Month: July 2020

UN Grossly Underestimates Low Income US City Residents

If low income city residents had any doubt, it has all been erased by the persistent neglect of their elected city officials. Any wonder as to how much violence and property destruction they may tolerate may be quelled by a clearer understanding of the motives behind the organizations funding this activity. A big clue lies in a recent communication from the UN.

The UN Security Council actually ordered the Trump administration to remove federal officers from Portland and other cities, claiming that the officers are using lethal force against peaceful protesters. This order comes after the UN had investigated the police shootings over a period of time and only came up with less than ten in the past year, almost all occurring while the suspects were attacking the police. Now the UN threatens the administration with “consequences” if they don’t pull back their federal officers. Make no mistake! The UN absolutely realizes they’re defending the rioters, not the peaceful protesters. They are intentionally taking the example of the mainstream media in creating the impression that the Trump administration is interfering with peaceful protesters for political gain. * I really didn’t see this sort of UN aggression coming this soon in the scheme of things. I thought they would wait until the National Guard and the Customs and Border Protection officers would be overwhelmed with rioters. It is utterly laughable that anyone could expect UN soldiers to come to the rioters recue. It only demonstrates the desperation of the UN for the rioters in Portland to succeed so that they could move on to other major cities across the US in the same vein. They may believe they have the support of enough of the American people. Yes, many of our young adults have been successfully indoctrinated into the globalist socialist agenda. Yet those same people absolutely do not believe that the way to societal change is through animal behavior. Even they would not support the legitimization of this in the US. The UN grossly underestimates the power of the silent majority, those that realize the power behind the vote and the right of the second amendment. Once the UN makes its intentions known to this sleeping giant, it will have demonstrated to the world its total ineptness and futility. They will only embolden this administration and their supporters. Sure, they’re desperate. They have invested billions, if not trillions of dollars into destabilizing the US by making every effort to remove power from the private sector, legally and economically. Now the objective is to remove the functional defense of our second amendment, the sheriffs across the country. This is their real objective with Portland today.

President Trump’s method of serving the state is to allow the state to use its resources first before requesting federal help. So it’s no surprise that yesterday he would welcome the use of state police to help stop the riots in Portland, while phasing out the federal officers. Yet, there should be no doubt that if the state cannot stop it, the feds will be back.

Pulling Out of the UN’s Clutches On the World’s Healthcare

The Trump administration formally withdrew from the WHO due to mishandling of COVID 19. The actual withdrawal is not valid until a year from July 6th as the UN requires one year’s notice in order to pull out.

The announcement in the liberal media is followed by rhetorical comments from the democrats, including Senator Menendez(D) calling the move “chaotic and incoherent”, and California US rep. (D) Eric Swalwell calling it “irresponsible, reckless and utterly incomprehensible”. The liberal media, in classic attack mode, only took statements from the democrats, not a single republican. This media is always ready to use any major decision president Trump makes to make him look dumb and inept. They never apologize after the results prove to be beneficial overall for the entire country. There is the assumption that the WHO has somehow helped us limit the actual damage of the virus, in terms of businesses lost, our death rate, and the extent of serious disease. Why is it not logical that the WHO was initially responsible for misrepresenting the true virility of this virus, claiming that it was not spread from human to human, recommending that travel bans were inappropriate. Why is it not logical that sensationalizing the spread of the virus now is just ridiculous fearmongering given that the death rate and rate of serious illness is actually decreasing as the virus spreads. Why is it not logical to withdraw form an agency that ignores a cheap and effective drug proven to prevent and limit the severity of the disease. These socialist activists actually believe that it is logical and beneficial to continue to pay a doctor who misses lifesaving opportunities and then is not able to help us in the midst of our disease, severely restricting our lifestyle without reasonable evidence. Once we stop using the total number of “cases” as the indicator for whether or not to increase social restrictions and extend lockdowns, president Trump’s decision to pull out of the WHO, which is an arm of the UN, will prove itself right and this media will grow silent. This is one of the first major attempts of the UN, through the WHO, to severely restrict our lifestyle at the expense of everyone’s livelihood without reasonable evidence of its effectiveness. It just happens to severely impact the private sector of the US, the UN’s biggest obstacle to globalization of healthcare.

Henry Ford Health System of Southeast Michigan enrolled 2,541 patients in an HCQ study where patients were given one of four alternatives: HCQ alone reduced mortality by 49%; HCQ with Azythromycin by 23.9%; and Azythromycin alone by 15%; placebo death rate was 26.4%. The study was published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases. Patients were not randomly assigned as in the other studies but rather assigned according to their risk for cardiac complications. They were also treated early, before they developed severe symptoms, 82% within the first 24 hrs. of admission, 91% within the first 48 hrs. of admission. Critics stated that patients treated with HCQ were given twice the dose of steroid, dexamethasone, as those that did not receive HCQ.

Even as these reporters cover a successful HCQ trial, they try to discredit it because the patients were assigned to receive HCQ according to cardiac risk factors. They tout the two studies, the NIH study of 470 patients and the UK Oxford study of 11,000 patients that concluded that HCQ was not only ineffective but dangerous as the trials were stopped. These medical journalists know full well that for HCQ to work, it must be given early to those with no heart disease. They also know that it should be given with zinc to be maximally effective. There was no mention of the various successful studies which assigned patients according to this knowledge. They also tout their political bias by including that president Trump “touted the drug heavily”. In addition, they described the positive impression given by Peter Navarro, White House trade advisor as a final comment after the description of the two failed drug studies. This kind of reporting to include blatant political bias has become the pattern wherever the topic is HCQ. This is not only an effort to discredit HCQ but also scare people away from requesting HCQ for treatment. This report got out lightning fast in an effort to make sure it was reported in a negative light.

On July 3rd, the WHO modified their mask policy to recommend that only those that are sick and those caring for them should wear a mask.

