Monthly Archives: June 2021


How Deadly is COVID? Real Science vs Media Hype — The Most Revolutionary Act

By Chris Lonsdale | 21st Century Wire | June 19, 2021 I tend to be very curious about the world. I always have been. It’s probably what brought me to Asia in the first place. I get especially curious when things don’t make sense, in which case I find myself drawn into exploring what might […]

How Deadly is COVID? Real Science vs Media Hype — The Most Revolutionary Act


Patrick Byrne just posted something!
Patrick Byrne
Jun 21, 2021 at 10:44pm🚨 UPDATE: Now you can buy tickets for “The Deep Rig” Movie Premiere Event! June 26, 2021 4pm to 9pm (MST) Dream City Church 13613 N. Cave Creek Rd Phoenix, Arizona Tickets: Watch Livestream Online: Attend Live Event in Phoenix, AZ: Important: The live event in Phoenix has a cap of 3,200 attendees, and the livestream will cap at 30,000 viewers. So buy your ticket now to avoid disappointment. If you miss out on the livestream, a playback of the event will be available for sale at https://TheDeepRig.Movie shortly after the event. There will also be local playback events around the country, hosted by Patriot groups from June 26 until August 01, 2021. The unprecedented censorship this film is experiencing means we are relying on The People to show the film in their local theaters, meeting rooms, and places of worship. To host a viewing of the livestream, register your interest at https://TheDeepRig.Movie . Together, We Win! WATCH MOVIE CLIPS: “The Deep Rig” Movie is based on actual events and the Best Selling Book, “The Deep Rig: How Election Fraud Cost Donald J. Trump the White House, By a Man Who did not Vote for Him” by Patrick M. Byrne. Produced by: Steve Lucescu Directed by: Roger R. Richards Starring: General Michael Flynn and Patrick M. Byrne Featuring: Joseph Flynn, Jesse Binnall, Jovan Hutton Pulitzer, Bobby Piton, Col. Phil Waldron, Matthew S. DePerno, and Joe Oltmann Patrick Byrne is donating 100% of his profits to The America Project was founded to advance freedom and preserve the American way of life.
View Post

Why Has “Ivermectin” Become a Dirty Word?

At the worst moment, Internet censorship has driven scientific debate itself underground


