter ever censored Americans pursuant to demands from the Government. After Ms. Gadde’s mumbled gibberish in response, haplessly phrased in the passive voice, Rep Mace thanked Ms Gadde for admitting that Twitter had become a “subsidiary” of the FBI in illegally violating the First Amendment rights of Americans.

It is so painful for me to see these faces. I have a very intimate relationship to these people.

They tried to destroy me, and did a fair job of it, by some measures.

These are the people — “my”people, paradoxically; people educated like me, people who shared my political views until 2020; these are people who vacationed where I used to vacation, who hang out with people I know — who were the agents behind full- on Stalinist-type persecution of innocent Americans; of me; these are the people who ruined my life, or sought to do so, and destroyed my career, or sought to do so. These emotionally ugly, these nasty, self-satisfied folks, so sure that they are right, so very, very wrong; are here at last; right here on C-Span.

They persecuted not just me but Dr Martin Kulldorff; Dr Jay Bhattacharya; Dr Paul Alexander; Dr Peter McCullough. So many others. They scrubbed and manipulated the discourse of a platform that has no right to be any more censorious than a telecom company, because they were willing to collude illegally with the government to decide what can be said in America. The messaging from the FBI via “the super-secret James Bond tele-portal”, as Rep Jim Jordan so brilliantly and rightly put it, reached into the voices of Americans and strangled Americans’ rights; but Twitter and the company’s political friends went further than mere silencing. These smarmy people ultimately hurt, and may have helped to injure and kill, many thousands.

These are the people who decided to remove the accurate tweet of mine about menstrual symptoms subsequent to MRNA vaccines, that could have saved millions of women from the current agony and infertility that they now endure. These are the people who obeyed the instructions of their colleagues in government to censor me.

I looked at the bios of the people cc’d on Twitter’s communications with the White House about attacking my accurate tweet; they were a lot of young functionaries at the US Bureau of the Census, at least two of them, oddly, educated at the University of Delaware. These low-level Gen Z apparatchiks, and their incompletely articulate bosses, thought it was fine to destroy the career and try to shred the reputation of someone who had written eight international bestsellers, who had been a Rhodes scholar, and an advisor to a Presidential campaign and to a Vice President; who had gone back to school at midlife and had worked for seven years successfully to complete a D Phil at Oxford University; who had been invited onto every major platform and written for every major newspaper and was a commentator on every major news network for 35 years, and who, for those decades, by those same platforms and news sites, had been identified as a global leader in the feminist movement.

These nothing people in front of me, these hacks, these people of zero cognitive distinction, these essentially trivial-minded humans, used their unearned, thuglike, intellectually meaningless power — the intellectually two-dimensional power of a social media platform — to announce to the world that I was crazy, unhinged; to present what appears to have been a file, to the BBC, to NPR, to The New York Times - to my own former colleagues — seeking to re-present me, a lifelong writer of heavily annotated bestselling nonfiction, as not credible.

For the two years subsequent to my deplatforming, news outlets — including those where I used to be a columnist, such as The Guardian and the Sunday Times of London — did not need to claim, let alone prove, that I was actually wrong in any concrete way; all they had to do now — and they did this repeatedly, clearly, as we see now, at the behest of the government involved - was to repeat the phrase replicated around the world, and embedded into posterity via my Wikipedia bio:

“Naomi Wolf was banned from Twitter for misinformation.”

“Misinformation” is never in quotes; the accurate caveat — “what Twitter called “misinformation”’ — is never added, in spite of this being the journalistically ethical and correct phrasing. This damning but really meaningless summary, then, is to what 35 years of labor, a status as a feminist leader, two degrees, eight bestsellers, thousands of footnotes, and the publication of essays in every major news site in North America, as well as most of Western Europe — got reduced.

It is incredible to me, as someone who was raised in an American meritocracy, and who has until very recently believed in American meritocracy, that a group of nonentities in Twitter, in collusion with nonentities at CDC (hi there, Carol Crawford), the White House and the US Dept. of the Census — were able thus so simply, and at such immediate, nuclear scale, to destroy the reputation of someone identified since 1990 as a major American voice.