On the same day, July 3rd, the US Surgeon General urges caution not to interpret a flat death rate while case numbers are increasing in the US as an improvement as the death rate may lag the new cases by at least 2 weeks. He uses this to make the case for wearing masks and social distancing among the young people during their 4th of July outings, so as not to give it to their older relatives. What he fails to mention is that the vast majority of young people may already have COVID 19 and the chances of passing it to their relatives while asymptomatic are extremely low. The soaring death rates of March and early April were mostly due to prison inmates, nursing home patients, and the immuno-compromised living within the community. The flattening death rate is due to the virus still spreading to those sectors of their society balanced off by the declining death rates in other states. The death rates themselves are most likely greatly inflated as the actual number of infected individuals is unknown due to the unknown number of asymptomatic infected people. The apparent decrease in death rates may also be due to the effectively increased testing, not necessarily an increase in infection rate. Why would we not be taking large enough samples of the asymptomatic younger population and getting an idea of the number of those individuals not yet infected. If we find that the young people are not a significant threat to one another, then maybe we could be wiser about what kind of businesses we choose to open up. It would make no sense to keep gyms closed just as these were vitally instrumental in encouraging our hardest working cohort of the younger population to maintain their overall health. It would also make no sense to keep parks and beaches closed for the same reasons. If we were really serious about preventing actual serious disease, we would simply continue to quarantine the symptomatic individuals, treating them early with HCQ and zinc. We would also emphasize the already known ways of bolstering immune health among our young population.

On July 4th, the WHO reversed their mask policy from Friday June 3rd to include everyone who is not able to do social distancing,” such as on pubic transportation, in shops or in other confined or crowded areas”. This was presumably in response to the increasing number of positive cases in certain US states and in other countries which are experiencing the same sort of increase. It went on to say that the the mask should consist of 3 layers made of fabric of different material. Once again, the WHO acting as if it was a fact that increasing numbers are a direct threat to the public, resulting from people not wearing masks. This came curiously after Dr. Fauci’s latest press conference in which he demonized those who would not wear a mask in public.

Dr. Bill Fisher, Houston, Texas ER physician described the number of asymptomatic cases coming into the ER, most likely for other reasons than COVID, and the 20 % that are testing positive. He asserts that they are just as contagious as “everyone else”, obviously including those that are symptomatic. This is the basic illogical inference that Dr. Fauci is single handedly trying to make for the entire world! This is the basis upon which he can, with a lot of authority, mandate that the entire country use lockdowns to slow the spread of infection. This infers that slowing the rate of spread of the virus will minimize the actual rate of death and serious illness. To mandate that we shut down the US economy and try to slow the spread of a virus that is not threatening to 90% of the population demonstrates a huge level of desperation. Again, these assertions have now become completely illogical, and if they actually studied the contagiousness of asymptomatic people who have tested positive and remain asymptomatic for 2 to 3 weeks, these assertions would be absolutely fraudulent. Dr. Fisher does state that the ICU beds are at capacity, but did not disclose how many of the COVID 19 patients are in the ICU due to COVID 19 and how many are testing positive but are not there due to progression of COVID 19.

Toward the end of March, Moody’s Analytics in India warned of a progressive financial decline in the world economy in the months to come as the world central banks lose the ability to bolster up their economies. The initial lockdowns in the US is expected to bring our GDP from 2.6% in January to -4.9 % in Mach to make an annual GDP of -0.5%. As of March 24th, Major firms were expected to cut employment and investment. President Trump has made a huge difference by allowing the Fed to produce stimulus checks which allowed many businesses to rehire those that were furloughed or rehired. Still, the extended lockdowns are absolutely unaffordable on the local level and on the macro level. If we continue to lock down, we will surely experience the economic fallout from the economic fallout in a worse way!. The liberal media and those voices from the unaffected will always produce the most moral outcry for continuing the lockdowns. They cry louder than those business owners now going under and those about to be unemployed. The social impact of a world economy in decline is inevitably going to be an increased infant mortality rate around the world and nationally in the US, a significant increase in diabetes and heart disease amongst the younger population, costing the US much more in social services.

Here then, are some major individuals and groups of notable experts around the world that would come to the president’s defense regarding his decision about pulling out form the WHO and encouraging certain governors to do everything possible to help businesses open up:

Twelve major scientists and researchers all agree that fearmongering and lockdowns were an unprecedented overreaction to COVID 19 based on the data available 3 months ago in March. They all agreed that the lockdowns are more likely to produce more harm than the virus itself due to the social upheaval and the economic decline it produces so quickly.

Thanks to Off-Guardian.org for putting this together.
Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi is a specialist in microbiology. He was a professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz and head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene and one of the most cited research scientists in German history.

What he says:

We are afraid that 1 million infections with the new virus will lead to 30 deaths per day over the next 100 days. But we do not realise that 20, 30, 40 or 100 patients positive for normal coronaviruses are already dying every day.

[The government’s anti-COVID19 measures] are grotesque, absurd and very dangerous […] The life expectancy of millions is being shortened. The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless people. The consequences on medical care are profound. Already services to patients in need are reduced, operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole society.

All these measures are leading to self-destruction and collective suicide based on nothing but a spook.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg is a German physician specialising in Pulmonology, politician and former chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. In 2009 he called for an inquiry into alleged conflicts of interest surrounding the EU response to the Swine Flu pandemic.

What he says:

Politicians are being courted by scientists…scientists who want to be important to get money for their institutions. Scientists who just swim along in the mainstream and want their part of it […] And what is missing right now is a rational way of looking at things.

We should be asking questions like “How did you find out this virus was dangerous?”, “How was it before?”, “Didn’t we have the same thing last year?”, “Is it even something new?”

That’s missing.

Dr Joel Kettner is professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious Diseases.

What he says:

I have never seen anything like this, anything anywhere near like this. I’m not talking about the pandemic, because I’ve seen 30 of them, one every year. It is called influenza. And other respiratory illness viruses, we don’t always know what they are. But I’ve never seen this reaction, and I’m trying to understand why.

[…]

I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related to that.

[…]

In Hubei, in the province of Hubei, where there has been the most cases and deaths by far, the actual number of cases reported is 1 per 1000 people and the actual rate of deaths reported is 1 per 20,000. So maybe that would help to put things into perspective.

