The Long Version

Retired broadcast journalist. Blogging helps scratch the itch. Recovering exRepublican – Sober and still Conservative.

India’s Ivermectin Blackout

with one comment

Part I of a series on the use of Ivermectin to treat COVID-19 in India

Authored by Dr. Justus R. Hope, writer’s pseudonym, graduated summa cum laude from Wabash College where he was named a Lilly Scholar. He attended Baylor College of Medicine where he was awarded the M.D. degree. He completed a residency in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation at The University of California Irvine Medical Center. He is board-certified and has taught at The University of California Davis Medical Center in the departments of Family Practice and Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. He has practiced medicine for over 35 years and maintains a private practice in Northern California.

News of India’s defeat of the Delta variant should be common knowledge. It is just about as obvious as the nose on one’s face. It is so clear when one looks at the graphs that no one can deny it.

Yet, for some reason, we are not allowed to talk about it. Thus, for example, Wikipedia cannot mention the peer-reviewed meta-analyses by Dr. Tess Lawrie or Dr. Pierre Kory published in the American Journal of Therapeutics.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/wikipedia-and-a-pint-of-gin/article_22ffa0d8-dde9-11eb-be75-d7b0b1f2ff67.html

Wikipedia is not allowed to publish the recent meta-analysis on Ivermectin authored by Dr. Andrew Hill. Furthermore, it is not allowed to say anything concerning www.ivmmeta.com showing the 61 studies comprising 23,000 patients which reveal up to a 96% reduction in death [prophylaxis] with Ivermectin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AIvermectin

One can see the bias in Wikipedia by going on the “talk” pages for each subject and reading about the fierce attempts of editors to add these facts and the stone wall refusals by the “senior” editors who have an agenda. And that agenda is not loyalty to your health.

The easy way to read the “talk” page on any Wikipedia subject is to click the top left “talk” button. Anyone can then review the editors’ discussions.

There is a blackout on any conversation about how Ivermectin beat COVID-19 in India. When I discussed the dire straits that India found itself in early this year with 414,000 cases per day, and over 4,000 deaths per day, and how that evaporated within five weeks of the addition of Ivermectin, I am often asked, “But why is there no mention of that in the news?”

Yes, exactly. Ask yourself why India’s success against the Delta variant with Ivermectin is such a closely guarded secret by the NIH and CDC. Second, ask yourself why no major media outlets reported this fact, but instead, tried to confuse you with false information by saying the deaths in India are 10 times greater than official reports.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/07/20/1018438334/indias-pandemic-death-toll-estimated-at-about-4-million-10-times-the-official-co

Perhaps NPR is trying so hard because NPR is essentially a government mouthpiece. The US government is “all-in” with vaccines with the enthusiasm of a 17th century Catholic Church “all-in” with a Geocentric Model of the Universe disputing Galileo. Claiming that India’s numbers are inaccurate might distract from the overwhelming success of Ivermectin.

But in the end, the truth matters. It mattered in 1616, and it matters in 2021.

India Uttar Pradesh State Data COVID/Ivermectin

The graphs and data from the Johns Hopkins University CSSE database do not lie. On the contrary, they provide a compelling trail of truth that no one can dispute, not even the NIH, CDC, FDA, and WHO.

Just as Galileo proved with his telescope that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe in 1616; today, the data from India shows that Ivermectin is effective, much more so than the vaccines. It not only prevents death, but it also prevents COVID infections, and it also is effective against the Delta Variant.

In 1616, you could not make up the telescopic images of Jupiter and its orbiting moons, nor could you falsify the crescent-shaped images of Venus and Mercury. These proved that the earth was NOT the center of the Universe – a truth the Catholic Church could not allow.

Likewise, the massive drop in cases and deaths in India to almost nothing after the addition of Ivermectin proved the drug’s effectiveness. This is a truth that the NIH, CDC, and FDA cannot allow because it would endanger the vaccine policy.

Never mind that Ivermectin would save more lives with much less risk, much less cost, and it would end the pandemic quickly.