So: this can happen to any American voice.

These ill-dressed, ill-spoken, banal careerist ciphers, cost me so much.

I re-trained for almost a decade, in the middle of my life, to teach. It is all I had ever really wanted to do with my life. Now I will never be able to be the only thing I ever wanted to be — a Professor of English Literature at a university.

I am now sixty. It’s too late for me. Twitter, in collusion with the Biden administration, cost me my hard-won lifelong dream. I’ve been maligned and censored by Twitter since 2021.

Even if the company eventually settles my lawsuit against it, and even though Mr Musk has “let” me back on the platform, that would be, this is, no victory.

Twitter has not sent an advisory to all of the news outlets around the world that depicted me, at Twitter’s own direction, as crazy, that they were wrong to have done so; there has been no press release stating that they erred, and that I was right, and that they are sorry for wrongly abusing my reputation — and for destroying women and babies. No, forever I will remain “deplatformed from Twitter for misinformation” in the cybersphere, even though it is finally being established that sadly I was deplatformed for telling God’s truth.

It is unlikely that any university at this point would see past the grotesque imprint on my bio that Twitter, via the White House, CDC and perhaps the FBI, has taken care to embed in my bio, and in articles about me, around the world. It is unlikely, too, that I will ever recoup the six figure investments that investors withdrew from my company when Twitter, colluding with the government, was orchestrating the shredding of my reputation. It is unlikely that a 35 years career and legacy online of what had been seen until very recently as a life of significant accomplishment, can ever be re-established.

I try never to complain in public. I try never to show self-pity or weakness, at least not to my enemies. But Twitter’s attacks on me are not over, and I am simply sick of the damage these mediocrities have done to me, and continue to try to do.

Just yesterday LinkedIn sent me a notification that a Twitter “Political Staffer” was viewing my bio. A notice of scrutiny by a Twitter staffer with friends in the administration reached my inbox the day before Congressional hearings about the censorship both entities imposed on people such as me.

Intimidate much, @Twitter?

I am a brave person — I guess — and I won’t be daunted by this obvious effort at harassment. But I am also human, and I happen to have a broken shoulder at the moment, and I am simply tired; tired of fighting these monsters.

And yes, it is wearying and threatening and coercive to see that this massive behemoth, with their friends at the highest levels of government, are not done messing with my own, personal, only life.

Yoel Roth is to this very minute, defending the de-platforming of people due to their having “spread COVID misinformation”; that, dear Reader, would be me. To this day, this trimly-styled nonentity defends debunked magical thinking.

To which Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene rightly responded: “Mr Roth: who put you in charge of what is true and what is not?”

Rep. Taylor Greene also said to Mr Roth:

“You abused the power of Big Tech to censor Americans. I am so glad you are censored now, and that you have lost your jobs.”

I cannot believe that “my own”people, my former tribe on the elite left, are joining forces with the government to violate the First Amendment rights of all Americans and then, worse still, to justify having done so. I can’t believe that Democrat after Democrat, liberal after liberal, is on C-Span singing the praises of censorship and inventing imaginary roles for government officials and social media platforms to keep Americans “safe” from the “threats“ of discourse and ideas. We used to be the side of Howl and Lady Chatterley’s Lover; of The Well of Loneliness. Heck, of the Free Speech Movement! What happened to us?

I can’t believe that people I thought were hostile to America’s interests — in this case, the Republicans demanding answers from the hacks and flunkies of Big Tech — are the allies in this hearing’s case at least, of truth and the Constitution and freedom of speech.

And I can’t believe that the forces who tore my life apart, temporarily half-destroyed my business, ended any hopes of my realizing my one life’s best dream, and set a match to my reputation, turn out, now that the curtain has been pulled back, as at the end of The Wizard of Oz - to be such small, small, sad, petty, miserable, mediocre people.