On December 8, 2020, when most of America was consumed with what The Guardian called Donald Trump’s “desperate, mendacious, frenzied and sometimes farcical” attempt to remain president, the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on the “Medical Response to Covid-19.” One of the witnesses, a pulmonologist named Dr. Pierre Kory, insisted he had great news.
“We have a solution to this crisis,” he said unequivocally. “There is a drug that is proving to have a miraculous impact.”
Kory was referring to an FDA-approved medicine called ivermectin. A genuine wonder drug in other realms, ivermectin has all but eliminated parasitic diseases like river blindness and elephantiasis, helping discoverer Satoshi Ōmura win the Nobel Prize in 2015. As far as its uses in the pandemic went, however, research was still scant. Could it really be a magic Covid-19 bullet?
Kory had been trying to make such a case, but complained to the Senate that public efforts had been stifled, because “every time we mention ivermectin, we get put in Facebook jail.” A Catch-22 seemed to be ensnaring science. With the world desperate for news about an unprecedented disaster, Silicon Valley had essentially decided to disallow discussion of a potential solution — disallow calls for more research and more study — because not enough research and study had been done. Once, people weren’t allowed to take drugs before they got FDA approval. Now, they can’t talk about them.
“I want to try to be respectful because I think the intention is correct,” Kory told the committee. “They want to cut down on misinformation, and many doctors are claiming X, Y, and Z work in this disease. The challenge is, you’re also silencing those of us who are expert, reasoned, researched, and extremely knowledgeable.”
Eight million people watched Kory say that on the C-SPAN video of the hearing posted to YouTube, but YouTube, in what appears to be a first, removed video of the hearing, as even Senate testimony was now deemed too dangerous for public consumption. YouTube later suspended the Wisconsin Senator who’d invited Kory to the hearing, and when Kory went on podcaststo tell his story, YouTube took down thosevideos, too. Kory was like a ghost who floated through the Internet, leaving suspensions and blackened warning screens everywhere he went.
The December, 2020 hearing on ivermectin wasn’t Kory’s first Senatorial rodeo. In May of that same year, he’d appeared before the same committee on a different subject: the use of corticosteroids in treating Covid-19 patients.
Kory belongs to a group called the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), founded by a well-known if controversial figure, Dr. Paul Marik. The author of 4 books and 400 peer-reviewed articles, Marik is a colossal figure in Critical Care — the word “giant” came up in more than one interview for this story — yet one with a definite reputation for bucking medical convention. At the outset of the pandemic, Marik and a group of like-minded colleagues around the world got in contact to form the FLCCC, trading stories about what doctors were seeing on the ground with Covid-19 cases everywhere from Italy to New York to South America.
“It was like a command center,” Kory recalls. “And we were reading papers like you wouldn’t believe.”
One of the first questions the group tackled was the proper treatment plan for hospitalized Covid-19 patients. Marik was famous for disagreeing with conventional wisdom about treatment protocols. He waged a long campaign to argue that the widely accepted practice of “fluid-loading” or “large-volume fluid resuscitation”— pumping patients in septic shock full of fluids — is unnecessary and may even be harmful or “worsen shock.” He was far from the only critical care doctor to have such thoughts, with some even comparing the groupthink around “fluid-bolusing” to the medieval certainty about bloodletting.
Such debates are normal in medicine, where authorities may come down on one side or the other of debates for a time, but consensus isn’t Talmudic law. Doctors argue in good faith about best practices, just like journalists argue about “objectivity” or legislators argue about everything from the filibuster or public campaign financing.
With Covid-19, early consensus favored what Kory calls a “supportive care only” strategy: water, Tylenol for fever, ventilation if necessary — anything, he says, but corticosteroids. “That was the one thing they agreed on, no steroids,” he says. It’s true that the WHO initially recommended against corticosteroid therapy for coronaviruses for a variety of reasons. However, there were many doctors who were anxious to bring more weapons to the fight against Covid-19.
Marik and the FLCCC were in the latter camp. They developed a protocol for Covid-19 patients called Math+ that included vitamin C, the blood thinner heparin, and the steroid methylprednisone. A few doctors in the U.S. tried out Math+ early on, but official bodies remained against it, and some doctors found, and still find, the claims about the vitamin C treatments in particular either dubious or harmless but unlikely to be effective (one I emailed about Math+ sent back an “eye-roll” emoji). Incidentally: while the FLCCC doctors have good reputations, their ideas have also met with plenty of pushback. MedPage described Kory and Marik as having a “knack for making headlines,” in a piece full of doctor quotes exuding clearly mixed enthusiasm for their “maverick” colleagues.
That didn’t make them wrong about steroids, however. Kory in his May 6 testimony reported that FLCCC doctors, in analyzing the use of steroids in treating other diseases like SARS, found that “contrary to the WHO recommendations… corticosteroids were life-saving in those prior pandemics when given to anyone beyond mild illness.”
Within months, researchers at Oxford released the results of a large-scale, randomized, controlled study called the “RECOVERY trial,” which found that steroids were highly effective for patients with severe and critical Covid-19. By September, the WHO issued a new guidance with a “strong” recommendation for steroid use for such patients.
“We were criticized,” Kory says now. “But it became the standard of care.”
Meanwhile, doctors all over the globe launched studies into a huge range of Covid-19 treatment possibilities, from the protease inhibitors used to treat HIV to the ace inhibitors used to treat high blood pressure to interferons to zinc and vitamin D and dozens of other candidates. Ivermectin was just one the many. It generated a little buzz within the medical community when an April, 2020 study in Antiviral Research found it inhibited SARS CoV-2 from multiplying under a microscope.
Other studies were less flattering, though, with one insisting humans would need to massively overdose in order to get even a theoretical benefit. As of last summer, the official take on ivermectin was unequivocal. The FDA on August 26th of 2020, acting out of concern that people might self-medicate using anti-parasitic drugs intended for their pets, issued a stern ruling.
“The FDA is concerned about the health of consumers who may self-medicate by taking ivermectin products intended for animals,” they wrote. “People should never take animal drugs.” A day later, on August 27th, the National Institutes of Health issued a guideline that “recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial (AIII).”
For most of last year, ivermectin was not on the radar of the FLCCC doctors. One by one, however, studies boosting ivermectin kept coming to their attention. These trials were going on in Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Spain, India, Peru, Paraguay, and other countries, and many claimed dramatic results.
They were small studies, but this was and is by no means a fringe or dismissed topic, with upwards of 220 papers published in just two years. Some were genuinely thought-provoking, like for instance one hypothesizing that the reason African countries have a lower incidence of Covid-19 is because so many Africans are already taking ivermectin. Absolutely none of this was hardcore proof, but there was reason to keep researching.
A consultant to the WHO, Dr. Andrew Hill of the University of Liverpool, presented an analysis of these ivermectin studies that came to a lot of the same conclusions as the FLCCC, in perhaps less excitable tones. Ivermectin was an alluring possibility, Hill said, because a course of treatment in third world countries costs just $1-$2, and though the available studies were nearly all small — between 100 and 500 subjects — there were some very attractive results. Overall, though, there wasn’t enough data to make a WHO recommendation.