Dr John Ioannidis Professor of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy and of Biomedical Data Science, at Stanford University School of Medicine and a Professor of Statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences. He is director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS).

He is also the editor-in-chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. He was chairman at the Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine as well as adjunct professor at Tufts University School of Medicine.

As a physician, scientist and author he has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, data science and clinical research. In addition, he pioneered the field of meta-research. He has shown that much of the published research does not meet good scientific standards of evidence.

What he says:

Patients who have been tested for SARS-CoV-2 are disproportionately those with severe symptoms and bad outcomes. As most health systems have limited testing capacity, selection bias may even worsen in the near future.

The one situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death rate from Covid-19 is much higher.

[…]

Could the Covid-19 case fatality rate be that low? No, some say, pointing to the high rate in elderly people. However, even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses that have been known for decades can have case fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect elderly people in nursing homes.

[…]

If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of total deaths due to “influenza-like illness” would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average.

– “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data”, Stat News, 17th March 2020

Dr Yoram Lass is an Israeli physician, politician and former Director General of the Health Ministry. He also worked as Associate Dean of the Tel Aviv University Medical School and during the 1980s presented the science-based television show Tatzpit.

What he says:

Italy is known for its enormous morbidity in respiratory problems, more than three times any other European country. In the US about 40,000 people die in a regular flu season and so far 40-50 people have died of the coronavirus, most of them in a nursing home in Kirkland, Washington.

[…]

In every country, more people die from regular flu compared with those who die from the coronavirus.

[…]

…there is a very good example that we all forget: the swine flu in 2009. That was a virus that reached the world from Mexico and until today there is no vaccination against it. But what? At that time there was no Facebook or there maybe was but it was still in its infancy. The coronavirus, in contrast, is a virus with public relations.

Whoever thinks that governments end viruses is wrong.

– Interview in Globes, March 22nd 2020

Dr Pietro Vernazza is a Swiss physician specialising Infectious Diseases at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen and Professor of Health Policy.

What he says:

We have reliable figures from Italy and a work by epidemiologists, which has been published in the renowned science journal ‹Science›, which examined the spread in China. This makes it clear that around 85 percent of all infections have occurred without anyone noticing the infection. 90 percent of the deceased patients are verifiably over 70 years old, 50 percent over 80 years.

[…]

In Italy, one in ten people diagnosed die, according to the findings of the Science publication, that is statistically one of every 1,000 people infected. Each individual case is tragic, but often – similar to the flu season – it affects people who are atthe end of their lives.
[…]
If we close the schools, we will prevent the children from quickly becoming immune.
[…]

We should better integrate the scientific facts into the political decisions.
– Interview in St. Galler Tagblatt, 22nd March 2020

Frank Ulrich Montgomery is German radiologist, former President of the German Medical Association and Deputy Chairman of the World Medical Association.

What he says:
I’m not a fan of lockdown. Anyone who imposes something like this must also say when and how to pick it up again. Since we have to assume that the virus will be with us for a long time, I wonder when we will return to normal? You can’t keep schools and daycare centers closed until the end of the year. Because it will take at least that long until we have a vaccine. Italy has imposed a lockdown and has the opposite effect. They quickly reached their capacity limits, but did not slow down the virus spread within the lockdown.

– Interview in General Anzeiger, 18th March 2020
Prof. Hendrik Streeck is a German HIV researcher, epidemiologist and clinical trialist. He is professor of virology, and the director of the Institute of Virology and HIV Research, at Bonn University.

What he says:

The new pathogen is not that dangerous, it is even less dangerous than Sars-1. The special thing is that Sars-CoV-2 replicates in the upper throat area and is therefore much more infectious because the virus jumps from throat to throat, so to speak. But that is also an advantage: Because Sars-1 replicates in the deep lungs, it is not so infectious, but it definitely gets on the lungs, which makes it more dangerous.
[…]

You also have to take into account that the Sars-CoV-2 deaths in Germany were exclusively old people. In Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart failure, and that without Sars-2 lung involvement. Since he was infected, he naturally appears in the Covid 19 statistics. But the question is whether he would not have died anyway, even without Sars-2.

– Interview in Frankfurter Allgemeine, 16th March 2020
Dr Yanis Roussel et. al. – A team of researchers from the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection, Marseille and the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, conducting a peer-reviewed study on Coronavirus mortality for the government of France under the ‘Investments for the Future’ programme.

What they say:

The problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably overestimated, as 2.6 million people die of respiratory infections each year compared with less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.

[…]
This study compared the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 in OECD countries (1.3%) with the mortality rate of common coronaviruses identified in AP-HM patients (0.8%) from 1 January 2013 to 2 March 2020. Chi-squared test was performed, and the P-value was 0.11 (not significant).

[…]

…it should be noted that systematic studies of other coronaviruses (but not yet for SARS-CoV-2) have found that the percentage of asymptomatic carriers is equal to or even higher than the percentage of symptomatic patients. The same data for SARS-CoV-2 may soon be available, which will further reduce the relative risk associated with this specific pathology.

– “SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data”, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, 19th March 2020
Dr. David Katz is an American physician and founding director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center

What he says:

I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near-total meltdown of normal life — schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned — will be long-lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself. The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses never will. The unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of the first order.

– “Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?”, New York Times 20th March 2020

Michael T. Osterholm is regents professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota.
says:

Consider the effect of shutting down offices, schools, transportation systems, restaurants, hotels, stores, theaters, concert halls, sporting events and other venues indefinitely and leaving all of their workers unemployed and on the public dole. The likely result would be not just a depression but a complete economic breakdown, with countless permanently lost jobs, long before a vaccine is ready or natural immunity takes hold.

[…]

[T]he best alternative will probably entail letting those at low risk for serious disease continue to work, keep business and manufacturing operating, and “run” society, while at the same time advising higher-risk individuals to protect themselves through physical distancing and ramping up our health-care capacity as aggressively as possible. With this battle plan, we could gradually build up immunity without destroying the financial structure on which our lives are based.

