Myself and 3 good friends who I met online have decided to start a podcast. We have all been awake for decades and all met online in a group. This turned out to be an online cult, and like other followers of this “truther”, were taken in by this scammer.
We realised he wasn’t who he said he was and set about uncovering everything we could about him, so we could convince others not to be taken in by this confidence trickster and donate their hard earned money to fund his lifestyle.
This was an amazing journey of growing friendships and also a learning curve into researching. We decided to do a podcast to out the “truther” who was saying we were agents sent to destroy his name paid for by the cabal!!
The first podcast we did was in 2 parts and was an explanation into how and why we started doing what we were doing. (We did manage to help hundreds of people away from the cult which allowed them to follow their own path and not his)
Our new podcast is about leaving him behind and moving forward in out own direction and letting others know what we think about current events.
The podcasts are unplanned and designed to be an eavesdropping into a conversation by a few friends. Have a listen. We are going to do more podcasts and YouTube videos shortly. We’ve even got an interview with a hospital patient during the peak of the supposed 1st wave in January 2021 coming in the next week.
SHOCK: Pediatric Cardiologist Dr. Kirk Milhoan tells Dr. Robert Malone that MRI scans of elite vaccinated athletes show that 50% of them all have myocarditis even though most of then aren’t experiencing the symptoms yet.
Transcript: “A recent study on elite athletes out of the Big 10 showed that when they looked at the cardiac MRI of the elite athletes, around 50% had myocarditis that wasn’t known by symptoms but was seen on cardiac MRI.
This is the statement made by the wife of a serving soldier in the US Army, who is being forced to take the vaccine, even though he has an exemption On medical grounds.
“We are military here and this deeply effects my family. I served in the army for 6 years, and left the service honorably in order to marry and support my husband, a Chaplain in the Army. We have sacrificed 16 years of our lives to my husbands career, and a combined 22 years of service between us, only to get to this horrible and unexpected place. My husband is currently deployed and was given a legitimate medical exemption by a military doctor, which was summarily deleted from his medical record without explanation on Sept 15, when the mandate was rolled out. He immediately appealed but was denied, and was given no room for rebuttal. My husband was told that the only medical exemption given is for near death experience following the first jab, and that he should take the shot at the hospital “near a crash cart just in case”. How’s that for “first do no harm”, not to mention this is still the EUA Pfizer? My husband already has a medical exemption for both the anthrax and flu vaccines due to a severe adverse reaction to small pox vaccine when he deployed to Afghanistan for 15 months. This Pfizer shot would kill him. So my husband applied for a religious exemption right away and has heard nothing. He is a chaplain, so his religion is in direct sync with his profession and also directly opposes this vaccine. (In fact, we oppose all vaccines on religious and medical grounds and do not vaccinate our children.) Even so, he has not been given a religious exemption or a timetable for when to expect one. Further, as of this day, he knows of zero military service personnel who have received a religious exemption in any of the branches, so it looks like they are trying to wait for the time to run out and give them all blanket denials followed by dishonorable discharges- the discharge equivalence of a felon: whereby the service member loses all veteran benefits (health care, GI bill), the right to vote, to get a loan, to own a fire arm or get another job. Since we have six young children, and since my husband is our breadwinner while I teach our kids at home, we have opted to resign his commission before he is given a dishonorable discharge for “failing to obey an order”, in refusing this injection. A resignation is better than a dishonorable discharge! But- this leaves us soon jobless and destitute for the immediate future, when we were only four years away from our retirement and when we planned to buy our first home after moving all around the globe. We have given so much to our country- people really have very little idea how hard this lifestyle is nor how costly in every way. I’m trying to help my deployed husband as much as possible, which is hard, being on the other side of the world, as much of the information he is getting is censored or propaganda. It breaks my heart that he is punished by having to wear a mask everywhere for 24/7, including when he sleeps!, bc he has two roommates. My husband is treated like a social pariah, cannot leave the barracks without special permission, and cannot travel like the rest of the vaccinated are allowed. And yet, THEY are all now getting sick, and my husband is not! (Thanks to vitamins and prophylaxis.) Thank you for reading our story: I’m no longer scared or angry…. I just feel so sad and very stressed. We loved serving our nation and felt it was a privilege, but the magic has gone and we are forced into an impossible position. I have no idea what will happen to us. Our country is losing all the very best of every industry, especially our national treasures found in our service members. Please pray for us.”