Not everyone was impressed. Dr. Zain Chaglia of McMaster University in Ontario wrote a long Twitter thread calling the studies Hill cited “very low grade” evidence. “This is complete echoes of what happened in hydroxychloroquine – where people raced to prescribe it offline, rather than study it in trials,” he said. “There is a higher standard here for all.”
The word got out around the world fast, and in many poorer countries, huge portions of the population began regimes of self-medication, often with the assent of local governments. In May of last year, health care workers passed out 350,000 doses in Bolivia, while a university in Peru announced it would give away 30,000 doses. Some doctors and researchers began to complain that it had become difficult to do studies on the drug, because too many people were already on it. “What we’re having is a populist treatment, instead of an evidence-based treatment,” Patricia Garcia, a former Peruvian health minister who was running an early ivermectin trial, complained to Nature.
Still, the issue with most of the early studies wasn’t that they showed negative results, so much as insufficient or ambiguous data. The overall take was promising, but not definitive. This was in this context that Kory returned to the Senate last December. He said a lot had changed in the 3-4 months since the first NIH-FDA rulings. “Mountains of data have emerged showing the miraculous effectiveness of ivermectin,” he urged. Describing an Argentine study in which no one out of 800 subjects given Ivermectin had fallen ill, he said, “It obliterates transmission of this virus. If you take it, you will not get sick.”
Kory says he regrets using the world “miraculous,” that “the descriptor made me seem uncredible and sensationalizing.” He wonders if “some slight moderation would have been more ‘palatable’ for the censors,” but at the same time isn’t sure anything would have made a difference. Was the language over-the-top? Maybe. Was what Kory said so dangerous that it needed to be removed from the Internet? That’s harder to argue, unless you see such talk as part of a larger pattern of offenses, which seems to be part of the issue with Covid-19 content moderation generally.
One of the challenges of the pandemic period is the degree to which science has become intertwined with politics. Arguments about the efficacy of mask use or ventilators, or the viability of repurposed drugs like hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, or even the pandemic’s origins, were quashed from the jump in the American commercial press, which committed itself to a regime of simplified insta-takes made opposite to Donald Trump’s comments. With a few exceptions, Internet censors generally tracked with this conventional wisdom, which had the effect of moving conspiracy theories and real scientific debates alike far underground.
A consequence is that issues like the ivermectin question have ended up in the same public bucket as debates over foreign misinformation, hate speech, and even incitement. The same Republican Senator YouTube suspended for making statements in support of ivermectin, Ron Johnson, has also been denounced in the press for failing to call the January 6th riots an insurrection, resulting in headlines that blend the two putative offenses.
“You have these ideas about the need to censor hate speech, calls for violence, and falsity,” Kory says, “and they’ve put science on the same shelf.”
As a result, doctors and organizations that may have little to do with politics but have advocated for ivermectin, from Dr. Tess Lawrie’s British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) to California pulmonologist Roger Seheult to many others, have been shut down online with the same unilateral abruptness platforms apply to hate speech or threats. Dr. Sabine Hazan, a gastroenterologist and CEO of a genetic sequencing laboratory called ProGenaBiome in Ventura, California, was blindsided. She got involved with ivermectin when she was pulling out the stops for Covid-19 patients.
“I’m a doctor. My job isn’t to do nothing. If I wanted to do nothing, I’d be selling shampoo,” Hazan says. When patients got really sick, she tried everything, treating off-label with a number of drugs in combination, including ivermectin. Eventually, she ended up taking it upon herself to run clinical trials with repurposed, off-patent drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, fearing that the lack of a profit angle would prevent a major corporate effort in that direction.
“I felt, no one is going to be investigating a cheap solution, so I did it myself,” she says.
Some weeks ago, Hazan got up early on a Sunday to present findings to a group of physicians that included Dr. Kylie Wagstaff, one of the physicians in the first in vitro ivermectin study, a family doctor in Zimbabwe named Jackie Stone, and others. She uploaded the talk on YouTube, and “lo and behold, it got taken down. It’s amazing. These are doctors talking. It’s not anyone selling anything.”