Racism and Police Brutality

A Well Planned Anarchy Movement

June 26, 2020

It is extremely important at this time to recognize that the anarchist global movement is playing the US like a sweet fiddle! At this time we are well on our way to losing the authority and the power it requires to maintain our basic freedoms as a sovereign nation! Everything is going according to their audacious plan. The well organized and paid mobs are accomplishing the re-writing of American history by rebranding all our historical heroes and protectors of our freedom as evil because they simply existed at a time when slavery was a cultural norm. This then depreciates any heroic or outstanding contributions they made to society. This is happening at a time and within a context where it is unanimously agreed that slavery is immoral toward any race or sector of society. This is just an excuse for transforming the values of individual freedom and national sovereignty that these historic people made possible for us from good to evil. The very institution that protects our individual freedom and national sovereignty is our very system of law and our very system of order. Indeed president Trump has it absolutely right that we cannot allow this system to be destroyed much less weakened. One of the most compelling editorials that completely nailed this issue was that of Fox News Host Tucker Carlson. It is a complete slam dunk depiction and explanation of the threat of the moment to this country.

Why is this happening now? If you were following the successful confiscations of tons of cocaine and large quantities of fentanyl bound for the US, and the successful arrests of MS gang leaders in NYC and other big cities in the US, the expectation of an increase in gang violence and robbery would be logically predictable. This war against drugs that was fought by fearless coast guard and law enforcement officers actually made such a huge dent in the illict drug cash flow that there was a noticeable increase in gang violence, including a rise in children being shot. The pandemic made it a lot harder for them to operate while their usual meeting places were shut down. This made it a lot easier for radical globalist organizations to recruit people to organize and riot upon a moment’s notice.

This level of rioting is too well timed and carried out to be spontaneous. They all appear at the right time in the right place and in sufficient numbers to achieve their disruptive and destructive goals, just enough to sensationalize and entice the rest of the black population to adopt a strong emotional ownership of their demands for abolishing the police. They all then transition from rioting to claiming their autonomous zones way too smoothly for an unorganized mob, carrying the same script with the common public claim that the police cannot protect them. They all behave as if they are no longer bound to our system of justice with some sort of false sense of security, most likely believing that they can’t be prosecuted and committed to jail sentences. They have probably also been told that there is plenty of money around to keep them from having to pay fines or go to jail. It has already been well calculated that our judicial system as it stands today does not have the conviction to sentence them to any significant jail time.

Why abolish the police? This is the ultimate million dollar question! The rioters, being used, have a completely different motivation for abolishing the police. They don’t want police interference in their gang warfare. They don’t want to be taken off the streets for drug trafficking. They don’t want the police to interfere with their crimes against their own. The real and most threatening motive is that of the global organizers who want to abolish the armed defenders of our basic constitutional freedoms of individual rights and national sovereignty. They want to take away our freedom to defend ourselves against the overbearing and tyrannical global government they have planned for us. It is the elected sheriffs that take the responsibility of protecting the people of their jurisdiction. They appreciate the legal ownership of guns intended to help protect gun owner’s households. On the same note, most sheriffs understand the significance of our right to deter an overbearing government. Given such a threat, they have the authority to deputize legal gun owners. One must remember that Obama tried to get the sheriffs to volunteer to cooperate in taking guns away from legal private gun owners on the pretense of gun control. At that time there just happened to be an incident almost every month in a different city and state, followed by the need to investigate every police department involved, with the purpose of establishing a federal partnership with these police departments. Most conservative thinkers in the US have thought that this threat may well be real in the future and never considered that there are desperate global organizations collaborating to unarm us and overtake our freedoms and our national sovereignty. All our values are completely intolerable to these organizations.

With cases of the offending officers ongoing, this level of violence will continue. If the ultimate sentences don’t satisfy the mob, they will definitely try and escalate their level of violence. The global organizations are ready to collaborate and already have a plan regardless of the outcome of these trials. They will continue to produce national theatre that is intended to energize as much of the black and other minority groups to support their activities.

It is also designed to bring the radical left to political power. That is the reason that there is a deafening silence on the part of Biden and the radical left former presidential candidates about these violent events. As far as they’re concerned it is all going according to plan and there’s nothing to deliberate in public. Their polling numbers are proving them correct as there is currently a significant rise in support of Biden and a significant drop in support of the president. The moderate democrats are also quiet because they believe they have no alternative. Actually, they are correct. The only real alternative would be to call out the real motivations of those that are organizing and funding this chaos. That would be political suicide as the alternative to this chaos is to agree with the republican party plan of strengthening our law enforcement and giving the black community more opportunity and incentive to lift themselves out of educational and economic poverty, funding better education and small business growth.

June 19th, 2020

Interestingly enough, there appeared a blip in the news about the ultimate goal of the entire movement. THE UN HELD A TOP LEVEL MEETING TO HOLD THE USA COMPLICIT IN HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. The UN Human Rights Council made that declaration. All these events were orchestrated to result in just this end.

June 18th, 2020

How is it that a father that is looking forward to his daughter’s eighth birthday winds up so intoxicated that he cannot be vacated from a Wendy’s drive thru by 10:30 PM ? Was this a predictable behavior? Has he had prior DUIs? What was his behavior in the days and hours prior to this? How is it that he was so intoxicated that he could not stay awake for the Wendy’s employee but was able to carry on a peaceful conversation with Rolfe for over half an hour? Why is this not seen as a concerted effort to de-escalate the situation? Why then, upon being handcuffed does his behavior abruptly deteriorate as he fights with the police, knocking Brosnan to the ground forceful enough to cause a concussion and then take his taser and then run away? Why didn’t he make an attempt to go for the gun? Why didn’t he attempt to tase Rolfe while he was within arms reach? Upon this kind of behavior, he labeled himself dangerous and desperate, begging to be shot in the back. Is this a naturally predictable occurrence that has been playing out across the country until recently? On the other hand, if he had a criminal history and was let out of prison for COVID 19, was this a deliberate suicide by police? Why were cars set on fire in front of Wendy’s if not to prevent the crowd from getting too close to witness the arson that was already planned? Was there evidence of this setup inside Wendy’s? How was it that it burned evenly to the ground without the fire department being able to put it out? Just in time, the NAACP “calls for” a march on Atlanta turning out thousands just in time to demonstrate public opinion against the officers while the DA was deliberating the actual charges to be made the next day.