Let us look at the burgundy-colored graph of Uttar Pradesh. First, allow me to thank Juan Chamie, a highly-respected Cambridge-based data analyst, who created this graph from the JHU CSSE data. Uttar Pradesh is a state in India that contains 241 million people. The United States’ population is 331 million people. Therefore, Uttar Pradesh can be compared to the United States, with 2/3 of our population size.

This data shows how Ivermectin knocked their COVID-19 cases and deaths – which we know were Delta Variant – down to almost zero within weeks. A population comparable to the US went from about 35,000 cases and 350 deaths per day to nearly ZERO within weeks of adding Ivermectin to their protocol.

By comparison, the United States is the lower graph. On August 5, here in the good ol’ USA, blessed with the glorious vaccines, we have 127,108 new cases per day and 574 new deaths.

Let us look at the August 5 numbers from Uttar Pradesh with 2/3 of our population. Uttar Pradesh, using Ivermectin, had a total of 26 new cases and exactly THREE deaths. The US without Ivermectin has precisely 4889 times as many daily cases and 191 times as many deaths as Uttar Pradesh with Ivermectin.

It is not even close. Countries do orders of magnitude better WITH Ivermectin. It might be comparable to the difference in travel between using an automobile versus a horse and buggy.

 

Uttar Pradesh on Ivermectin:  Population 240 Million [4.9% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 26

COVID Daily Deaths: 3

The United States off Ivermectin: Population 331 Million [50.5% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 127,108

COVID Daily Deaths: 574

Let us look at other Ivermectin using areas of India with numbers from August 5, 2021, compiled by the JHU CSSE:

Delhi on Ivermectin: Population 31 Million [15% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 61

COVID Daily Deaths: 2

Uttarakhand on Ivermectin: Population 11.4 Million [15% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 24

COVID Daily Deaths: 0

Now let us look at an area of India that rejected Ivermectin.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/tn-drops-ivermectin-as-covid-19-drug/article34561235.ece

Tamil Nadu announced they would reject Ivermectin and instead follow the dubious USA-style guidance of using Remdesivir. Knowing this, you might expect their numbers to be closer to the US, with more cases and more deaths. You would be correct. Tamil Nadu went on to lead India in COVID-19 cases.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/tamil-nadu-leads-india-in-new-infections-denies-citizens-ivermectin/article_32634012-ba66-11eb-9211-ab378d521f9a.html

Tamil Nadu continues to suffer for its choice to reject Ivermectin. As a result, the Delta variant continues to ravage their citizens while it was virtually wiped out in the Ivermectin-using states. Likewise, in the United States, without Ivermectin, both the vaccinated and unvaccinated continue to spread the Delta variant like wildfire.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html

Tamil Nadu off Ivermectin: Population 78.8 Million [6.9% fully vaccinated]

COVID Daily Cases: 1,997

COVID Daily Deaths: 33

Like the JHU CSSE data, Galileo’s telescope did not lie either, and the truth can usually be found in plain sight. Ivermectin works, and it works exceedingly well. Harvard-trained virologist Dr. George Fareed and his associate, Dr. Brian Tyson of California’s Imperial Valley, have saved 99.9% of their patients with a COVID Cocktail that includes Ivermectin. They have released versions of their new book published in the Desert Review that everyone should read.

https://www.thedesertreview.com/opinion/columnists/doctors-story-of-light-and-life-the-covid-19-darkness-overcome-part-i/article_5ae16f0c-f614-11eb-8351-cf0d67e94c25.html

I could talk about how every one of my patients who used Ivermectin recovered rapidly, about my most recent case who felt 90% better within 48 hours of adding the drug, but I won’t. I could write about how Wikipedia censors more than Pravda, about how you should always read the “talk” section of EVERY Wikipedia article to go behind the scenes and understand what the editors DO NOT want you to read, but I will refrain.