Hazan doesn’t necessarily believe ivermectin is a miracle cure by itself — “I’m not sure just ivermectin is going to do the trick” — but she’s adamant that censorship and interference by both the media and politicians is “ruining science.” Like many of the doctors who’ve been censured for discussing the topic, she believes Internet carriers and politicians alike have a fundamental misunderstanding of how medicine works.
“All science, all medicine, is a hypothesis,” she says. “Until you have a valid, verifiable, reproducible cure, it’s all hypothesis. You need humility about what you don’t know. It’s like Einstein said: if we knew what we were doing, it wouldn’t be called research.”
The suspensions and bans have triggered a dystopian chase game, in which ivermectin backers rush to take their case to media figures before the media figures themselves end up sitting next to them in the same Facebook or YouTube “jail.”
One of the most prominent examples involves Bret Weinstein, whose DarkHorse podcast is one of the faster-growing independent political shows online. In May, for instance, DarkHorse scored 4.9 million views on YouTube and generated over 43,000 new subscribers. This growth is due in significant part to the fact that Weinstein and wife Heather Heying made a conscious effort to provide a forum for discussions about Covid-19 that live outside the narrow realm of allowable debate on commercial media. Because that debate has become so constrained, independents like Weinstein have a virtual monopoly on content about a whole range of effectively banned topics.
On June 1, Weinstein did a show that included an interview with Kory called, “COVID, Ivermectin, and the Crime of the Century.” That was swiftly removed by YouTube, with a notice declaring, “Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our spam, deceptive practices and scams policy.” Another episode, “Why is Ivermectin not being used in other countries?” was removed with a similar warning. Two more videos were either taken down or marked with warnings, and another, with Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, was taken down during the writing of this article after 587,331 views, leaving Weinstein in a precarious position.
He and Heying have two YouTube channels. After four warnings and one official strike on each channel, they’re a couple of poorly received shows away from being out of business. Weinstein is particularly concerned about their more profitable “clips” channel, which seems to have attracted more of YouTube’s attention.
“If they give me a third strike,” says Weinstein, “that would represent more than half of our income.”
YouTube, in a statement, says the distinction in Weinstein’s case has to do with actively advocating for ivermectin’s use. “While we welcome content discussing possible treatments for COVID-19, our policies don’t allow videos that encourage people to use Ivermectin to treat or prevent the virus and as a result we removed videos from Bret Weinstein’s channel,” they told TK. “We apply our policies consistently to all content on YouTube, regardless of speaker or political views.”
YouTube’s policy is elaborately thought out. At least in theory, it doesn’t simply zap anyone who mentions ivermectin. It does, however, require that any discussion in favor of the drug include disclaimers that either refutes those positive claims or outlines official guidelines on the subject. In essence, YouTube is making the FDA’s current position a mandatory element of any public discussion.
Not all the platforms have the same policy. A spokesperson for Twitter says the company refrains from yanking content unless it would be “immediately dangerous to someone reading and taking action based on a Tweet (e.g. ‘drink bleach to cure COVID’).” Twitter’s standard stresses the idea of “immediate” physical harm, not unlike actual speech laws. By contrast, YouTube and Facebook have much broader and tougher rules, and the appeals process is either glacial or nonexistent.
Ivermectin may never be proven effective as a Covid-19 treatment, but its story has already appeared as a powerful metaphor of the Internet’s transformation. Once envisioned as a vast democratizing tool, which would massively raise global knowledge levels by allowing instant cross-global communication between all people, it’s morphed instead into a giant unaccountable bureaucracy for suppressing dialogue, run by people with an authoritarian vision for information flow. Many ivermectin advocates believe discussion of the the drug is being suppressed because of its status as a threat to a billion-dollar vaccine business, but it’s just as likely that its reputation worldwide as a “populist” treatment, a medicine taken by people not waiting for official validation, has made it a target of censors and pundits alike.
“I think what happened is that at the outset of the pandemic, it was decided that all information must go in one direction, from the Gods of Science down,” says Kory. “But that’s not the way it works. Science happens on the ground. That’s where the little discoveries are made. They don’t happen at the top of the mountain.”