Let me see if I understand this properly. Person A feels that they need the vaccine to be protected, so they get vaccinated. However, Person A doesn’t feel protected unless Person B also gets the vaccine. And if Person B refuses to get the vaccine, Person A shames them until they do.
Let’s take this a step further. Person A, who is vaccinated, can still catch and transmit the virus, but is not subjected to going through daily/weekly testing. Person B, who is not vaccinated, and who can catch and transmit the virus, has to go through daily/weekly testing and potential quarantine. Why does Person A not have to go through testing and quarantine if they can still catch and transmit the virus?
And to go even further than that: Person A is vaccinated and, even though they can catch and transmit the virus, can walk into any number of locations that state they will only allow the vaccinated inside. Person B is not vaccinated and, even though they may test negative for the virus, are not allowed inside any of the locations that state they will only allow the vaccinated inside.
Wanna piece this together now? It boils simply down to segregation and discrimination with no real basis for doing so.
Person A is vaccinated.
Person B is not vaccinated.
Both Person A and Person B can catch and transmit the virus.
Person A does not have to get tested, but Person B does.
Person A can go wherever they want, but Person B cannot.
Person A is allowed to live their lives, while Person B cannot.
Person A perpetuates the shaming of Person B by stating that Person B needs to be vaccinated for Person A to be protected.
Anybody disagree with anything I just said? You do? Then go look this up because this is all fact. Nothing I typed above is untrue; you need only read the news to see that this is exactly what is happening.
If your shot works, why do I need one? If your shot doesn’t work, why should I get one?
I have never known any government to put the best interests of its people first, and this COVID-19 pandemic is no exception.
Now this isn’t intended to be a debate over whether COVID-19 is a legitimate health crisis or a manufactured threat. Such crises can—and are—manipulated by governments in order to expand their powers. As such, it is possible for the virus to be both a genuine menace to public health and a menace to freedom.
Yet we can’t afford to overlook the fact that governments the world over, including the U.S. government, have unleashed untold horrors upon the world in the name of global conquest, the acquisition of greater wealth, scientific experimentation, and technological advances, all packaged in the guise of the greater good.
After all, grisly experiments, barbaric behavior and inhumane conditions have become synonymous with the U.S. government, which has meted out untold horrors against humans and animals alike.
For instance, did you know that the U.S. government has been buying hundreds of dogs and cats from “Asian meat markets” as part of a gruesome experiment into food-borne illnesses?
The cannibalistic experiments involve killing cats and dogs purchased from Colombia, Brazil, Vietnam, China and Ethiopia, and then feeding the dead remains to laboratory kittens, bred in government laboratories for the express purpose of being infected with a disease and then killed.
While these particular incidents have been dismissed as “accidents,” you don’t have to dig very deep or go very back in the nation’s history to uncover numerous cases in which the government deliberately conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace—citizens and noncitizens alike—making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins.
At the time, the government reasoned that it was legitimate to experiment on people who did not have full rights in society such as prisoners, mental patients, and poor blacks.
In Alabama, for example, 600 black men with syphilis were allowed to suffer without proper medical treatment in order to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis. In California, older prisoners had testicles from livestock and from recently executed convicts implanted in them to test their virility. In Connecticut, mental patients were injected with hepatitis.
In Maryland, sleeping prisoners had a pandemic flu virus sprayed up their noses. In Georgia, two dozen “volunteering” prison inmates had gonorrhea bacteria pumped directly into their urinary tracts through the penis. In Michigan, male patients at an insane asylum were exposed to the flu after first being injected with an experimental flu vaccine. In Minnesota, 11 public service employee “volunteers” were injected with malaria, then starved for five days.