Now that the charges have been made and announced to the public, what if the DA cannot secure a full conviction of felony murder against Rolfe? What if the charges are reduced or dropped against Brosnan for his willingness to cooperate fully with the investigation? It is almost implied that there will be a progression of violence if these convictions are not secured. With the visible public pressure brought to bear, I doubt very much that BLM and Antifa will go home peacefully if these officers are not convicted fully.

June 15, 2020

I could have predicted that the next event was going to happen in one of the most liberal cities on the east coast not yet affected by the movement for the sake of emphasizing the claim that it’s not just some police departments but the entire country’s police departments that are systemically affected. It would not have been too hard to predict Atlanta as the next city to be affected as its police chief and its mayor are both female and the mayor is black. One would have to beg the question as Fox News journalist Shannon Bream has as to how is it that the police culture in these departments are so racist if their top leadership belongs to the target race? It may not be so unpredictable that the unnamed medical examiner proclaimed the death to be a homicide as the autopsy showed two gunshot wounds to the back. He or she completely disregarded the context of the shooting. Fox News reports that the officer shot Brooks after he turned and pointed the taser at him. The video shows Brooks running away from the officer and discharging the taser as he pointed it backwards while running forward, his back still facing the policeman. Tasers have a maximum range of 15 ft. Brooks may well have been within that effective range or close to it. What would have been the ramifications if the policeman allowed Mr. Brooks to get away with the taser? How was Mr. Brooks going to be disarmed if he was brazen enough to attempt to shoot the policeman with the taser and then have the opportunity to take his gun? We can fairly easily predict that there will continue to be protesting and rioting until the unknown leader of the rioters is only satisfied with a murder charge which may be decided Wednesday. I can only believe that there will be every effort to turn Atlanta into “CHOP 2” as the initial local leadership responses are eerily similar. As more cities are affected, the plan is to eventually overwhelm state and federal law enforcement such as the national guard.

At first glance, it would be hard to see how this horrific scene could be a set up. On the other hand, it is equally hard to believe that this whole event was sheer coincidence? How is it that prior to any investigation, the Atlanta chief of police immediately resigns after a fully accomplished career within that same department and the mayor then takes the role of firing the police officer involved? How is it that the very location of the scene is totally torched, protesters blocking its access from the fire department. There seems to be a familiar playbook at hand here. Why did he resist arrest so violently if he was just being arrested for DUI? It turns out that he actually had a criminal record involving and was let out of jail due to COVID 19. Why is this being buried by the media? If events unfold according to plan we can expect the Atlanta police to be demoralized and discouraged from protecting the city. Upon the decision on the charges on Wednesday, we can expect anarchists to attempt to capture the Fulton County precinct and claim a 5-10 block area, encouraged and enabled by members of the city council. If there is a powerful well resourced network organizing these events and they have infiltrated our federal and state agencies, we could not expect to see exactly how these events have been staged, but we will know by the perfection of their timing, location, and impact. It could very well be that the next event has already been prepared and will be revealed to you through Fox News and CNN.

President Trump has tweeted about the police encounter with the elderly activist in Buffalo. He is making people aware that this activist may well have been part of a set up to make the policemen look unreasonably brutal for shoving this man so hard that he could suffer brain injury. President Trump knows full well that these organizations have the power to orchestrate scenarios that may very well deceive the public. The activist’s real identity may not have yet been discovered or revealed as there is still an ongoing investigation while the protester is still in the hospital. Apparently, President Trump was tuned in to One America News Network, which described the protester, Martin Gugino as an Antifa provocateur who was attempting to scan police communications and produce a blackout.

June 14th, 2020

It couldn’t have happened in a more prefect way, in a more perfect place, at a more perfect time! If you want your audience to ramp up their emotions about a particular issue and you want to gain the support of the confused and unaware sector of the population, the global playbook is to recreate the same drama in different parts of the country. What better persuasive drama than a white police officer shooting a black man in the back? What better location than the capital of the civil rights movement? And what better time than just after the successful establishment of ‘Chaz’? You couldn’t have scripted a better movie for the purpose of compelling support for the abolishment of the country’s police departments. And then for the entire country to rush to judgment against the police while the police chief resigns and the mayor condemning the shooting and firing the police officer, encouraging the establishment of guilt until proven innocent. What a totally effective way to demoralize the police and discourage them from doing their job. Major Travis Yates from the Tulsa, Oklahoma PD wrote an essay describing how many police are wanting to quit, as they find no support from their local government. Again, more than one officer was involved to demonstrate that this was not just one bad apple. It would be very interesting to know exactly how this scene was set up and the real players involved.

With a suspect audacious enough to fight the police officer and steal his taser, how much force should be used to prevent the suspect from doing more harm? How much more harm could this suspect have done if he was able to actually use the taser on the policeman and then grab his gun? DA Paul Howard told CNN that “he did not seem to present a threat to anyone”. With the subsequent rioting and the fire threatening two neighboring gas stations, the police unable to clear the area to allow the fire trucks to put the fire out before it engulfs a gas station, it appears that the looters are on their way to destroying as much of the area as possible. With the police chief resigned and the mayor of Atlanta signaling sympathy with rioters, they may very well be on their way to” CHAZ 2″.

June 10th, 2020

So, right according to plan the Seattle police department has been completely overrun, and today they have stormed Seattle’s city hall to demand the resignation of the mayor. How have they been able to organize to this extent in such little time? We have enemies around the world that would have liked to accomplish as much against the US. There are specific players with lots of financial resources and political capital that are directing and enabling this global order’s plan is to disarm those that stand in the way of their takeover of the US. To accomplish this in the US you have to disband the frontline defense of our second amendment, the sheriffs of the US. The sheriffs have the power to deputize large numbers of people under our constitution and pose a formidable obstacle to disarming legal citizens who stand against a radical takeover of the country. We are the only country in the world whose constitution guarantees the right of its citizens to bear arms for the specific purpose of deterring a rogue militia that is determined to take our freedoms away. In any other country, once you gain the support of the military, you have the physical ability to take over the country, as has been occurring around the world. At some point, our young people have to realize that there is a desperate movement to convince them to give up their own freedoms and control over their future. We are now in a race against time to defend our freedoms and our sovereignty. Individual financial and religious freedom is the only path to economic prosperity in an economic world determined by the free market. Our young people have to understand the power of the tsunami they are about to unleash if they don’t stand up for their own freedom by opposing this movement and voting accordingly. What are the young people of Seattle going to do? What side are they going to take when they finally realize the endpoint of the takeover of their city?