SOURCE: Why Has “Ivermectin” Become a Dirty Word? – TK News by Matt Taibbi (



CLICK THE VIDEO LINK HERE: We’re at war. Don’t be a casualty. – Forbidden Knowledge TV


The “novel coronavirus”, SARS-CoV-2 has two components, 1) The Spike Protein, a bioweapon which was originally developed at Fort Detrick. This work was continued by Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and; 2) The Coronavirus, another bioweapon developed in China by the People’s Liberation Army.

Chinese refugee virologist, Dr Yan Li-Meng has claimed for over a year that the backbone of this virus was developed by the Chinese military (PLA) and that it is based on the Zhoushan bat coronavirus, which she has referred to as “ZC45” and “ZXC21”.

The Fauci emails reveal that the NIH, the Pentagon and – now, we learn, Google – financed the merging of these two elements, the spike protein with the virus (aka “Gain of Function”) at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, through Peter Daszak’s NGO, EcoHealth Alliance.


Currently, there’s a public debate as to whether or not the CCP virus was released by accident or on purpose, although most agree that the CCP purposefully allowed the virus to spread. These points are a diversion, because it’s clear that the Globalists, i.e., the UN, World Economic Forum, Big Pharma, big banks, Fortune 1000 Companies and Bill Gates colluded with the CCP in this bioterrorism campaign as a pretext for the Great Reset and for “vaccinating the entire planetary population.”

To blame everything on China is nonsense, albeit politically expedient for those who wish to take down the CCP, like members of the Chinese Whistleblower Movement. Both the CCP and the economic elite stood to gain, longterm from the deliberate collapsing of the West and from the global depopulation agenda. The bankster Cabal and the CCP are collaborators in this mass genocide project.

In this video, Clif High begins by explaining that the Globalists engineered the spike protein in order to conduct mass genocide. He has reversed his previous opinion that Xi Jinping is being scapegoated by the Globalists. He now believes that Xi was in on the mass genocide project, all along. He cites a speech given by Xi in November 2019, which made a huge splash on the Chinese Deep Web, in which Xi said, “At the end of this [unspecified], CHINA, [written all large] will be more prosperous. All Chinese people in China will be more prosperous when the end arrives.”

Clif says, “If that were to be true, China would have to accumulate more stuff from the rest of the world…And within China, the idea is even more disconcerting, because the only way one Chinese can be more prosperous in China is going to be if there’s a lot fewer Chinese to divide up the stuff…and I think it [Xi’s statement] directly related to the virus and what was to come, so I think Xi was part of it. Initially, I thought it was done to screw him.”

He says Chinese scientists attached the spike protein to a prior virus but in 2015, they discovered that this was an inadequate delivery mechanism. “In 2016 – a year later – we hear the head of Fauci’s chief of production [Peter Daszak] bragging in a video that they had attached the spike protein to a coronavirus…They’d tried another virus that had crapped-out on them in 2015 and they had to re-engineer it to the [Zhoushan bat] coronavirus in 2016…

“The coronavirus was used because they were under the impression, after tests done on the Uyghurs in 2015 and 2016 that they could use the coronavirus to good effect, because it appeared to be more than ‘majority-population-effective’.

“They were under the impression that their…COVID-19 would…disable or kill more than the majority of the population, based on the results they had, testing it on the Uyghur population.” But it turns out the Uyghur prisoners were very susceptible because they’re Sun-avoiders [low Vitamin D] and they have poor nutrition.

He says, “Some time between 2016 and 2019, they discovered that CV-19 would not be effective and in 2019, they presented the very first samples or tests of the mRNA vaccine with the spike. And that was presented to Fauci’s crew in 2019. So sometime between 2016 and 2019, that phase of the plot was hatched; that phase of the global depopulation plot that I’m discussing here, now.”

They’d figured out by 2016 that they needed another approach for populations with adequate levels of Vitamin D and that’s when it was decided that it would be done via injection.