As the Associated Press reports, “The late 1940s and 1950s saw huge growth in the U.S. pharmaceutical and health care industries, accompanied by a boom in prisoner experiments funded by both the government and corporations. By the 1960s, at least half the states allowed prisoners to be used as medical guinea pigs … because they were cheaper than chimpanzees.”
Moreover, “Some of these studies, mostly from the 1940s to the ’60s, apparently were never covered by news media. Others were reported at the time, but the focus was on the promise of enduring new cures, while glossing over how test subjects were treated.”
Media blackouts, propaganda, spin. Sound familiar?
How many government incursions into our freedoms have been blacked out, buried under “entertainment” news headlines, or spun in such a way as to suggest that anyone voicing a word of caution is paranoid or conspiratorial?
Unfortunately, these incidents are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the atrocities the government has inflicted on an unsuspecting populace in the name of secret experimentation.
For instance, there was the U.S. military’s secret race-based testing of mustard gas on more than 60,000 enlisted men. As NPR reports, “All of the World War II experiments with mustard gas were done in secret and weren’t recorded on the subjects’ official military records. Most do not have proof of what they went through. They received no follow-up health care or monitoring of any kind. And they were sworn to secrecy about the tests under threat of dishonorable discharge and military prison time, leaving some unable to receive adequate medical treatment for their injuries, because they couldn’t tell doctors what happened to them.”
Now one might argue that this is all ancient history and that the government today is different from the government of yesteryear, but has the U.S. government really changed?
Has the government become any more humane, any more respectful of the rights of the citizenry?
Has it become any more transparent or willing to abide by the rule of law? Has it become any more truthful about its activities? Has it become any more cognizant of its appointed role as a guardian of our rights?
Or has the government simply hunkered down and hidden its nefarious acts and dastardly experiments under layers of secrecy, legalism and obfuscations? Has it not become wilier, more slippery, more difficult to pin down?
Having mastered the Orwellian art of Doublespeak and followed the Huxleyan blueprint for distraction and diversion, are we not dealing with a government that is simply craftier and more conniving that it used to be?
In Guatemala, prisoners and patients at a mental hospital were infected with syphilis, “apparently to test whether penicillin could prevent some sexually transmitted disease.” In Uganda, U.S.-funded doctors “failed to give the AIDS drug AZT to all the HIV-infected pregnant women in a study… even though it would have protected their newborns.” Meanwhile, in Nigeria, children with meningitis were used to test an antibiotic named Trovan. Eleven children died and many others were left disabled.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The government insisted that the gases released into the subways by the DHS were nontoxic and did not pose a health risk. It’s in our best interests, they said, to understand how quickly a chemical or biological terrorist attack might spread. And look how cool the technology is—said the government cheerleaders—that scientists can use something called DNATrax to track the movement of microscopic substances in air and food. (Imagine the kinds of surveillance that could be carried out by the government using trackable airborne microscopic substances you breathe in or ingest.)
In 1953, government operatives staged “mock” anthrax attacks on St. Louis, Minneapolis, and Winnipeg using generators placed on top of cars. Local governments were reportedly told that “‘invisible smokescreen[s]’ were being deployed to mask the city on enemy radar.” Later experiments covered territory as wide-ranging as Ohio to Texas and Michigan to Kansas.
And this is the same government that has taken every bit of technology sold to us as being in our best interests—GPS devices, surveillance, nonlethal weapons, etc.—and used it against us, to track, control and trap us.
So, no, I don’t think the government’s ethics have changed much over the years. It’s just taken its nefarious programs undercover.
The question remains: why is the government doing this? The answer is always the same: money, power and total domination.
It’s the same answer no matter which totalitarian regime is in power.
The Nazi’s unethical experiments ran the gamut from freezing experiments using prisoners to find an effective treatment for hypothermia, tests to determine the maximum altitude for parachuting out of a plane, injecting prisoners with malaria, typhus, tuberculosis, typhoid fever, yellow fever, and infectious hepatitis, exposing prisoners to phosgene and mustard gas, and mass sterilization experiments.