May 25th. 2020

No singular event which produces such global upheaval occurs in its own vacuum. It is absolutely impossible to understand what actually occurred in Mineapolis without examining the specific social and economic context within which it occurred. This was not a spontaneous, natural confrontation between a black man and a white police officer. This was rather just the right event at just the right time for just the right purpose. After everything that was said and done, there is only one singular conclusion that one is permitted to have: that there was overwhelming police brutality that caused a black man’s death motivated by frank and obvious racism. No doubt the video is a perfect emotional trigger, but it is definitely not the complete story. This conclusion has become the stimulus of world upheaval even before all the essential details of the entire event could be publicly known. An entire global movement was ignited as if all the facts of what actually occurred had been disclosed. This conclusion is what the global activists understand it takes to motivate angry, resentful and desperate people to riot, loot, destroy, and kill. Yet there are so many essential questions that have not yet been answered. Could this be a logical conclusion based on what we have seen and what we know about the event?

The videos do not answer all the pertinent questions. What exactly were the circumstances that prompted such an extreme use of force. Is simply resisting getting into the police car reason for this use of force? If these 2 men knew each other, what was the nature of their relationship? Why does the owner of the bar where they both worked security claim they didn’t know one another? What was the currently expected professional behavior given the circumstances? What was the policeman trying to achieve by this use of force? Was this an unusual use of force given the threat level presented by the suspect? What have been the results of previous uses of this kind of force on previous suspects by this policeman and by other policemen? Why were the other policemen not bothered by Chauvin’s use of extreme force? Why didn’t Chauvin realize that Floyd could have possibly arrested when he turned unresponsive? If Chauvin had intended to risk killing Floyd, why would he do it in public in broad daylight? Why did the EMTs not perform CPR if there was no pulse? Why is there no claim as to what went on in the ambulance after the handcuffs were removed? What is the evidence that it was the race of the man that motivated this force as opposed to his behavior?

Using A Pandemic To Empower The WHO

COVID-19 TREATMENT FRAUD

June 30, 2020

According to the plan for a COVID vaccine, everything is going just fine. Whatever the CDC and NIAID come up with will be given and it will be a mandatory vaccine. The fear factor has been successfully installed by sensationalizing the spread of the virus even if its mortality and morbidity has dramatically decreased.

Dr. Fauci, head of the White House Coronavirus Task Force that produced the initial guidance on the management of the outbreak in the US is now sensationalizing the rising rate of the spread of the virus in states that have relaxed their recommended restrictions. Even though the rate of infection no longer correlates with the death rate or even the rate of serious disease, he is still calling for more stringent measures to contain the virus fully, totally ignoring the economic impact for the whole of the country in his exhortations. This is one huge effort to fraudulently maximize the public demand for his vaccine that is currently in phase 3 trials, which entails the testing of the vaccine on patients for effectiveness. It also maximizes the public demand for his chosen first line drug for COVID 19, Remdesivir. Its actual performance is guaranteed not to diminish the demand for the vaccine. This is the same doctor who collaborated with a researcher Dr. Gallo who claimed to have discovered the AIDS virus. Having designed a test which produces a large incidence of false positives because the test doesn’t actually detect the virus. Managing a budget of millions of taxpayer dollars, and in addition, being funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Clinton Foundation, Dr. Fauci gave the pharma company Gilead millions of dollars to produce a severely corrosive drug, AZT for HIV/AIDS prevention to those who merely had risk factors for AIDS. The FDA approved the drug despite it having failed 2 of 4 drug trials. Dr. Fauci, in his 37 years in the NIAID arm of the NIH, he was unable to come up with a vaccine for the AIDS virus. Now, with a great big opportunity to produce another vaccine, he is once again giving Gilead millions of dollars to produce Remdesivir, another risky drug trialed on Ebola, which to date only decreases the duration of COVID illness by an average of 3-4 days. It has not yet even been shown to improve survival of the disease. This, in complete ignorance of the much cheaper, more widely available anti-malarial drug HCQ which is far more effective in deterring the severity of the disease itself. This fits Dr. Fauci’s plan for drumming up desire for a vaccine for COVID. He is actually attempting to coerce the country to shut down its economy just for the purpose of having the general population require the vaccine. In leading the smear for HCQ, Dr. Fauci has fraudulently produced a perceived threat of a virus that now produces fairly mild symptoms, if any at all, in the vast majority of healthy, productive adults.

Meanwhile, in the country that is the main supplier of HCQ, India, the death rate from COVID 19 is the lowest by far , 1 per million, as compared to the average western countries, 50 per million. A whopping 80% of healthcare workers given HCQ as a prophylactic don’t get infected. It also greatly reduces the mortality rate upon being used therapeutically.

Dr. Fauci speaks as if this is a doomsday scenario because the shear number of infections have sharply risen. This is to imply that there will be more deaths and severely ill people than we would have if everyone continued the lockdown and complied with all his recommended restrictions. There is no explanation about why the death rate and hospitalization rate for COVID have continued to decline in those same areas. He actually believes that if he and the democrat governors and mayors and the media continue to focus on the rising infections, he can contain the virus so that there will actually be a public demand for his vaccine, while Remdesivir continues to be sold at $2340 per person. The US government has invested $3 billion on 6 companies to develop a vaccine and 3 companies to manufacture it. The US National Stockpile now has 63 million doses of HCQ that is not allowed to be used as in the successful trials in New York.