“Once you’re inoculated, you become a spike protein-producing, a vaccine-producing machine…If you get enough shots in you, you’ll produce spike proteins and you’ll infect everyone around you…You become the node for the supposed killing approach…

“Whether you get it from the virus or you get it from the shot, the spike protein is what’s causing the problems. We now know from autopsies that the spike protein travels and it gets in all your organs and it concentrates in the testes, the ovaries, the liver, the spleen, the endothelial layer inside the blood vessels, the heart…the brain. It gets throughout your organs but it concentrates in those that are replete, replenished with heavy blood supply; so, your gonads. Your stomach, not so much, because the stomach is only active when you’re digesting stuff. Your brain, yeah, you get a lot of spike protein, because you pump a lot of blood through your brain…

“So now, we’re learning that their chosen delivery method is actually the shot, so the shot, itself is part of the bioterrorism war that’s now being waged…

China is now inoculating with their own vaccine, the Sinovac, which is widely criticized in the Death Cult (Mainstream Media) as “ineffective”. He says, “Maybe what is making the Moderna and Pfizer so deadly, and then, the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson following behind that – and then, Sinovac behind that, maybe that whole progression comes from the mRNA in a mono-polar magnetic bubble by virtue of SPIONS, (Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles). Maybe that’s so effective at moving the spikes around you…


Clif says we are in war of the power elite against the rest of us. “It’s not a nation-state thing, it’s not a race war, like the Commies and the Wokians want. It’s the power elite vs the rest of us. They opened the war, they attacked us, it’s their plan, they’ve duped lots of people. Now, a lot of the people they’ve duped are starting to wake up.”

We’re starting to see doctors and lawyers sue the establishment and this will eventually overwhelm the legal system, because all of the lower level minions who support the power elite took the vaxx. Though they haven’t previously “informed on their own suffering, for fear of ‘looking like a Conservative’…those people are starting to turn on the power elite, they’re starting to wake up and many of them are starting to realize, from the magnetism and all of this, just how damaged they are.”

In this war, we will see mass deaths and injuries, which will affect inheritance and labor pools. Clif reminds us of the Black Death, which killed one third of the population of Europe, which had the effect of knocking-out the feudal system. Likewise, he says, “We’re going to have a different kind of social order emerge as this bioterrorism war goes through humanity at this time, and it’s going to have many of the same kinds of effects as we have seen in death of empire and great plagues.”

He estimates that those rendered sterile will probably outnumber the dead and injured and this overall cohort will favor the Progressives, college-educated and white people. He says, “We may breed out Progressivism, Leftism and Communism, simply because they’re not going to be able to have children and so many of them will die.”


Clif then gets into the actuarial aspect of the genocide. It’s being said that 1/7th of the world population has been vaxxed, which rounds off to 100 million people, worldwide.

“All kinds of inflation issues change…real estate becomes real cheap, because you have 100 million less people looking for it; hundred million less people needing washers, dryers, food, etc. This is gonna happen over these next few years. And they wanted it much larger. It’s only going to be something between 100 million and a billion…

“Let’s look at the effect on deflation. That’s a deflationary event, if a hundred million people are gone. And this affects everything, in terms of the financials. And it transmits money all around; people with money are gonna die, there’s gonna be inheritance being sent to people – those people are going to die…a lot of money will go back to the State, because there won’t be anybody in a inheritance chain to pick it up…it’s gonna be unlike any kind of normal event…

“We’re already seeing this, for instance, in the rumors that are coming out now about British Airlines, where they say 80% of their pilots and flight crews have taken the vaxx. And so, if that’s the case, then they’ve only have the other 20% to rely on, because the 80% is gonna go real quick and it’s gonna go exceptionally quick, if you take these people that are now prone to blood clots and you stick them up, at high altitudes, and you keep ’em there for a long time and you’re gonna kill them off, in essence.

“And so, maybe also, you’ve killed-off all of the airline industry. Like, globally.”


An example of the latter, says Clif is Charlie Ward, promoting this QFS and NESARA/GESARA stuff. He says Ward has admitted to taking underage girls to Jimmy Savile’s Top of the Pops TV show. Clif refers to Ward as a “money launderer” and a “pathological liar” and a “disinfo agent”, which he says is also true of Simon Parkes, saying “Simon Parkes is pumping up QFS like mad, now.”

He says anybody who is visibly pumping out disinformation should be warned that we are coming into a point where, “Actively, it will be seen that the MSM has been in war, on the side of the elite, against the whole population and the individuals within the media will be held personally liable, personally culpable for their actions, in spreading the disinfo.

“Once they’re eliminated, once they’re dealt with, in terms of once the population has gotten their anger out on the Mainstream Media and it doesn’t exist anymore, then other disinfo agents will be the next natural target.”

Clif says that even the States’ vote audits are a distraction from the central fact of the war, which is that we’ve been poisoned – as much as the election theft is a big part of the war.