The horrors being meted out against the American people can be traced back, in a direct line, to the horrors meted out in Nazi laboratories. In fact, following the second World War, the U.S. government recruited many of Hitler’s employees, adopted his protocols, embraced his mindset about law and order and experimentation, and implemented his tactics in incremental steps.
Sounds far-fetched, you say? Read on. It’s all documented.
As historian Robert Gellately recounts, the Nazi police state was initially so admired for its efficiency and order by the world powers of the day that J. Edgar Hoover, then-head of the FBI, actually sent one of his right-hand men, Edmund Patrick Coffey, to Berlin in January 1938 at the invitation of Germany’s secret police, the Gestapo.
The FBI was so impressed with the Nazi regime that, according to the New York Times, in the decades after World War II, the FBI, along with other government agencies, aggressively recruited at least a thousand Nazis, including some of Hitler’s highest henchmen.
It’s certainly easy to denounce the full-frontal horrors carried out by the scientific and medical community within a despotic regime such as Nazi Germany, but what do you do when it’s your own government that claims to be a champion of human rights all the while allowing its agents to engage in the foulest, bases and most despicable acts of torture, abuse and experimentation?
When all is said and done, this is not a government that has our best interests at heart.
This is not a government that values us.
Perhaps the answer lies in The Third Man, Carol Reed’s influential 1949 film starring Joseph Cotten and Orson Welles. In the film, set in a post-WW II Vienna, rogue war profiteer Harry Lime has come to view human carnage with a callous indifference, unconcerned that the diluted penicillin he’s been trafficking underground has resulted in the tortured deaths of young children.
Challenged by his old friend Holly Martins to consider the consequences of his actions, Lime responds, “In these days, old man, nobody thinks in terms of human beings. Governments don’t, so why should we?”
“Have you ever seen any of your victims?” asks Martins.
“Victims?” responds Limes, as he looks down from the top of a Ferris wheel onto a populace reduced to mere dots on the ground. “Look down there. Tell me. Would you really feel any pity if one of those dots stopped moving forever? If I offered you twenty thousand pounds for every dot that stopped, would you really, old man, tell me to keep my money, or would you calculate how many dots you could afford to spare? Free of income tax, old man. Free of income tax — the only way you can save money nowadays.”
To the powers-that-be, the rest of us are insignificant specks, faceless dots on the ground.
To the architects of the American police state, we are not worthy or vested with inherent rights. This is how the government can justify treating us like economic units to be bought and sold and traded, or caged rats to be experimented upon and discarded when we’ve outgrown our usefulness.
To those who call the shots in the halls of government, “we the people” are merely the means to an end.
“We the people”—who think, who reason, who take a stand, who resist, who demand to be treated with dignity and care, who believe in freedom and justice for all—have become obsolete, undervalued citizens of a totalitarian state that, in the words of Rod Serling, “has patterned itself after every dictator who has ever planted the ripping imprint of a boot on the pages of history since the beginning of time. It has refinements, technological advances, and a more sophisticated approach to the destruction of human freedom.”
In this sense, we are all Romney Wordsworth, the condemned man in Serling’s Twilight Zone episode “The Obsolete Man.”
Four German holidaymakers who were illegally quarantined in Portugal after one was judged to be positive for Covid-19 have won their case, in a verdict that condemns the widely-used PCR test as being up to 97-percent unreliable.
Earlier this month, Portuguese judges upheld a decision from a lower court that found the forced quarantine of four holidaymakers to be unlawful. The case centred on the reliability (or lack thereof) of Covid-19 PCR tests.
The verdict, delivered on November 11, followed an appeal against a writ of habeas corpus filed by four Germans against the Azores Regional Health Authority. This body had been appealing a ruling from a lower court which had found in favour of the tourists, who claimed that they were illegally confined to a hotel without their consent. The tourists were ordered to stay in the hotel over the summer after one of them tested positive for coronavirus in a PCR test – the other three were labelled close contacts and therefore made to quarantine as well.