Dr. Fauci is committing this fraud in total collaboration with the CDC and the World Health Organization in order to achieve a global healthcare system that will impose its remedies on the entire world all at the same time in an insane effort to spread the cost of healthcare evenly around the world.

June 23, 2020

What a stark difference between the way the two medias depict the current progression of COVID 19!  The liberal media portrays it as a worsening progression due to people being too lax about social distancing and wearing masks.  They insinuate that the overall increases in cases is a threat to the larger community and our economy without claiming any logical basis.  They immediately focus on President Trump’s rally while having stayed completely silent about the risk of spread engendered by the protests. Dr.  Tom Inglesby from Johns Hopkins makes a large distinction between large indoor gatherings vs large outdoor gatherings, implying that the President’s rally was much more risky than the protests. They refute the president’s claim that the coronavirus is fading away, stating that there are increases of cases around the world and concur with the WHO that states that this is a serious matter of concern.  They make a concerted effort to mislead the country about the fact that the president was referring to  the virus causing milder symptoms, especially amongst the younger community, as stated by other health professionals around the world. They accentuate the importance of waiting until there is a vaccine available which they admit will most likely not be until next year.  They also emphasize the importance of contact tracing and quarantining.  They present this without considering the impact on our economy and its consequences. 

The conservative media focuses on the overall death rate of the US dropping by 40% in the last 2 weeks, attributing it to social distancing and adherence to wearing masks.  This media does emphasize the importance of distinguishing both hospitalization rates and death rates.  The waning of the severity of the disease is attributed to possible mutations of the virus and a lower viral load.  They emphasize the importance of cautious re-opening, warning of the resurgence of the virus if not done carefully enough.  The increase in cases amongst the younger population is attributed to the successful protection of the older population and increased testing.  One expert emphasized the need to be vigilant about the hospital bed capacity. 

Interestingly enough, after HCQ being re-instated by the WHO as a legitimate trial drug to be available to symptomatic patients, it has completely vanished from the media.  There is no formal study as to how many people benefited from HCQ with zinc, and how many could have benefited from it.  There is no discussion about how this regimen could be the key to saving our remaining vulnerable population. Frustratingly, what is also being completely disregarded is the hospitalization rate of people under 55 due to COVID 19 specifically.  The importance of the mildness of symptoms among our young people is also under-appreciated.  These two factors should be used to emphasize the importance of facilitating herd immunity among them.  There is one expert that discussed this but in a very confusing  manner.  What is being completely avoided is any discussion about the viral concentration and the fact that it is most likely decreasing significantly amongst everyone overall globally.  Too much focus on that could lead to a public inquiry about how an artificially high concentration of this virus could have caused the unusually high severity and death rate in the first 4-6 weeks, curiously followed by such a significant decrease in overall death and  severity globally.  If it can be shown that the both the severity of the illness and the threat to the larger community is fading, then it threatens the importance of inoculating the larger community.  The liberal media is doing everything to fear-monger everyone to slow or totally avoid the spread of the virus in order to uphold the value of the development of the vaccine!  There is this concerted effort by those directly connected to the CDC to depict a dire need for a vaccine.  How is it that the president has it right again despite the outrageous disinformation campaign led by the CDC and the liberal media?  How is it there is no differentiation between those ICU beds being taken by the prison and nursing home population as opposed to those from the larger community?  These are very important pieces of the logical argument for lifting or prolonging local lockdowns.

June 4, 2020

Wouldn’t you know, the LANCET just retracted their study of the huge multinational trial led by the WHO involving HCQ after it had been investigated for unsupported statistical information, blamed on the hospitals providing the information to a third party medical statistics organization. The WHO had halted the trial based on their study. As a result, the WHO had no recourse but to resume the trial. Had the study not been discovered to be faulty, this huge trial would have been halted with the worldwide conclusion that HCQ is useless and dangerous for treatment of COVID 19.

May 25,2020

President Trump disclosed today that he is taking hydroxychloroquine as a prophylactic to Covid-19 with the approval of his physician, who stated that “After numerous discussions he and I had about regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine, we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks”. Is this a logical action to take for the president of the United States? Well, in review of all the evidence that I have come across in the last 3 months, the answer is a definitive yes!

In as early as mid February 2020, there was evidence that hydroxychloroquine in combination with zinc was making a dramatic difference in South Korea. Then, March 21st, Israel’s pharmaceutical company Teva donated 6 million doses of hydroxychloroquine to the US. that was to be distributed to hospitals.

There is a huge coordinated smear campaign against hydroxychloroquine which is being propagated by the NIH (National Institutes of Health) for the purpose of preserving the value for mass vaccination against COVID-19. If there actually was an effective treatment for COVID-19 or any coronavirus, there would be little purpose in vaccinating the entire population. There may still be value for vaccinating the immunocompromised and the elderly. This would certainly and substantially diminish the profit that pharmaceutical companies have made on Remdesivir or any other antivirals. More impactfully, it would deny government agencies around the world the opportunity to enforce the behavioral compliance to be vaccinated “for the greater good”. Well, hydroxychloroquine is now proving to be that threat to government agencies and big pharmaceutical companies. The proof is definitely now being made.

Basic science research has shown us that HCQ facilitates a greater amount of zinc to enter the cells and prevent the coronavirus from replicating itself inside the cell.

There have been several overwhelmingly successful HCQ trials in the US, in South Korea, France and Belgium. Dr. Vladimir Zalenko, a community physician in Kyrias Joel, NY, a Hassidic Jewish community hard hit with COVID-19, combined all the evidence thus far produced in South Korea and France and treated 405 patients in the high risk category for COVID-19 since beginning of March with nearly 100% effectiveness. He accomplished this by combining HCQ with Azithromycin and Zinc. A study out of NYU Grossman School of Medicine on 900 patients found that as half of the patients were given zinc in addition to HCQ and Azithromycin had a 1.5 times greater chance of recovery to discharge and 44% less likely to die. On April 10th, a French study of 1,061 patients resulted in 91.7% virologic cure while 10 patients were transferred to ICU and 5 patients, from age 74-95, died. There was no evidence of cardiac toxicity. Dr. Grace at Lennox Hill hospital claimed on national media that he is treating over 100 patients with HCQ and that none have died.