“So when they start pumping the audit and throwing Biden under the bus – and Harris and all of that – then you know that the next thing that’s going to break out is the reality of the ‘vaxxed and the spiked’, because that will be one of the last things that they’ll use as a distraction, trying to whip us up, totally diverted away from the fact that we’ve been poisoned…Humanity has been poisoned by a very small part of humanity… 

“The celebrities, the power elite and everyone – they’re gone. They’re going to disappear – and it’s not because of some Charlie Ward bullshit saying they’ve been killed. It’s not because of Simon Parkes saying they’re in Gitmo, OK? There’s only so many f***ing cells down there, guys, you’ve already got it populated with like 20,000 people or something.


“None of that is true. It’s because they’re hiding out. The smart ones know that the backlash is coming and that, when this backlash comes, it will be pitchforks, it will be shotguns. It won’t be tar and feathers. It won’t be ‘allowed to live and just simply retire off somewhere’. So Fauci is not going to be simply able to retire. If he were to retire anywhere, could he go shopping? Could he get out of his house? Could he walk down any street, anywhere in the United States and not fear for his life?…

“We’re going to see a destruction of the social order on many levels but it’s not going to be on the levels engineered by the power elites, because, I think to a great extent, timing and circumstance and personalities have interfered, in that the power elite have been hoisted on their own petard by Universe.

“And as we move into July, we will see the panic. It’s already starting to show up…By the time we get into July, you will not be able to look at the Mainstream Media in any way, shape or form, or any other representatives without seeing some signs of panic, whether they’re gritting their teeth to hide it or not, these people are going to be in a constant state of panic…

“Be well. Prepare for any kind of weird-ass reaction from the Powers-That-Be. They may, indeed try and shut off the power grid in certain places. They will certainly try and bring down all of the information sources and keep you in the dark…We may be reduced, for some time to just local radio for getting the news, because the Powers-That-Be are going to start f***ing with the internet but they can’t do it too much, for too long because that is the source of their power (laughs), so they can’t really turn it off!

“We’re at war. Don’t be a casualty.”

Emergency Saturday Broadcast! Dr. Steve Pieczenik, Nick Fuentes Expose January 6th Capitol Riots False Flag! – Banned Must Video


CLICK HERE: Emergency Saturday Broadcast! Dr. Steve Pieczenik, Nick Fuentes Expose January 6th Capitol Riots False Flag! – Banned Must Video | Opinion – Conservative | Before It’s News (

Steve Pieczenik, MD, PhD

Steve Pieczenik, MD, PhD

DR. STEVE R. PIECZENIK, MD, PHD is a critically acclaimed author of psycho-political thrillers and the co-creator of the New York Times best-selling “Tom Clancy’s Op-Center” and “Tom Clancy’s Net Force” book series. He is also one of the world’s most experienced international crisis managers and hostage negotiators. His novels are based on his twenty years experience in resolving international crises for five U.S. administrations.

A former White House doctor, 13 other House Republicans urge Biden to ‘immediately’ take cognitive test — The Most Revolutionary Act

Originally posted on Counter Information: US President Joe Biden A former White House physician has called on US President Joe Biden to undergo a cognitive test as the 78-year-old’s performance over the past months has raised qualms about his mental capabilities. Ronny Jackson, who currently serves as a congressman but used to work as former…

A former White House doctor, 13 other House Republicans urge Biden to ‘immediately’ take cognitive test — The Most Revolutionary Act

Did you ask about Spike Protein?

Unvaxed Still At Risk Of Spike Protein! – Dr. Charlie Ward (

Multiple-Nation Origin for COVID-19 Ends “Wuhan Flu” Controversy and Hypocrisy — The Most Revolutionary Act

Originally posted on Not Something Else: There has been an awful lot of misleading hullaballoo in recent weeks over renewed calls for a search for COVID origins – mostly from Western sources. The drivers behind this, as with many other Western allegations on a variety of matters – in fact almost any accusations emanating from…

Multiple-Nation Origin for COVID-19 Ends “Wuhan Flu” Controversy and Hypocrisy — The Most Revolutionary Act

The Real Digital Plot — Armstrong Economics

The move to end paper money and move toward a national cryptocurrency took a major step recently when the House Financial Services Committee task force expressed support for experiments to create a digital cryptocurrency version of the U.S. dollar. They argued that the United States had to keep pace with China, and in the…

The Real Digital Plot — Armstrong Economics