The larger issue is not the damage these smirking, small-minded people did to me. The larger issue is what the experience I underwent at their hands, represents for our culture.

There is a specific kind of damage that Twitter and the Biden administration did, in censoring and smearing the medical doctors — in silencing the signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration. Medical harms, medical damage, limits to medical options and open debate, follow.

But consider my example as an example of something else, that is equally serious.

I am not a medical doctor or a public health official — I am, or I was, an American writer, identified as a cultural figure. So what happened to me means that any American cultural figure can be taken down. Any American cultural movement can be mis-framed, defamed, broken. Any American writer, musician, artist, sculptor, actor, director, can be annihilated and memory-holed. Any American artistic movement can be burned alive. And remember — Twitter is an international company, and wars can be waged, culturally, against us by our adversaries.

Why should any young writer, watching what happened to me, believe in meritocracy in American culture any more — why should she work hard, aspire largely, and master her craft? Clearly keeping her head down and parroting the party line will keep her safer.

So this issue brings us squarely into the cultural climate of 1933, when books were dragged from university libraries to be burned in a pile, in Berlin: [] or of 1937, when the Nazi party curated and hosted a “Degenerate Art” exhibit in Munich. [] What happened to me brings us squarely into a climate in which specific American writers, artists, sculptors, musicians, social activists, can be identified as enemies of the state, or identified as culturally or socially untouchable.

“Degeneracy” in 1937 was defined essentially as that of which the Nazi party did not approve.

Today on C-Span, we heard a lot about the decision to violate Americans’ rights, based simply on sentiments of which the Biden administration, or Twitter’s employees, did not approve.

The larger issue is that once a society crosses this Rubicon, with one cultural figure, this can happen to any cultural figure or any cultural movement. And if we do not reject (and indeed prosecute and legislate against) this unlawful suppression of views at the behest of the government, then we no longer live in an American culture, in which ideas rise and gain currency on the basis of merit and on the basis of ideas’ appeals to others.

We will, rather, be in a Nazi reality in which petty officials distort and dictate culture itself and reputationally behead those cultural leaders who pose challenges to the power structure.

Berlin, Munich, in this respect, are here again, in their darkest sense; those who decided, based on a party line, on proper and improper art, books, views — are not dead and gone; lost in history; no; here they are.

But this time they appear in our America, in their bad blue suits, with their pompous nasal voices; saying “I have no knowledge of this matter”; or “I can’t hear the question”; as they occupy, with their damaged consciences, their nauseating excuses, seats in a hearing room on Capitol Hill in the United States of America.

Will we let these cultural functionaries — who operate just like those petty tyrants of the cultures of Berlin and Munich not so long ago — take up space, with impunity, in the heart of our America?

Or will we drag America back into daylight and sunlight again, and force these equivocating wretches to face their own degenerate crimes — crimes against freedom of speech and the Constitution?

*  *  *

Outspoken with Dr Naomi Wolf is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support her work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Tyler Durden Sun, 02/12/2023 - 23:00


What Can We Learn From The Biggest Lies People Believed About Covid?

At the very beginning of the covid event in late 2019 to early 2020 the public had little to no information on the details surrounding the outbreak in Wuhan, China and what kind of virus the world might be facing.


Africa a medical mystery to the globalist COVID elites

When someone has had success in beating off a global pandemic, shouldn't they maybe get some kind of laurels? At a minimum, it would makes sense to learn what they learned so as to get the same result. That's how actual science works, or at least, it did.


A recent report details how a handful of corporations is taking control of the world’s food supply

The report, titled ‘Food Barons 2022 – Crisis Profiteering, Digitalization and Shifting Power’, offers a snapshot of the world’s “Food Barons” – the biggest players up and down the industrial food and agriculture chain.


Sunday, February 12, 2023

Majority of Italian Parents Appropriately Hesitant on Childhood COVID-19 Vaccination

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH The peer-reviewed medical literature on COVID-19 is under strong bias from the editors and publishers to allow mainly favorable papers into publication on COVID-19 vaccination.