Unreliable, with a strong chance of false positives
The deliberation of the Lisbon Appeal Court is comprehensive and fascinating. It ruled that the Azores Regional Health Authority had violated both Portuguese and international law by confining the Germans to the hotel. The judges also said that only a doctor can “diagnose” someone with a disease, and were critical of the fact that they were apparently never assessed by one.
They were also scathing about the reliability of the PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, the most commonly used check for Covid.
The conclusion of their 34-page ruling included the following: “In view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”
In the eyes of this court, then, a positive test does not correspond to a Covid case. The two most important reasons for this, said the judges, are that, “the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used’’ and that “the test’s reliability depends on the viral load present.’’ In other words, there are simply too many unknowns surrounding PCR testing.
Tested positive? There could be as little as a 3% chance it’s correct
This is not the first challenge to the credibility of PCR tests. Many people will be aware that their results have a lot to do with the number of amplifications that are performed, or the ‘cycle threshold.’ This number in most American and European labs is 35–40 cycles, but experts have claimed that even 35 cycles is far too many, and that a more reasonable protocol would call for 25–30 cycles. (Each cycle exponentially increases the amount of viral DNA in the sample).
Earlier this year, data from three US states – New York, Nevada and Massachusetts – showed that when the amount of the virus found in a person was taken into account, up to 90 percent of people who tested positive could actually have been negative, as they may have been carrying only tiny amounts of the virus.
The Portuguese judges cited a study conducted by “some of the leading European and world specialists,” which was published by Oxford Academic at the end of September. It showed that if someone tested positive for Covid at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher, the chances of that person actually being infected is less than three percent, and that “the probability of… receiving a false positive is 97% or higher.”
While the judges in this case admitted that the cycle threshold used in Portuguese labs was unknown, they took this as further proof that the detention of the tourists was unlawful. The implication was that the results could not be trusted. Because of this uncertainty, they stated that there was “no way this court would ever be able to determine” whether the tourist who tested positive was indeed a carrier of the virus, or whether the others had been exposed to it.
Sshhh – don’t tell anyone
It is a sad indictment of our mainstream media that such a landmark ruling, of such obvious and pressing international importance, has been roundly ignored. If one were making (flimsy) excuses for them, one could say that the case escaped the notice of most science editors because it has been published in Portuguese. But there is a full English translation of the appeal, and alternative media managed to pick it up.
And it isn’t as if Portugal is some remote, mysterious nation where news is unreliable or whose judges are suspect – this is a western EU country with a large population and a similar legal system to many other parts of Europe. And it is not the only country whose institutions are clashing with received wisdom on Covid. Finland’s national health authority has disputed the WHO’s recommendation to test as many people as possible for coronavirus, saying it would be a waste of taxpayer’s money, while poorer South East Asian countries are holding off on ordering vaccines, citing an improper use of finite resources.
Testing, especially PCR testing, is the basis for the entire house of cards of Covid restrictions that are wreaking havoc worldwide. From testing comes case numbers. From case numbers come the ‘R number,’ the rate at which a carrier infects others. From the ‘dreaded’ R number comes the lockdowns and the restrictions, such as England’s new and baffling tiered restrictions that come into force next week.
The daily barrage of statistics is familiar to us all by this point, but as time goes on the evidence that something may be deeply amiss with the whole foundation of our reaction to this pandemic – the testing regime – continues to mount.
This weeks Truth Honor & Integrity show covers the civil unrest in Spain & Catalonia and the fact that Main Stream Media turning a blind eye and reporting that the Catalonians are rioting which is untrue. The Harvey Weinstein issue unfolds with the covering of more elite reports of pedophilia, sexual abuse and rape.
The Crips gang in Los Angeles have been employed by the Bush organisation to enforce their agenda but a warning was sent out and this is thought not to be an issue anymore.
Thomas reports that Hilary Clinton has fled the USA to the UK due to the fact that there is a bounty on her head. She is thought to be under the protection of the Knights of Malta.
Also covered is the Direct Energy Devices which caused the fires in California.