Both the media and our federal health agencies are blatantly ignoring these studies to proclaim HCQ ineffective and dangerous. The report done by Elizabeth Cohen, medical correspondent for CNN…has been touting the failures of HCQ and the fact that the Lancet study of May 22nd showed that HCQ was ineffective and dangerous, producing cardiac arrhythmias. She did not mention that it was given to patients with heart disease in a late phase of the COVID infection, not to patients who were just turning symptomatic where it had already been proven to be effective.

So why is there a concerted smear campaign against HCQ on the part of the liberal media and the CDC and NIH? How does a relatively inexpensive drug like HCQ threaten these people? It is not merely Trump Derangement Syndrome. Even if president Trump were not to have promoted HCQ there would still be an all out war against it.

The COVID pandemic is too large an opportunity for the CDC to miss out on for the purpose of retaining ownership and control of its “cure”, not just in the US but globally. It legitimizes behavioral control of large populations while also gaining access and taking part in the distribution of individual’s private health information. Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, it is comprised of people very much sympathetic to the civil rights movement. Today in healthcare, this for them means achieving an equal distribution of healthcare equity. It assumes that the “privileged” sector of society will always be favored by the owners and providers of healthcare. Their organizational structure prioritizes the distribution of healthcare equity as one of their main offices is the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity. The CDC originated from an initial private organization funded by the Rockefeller foundation, dedicated to preventing, yes, malaria in the US, particularly in the south. The CDC is quite versed in occurrence of side effects of hydroxychloroquine at therapeutic doses. It had been on the FDA’s list of safe and effective drugs since the 1960s.. They have dropped it from this list only upon the occurrence of COVID-19. The CDC has since ballooned into a huge multinational organization that has declared control over the the prevention of all communicable diseases, along with gun control. They, along with the federal regulatory agencies of healthcare have systematically overhauled the provision of healthcare so as to be able to monitor, in real time, and control the distribution of treatment and medication down to the minute of professional attention and the mg of each medicine administered anywhere and everywhere in the US and many other countries. For these reasons its size and power is largely supported by the liberal democratic politicians and the largest pharmaceutical industry leaders. The largest pharmaceutical companies compete for CDC led vaccine development contracts and for FDA approval of new drugs. They are among the heaviest lobbyers of the democratic arm of congress.

Just as the CDC could not tolerate the discovery of an effective cure to the coronavirus, neither could the large pharmaceutical companies stand to lose out on an immense source of lobbying capital, and neither could the democratic party stand to lose that large an opportunity for financial support. Therefore, on behalf of the CDC and the NIH, the large pharmaceutical companies, and the democrats in congress, there must not be a legitimate alternative to expensive, less effective drugs, nor a vaccine to manage this pandemic. An already widely distributed cheap medication like HCQ would crash this party way too hard! No, this would be another serious obstacle to the ultimate goal of global control of healthcare equity by an international CDC and other international organizations such as the WHO. So there lies the desperate attempt and mad rush to discredit HCQ by implementing large trials that are designed to make it appear ineffective. All these trials are administering HCQ without its essential primary agent, zinc and aimed at patients who by enlarge have already suffered an irreversible destruction of lung tissue and other organ function. They are administering their own drugs to those who show much more promise of survival. Even as Remdesivir, a much more expensive and less experienced drug has been shown to be minimally effective, it has been declared the more likely frontline treatment for COVID-19. Just in the last few days, three federal agencies started a trial of just 19 patients using a cancer drug approved to treat blood cancers. The trial is aimed at patients who have developed serious symptoms requiring hospitalization. It has already been shown that these patients would more likely benefit from HCQ/zinc/Azythromycin at a fraction of the cost of this new cancer drug. This is a blatant, unprecedented and concerted campaign to depreciate HCQ. All this while the HCQ trials that include zinc are being run by doctors who have no ability to enlist a large patient cohort. Yet in any other setting, their results would prompt a credible and definitive study that would be stopped as soon as it replicated the doctor’s results, upon which HCQ/zinc/Azythromycin would be declared as the frontline treatment for COVID-19 with the exception of progressed heart disease or end stage respiratory and multi-organ failure. This could have saved the lives of thousands of patients by now. It could also be declared as the frontline prophylactic in the setting of future local epidemics.

The vaccine, by the time it became widely available to the public, would be largely outdated. By early next year, the only individuals that would benefit are those that would not yet have been exposed and are susceptible to developing a serious respiratory illness. Granted, the vaccine would be a great value for them at that time. The next generation of elderly such as myself would already have been exposed and therefore not be threatened with a serious illness. This eventuality would seriously hamper the CDC’s aspirations of distributing the vaccine among the larger population. On the other hand, if a significant portion of the larger population remains unexposed, then they remain a threat to the vulnerable sector of society and thus could be obligated to be vaccinated by law. This, I believe, is the ultimate real goal of the CDC and WHO. It is the only condition that would maintain the value of the impending vaccine.

Popular support for the vaccine is also essential. Without sufficient fear of being unprotected from a formidable health threat, it would be too difficult to find enough people willing to take a risk and participate in the safety trials early on as in mid March 2020. The only way for the public to be willing to take such a risk would be in the context of an uncontrolled spread, causing serious illness and death. In early February, the WHO was proclaiming that there was no scientific evidence to support banning international travel. So, many passengers arrived from China before the travel ban was imposed by president Trump, and before there was enough effective screening at our international airports. These were the unnecessary and illogical acts of omission by the CDC and WHO that produced the worldwide need and value for a vaccine.

Now, the priority for these organizations is the prevention of herd immunity. Now that we have flattened the curve and shown that there are enough medical resources to treat the remaining future symptomatic cases of COVID, we are experiencing the political response of persistently imposing nondiscretionary, all encompassing statewide lockdowns along political lines at a huge cost to the future taxpayers of the country, not to mention threatening their future local economies. This, all supported by the CDC with the intention of having an unexposed population to vaccinate. This would also create a recurring population that would be need to be vaccinated on some recurrent basis.