I could write about VAERS and how it is so much easier to navigate by following Open VAERS or how Wikipedia has unfairly portrayed Dr. Peter McCullough, one of the world’s sharpest and most credible doctors. But I will hold back.

https://www.openvaers.com/

I could also discuss our current cancer treatment system’s dangers and how chemotherapy and radiation stimulate cancer stem cells and cancer recurrence. About how this information has been suppressed and how the addition of repurposed drug cocktails can help prevent this, but I digress.

https://www.amazon.com/Surviving-Cancer-COVID-19-Disease-Repurposed/dp/0998055425

I could recite the history of early outpatient treatment of COVID-19 with repurposed drugs, including Ivermectin, with all the specifics, and EXACTLY WHY this lifesaving information has been censored, but instead, I will leave researching these topics to each of you readers as individuals.

https://www.amazon.com/Ivermectin-World-Justus-R-Hope/dp/1737415909

Because you already know what will happen if you simply sit back and swallow what the media are feeding you. You MUST question what the government tells you, and always DO YOUR OWN research.

Following the 1616 Inquisition of Galileo, the Pope banned all books and letters that argued the sun was the center of the Universe instead of the Earth. Similarly, today, the FDA and WHO have banned any use of Ivermectin for COVID outside of a clinical trial.

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/who-advises-that-ivermectin-only-be-used-to-treat-covid-19-within-clinical-trials

YouTube and Wikipedia both consider Ivermectin for COVID as heresy.

“YouTube doesn’t allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts local health authorities or the World Health Organization’s (WHO) medical information about COVID-19… Treatment misinformation: claims that Ivermectin is an effective treatment for COVID-19.”

Wikipedia defines heresy as:  “any belief or theory that is strongly at variance with established beliefs or customs, in particular the accepted beliefs of a church or religious organization. The term is usually used in reference to violations of important religious teachings, but is also used of views strongly opposed to any generally accepted ideas. A heretic is a proponent of heresy.”

Heresy is disagreeing with the government, or their health authority, even if they are all wrong and even if their policies harm people. Today we no longer call it heresy; it is labeled as misinformation.

Galileo was found guilty of heresy and sentenced on June 22, 1633, to formal imprisonment, although this was commuted to house arrest, under which he remained for the rest of his life.

On August 7, 2021 Medpage Today published a new quiz, “Can COVID Misinformation Cost You Your Medical License?”

https://www.medpagetoday.com/quizzes/news-quiz/93943

Written by DCL

September 18, 2021 at 7:15 pm

Is it Bad to Say I Told You So? …I Guess I Just Did.

leave a comment »

Since May of 2020 I have been writing occasionally about the things I’ve read, seen, heard, discovered, and learned about COVID, the PCR tests, the “vaccines”, and the politics that have been thoroughly mixed into every part of the pandemic.

I learned early on, by reading the CDC literature, that a virus was never isolated by any definition or scientific standard. Jon Rappoport, a veteran investigative journalist in the medical and health field, made this clear in his research. They didn’t have a virus per se, they had a soup of goop pulled out of someone’s nasal cavity which they would mix with another soup they make in their laboratories to see if any cells get “infected” by something in the combined soup bowl. Then they would amplify it millions of times using the PCR test until they saw something that indicated a person may have the virus. A case. A case didn’t have to show symptoms and suddenly, belying all previous science, asymptomatic people were a danger to others.

Throughout 2020 cases were blowing up around the world. Cases became synonymous with infection. Everything modern medicine knew about viruses miraculously changed when public health married partisan politics and “we’ve never done anything like this before” became blanket policy. Lockdowns, masks, and separation led to panic, division, anger, and tribalism. The flip flops seemed to arrive weekly. “No need for masks,” they said. “Everyone should wear a mask,” they then insisted. “Kid’s are very low risk for infection or transmission,” they assured us. “Mask your kids, separate them, no recess, no mingling, we can’t have them infecting their teachers” they demanded. Little of it made any sense and even less was corroborated by the science. The pre-2020 science that is… In 2020 common sense and science became a conspiracy stance and syunce.

They did everything in their power, using every means available, to convince America the draconian policies they were implementing were effective and necessary, but after a year and a half the data said otherwise.

The beautiful thing about truth is it does eventually find its way to the surface no matter how hard those who fear it try to bury it. The beautiful thing about the technological age we live in is it’s much harder to completely hide the truth, which means a campaign of misinformation and disinformation must also be implemented to keep the masses from paying attention to those “other information sources” where the truth tends to bubble up and that happened too.

Today Mr. Rappoport once again blew away the smoke and shattered the mirrors of big tech, big media, and big pharma with verifiable, documented proof that what he and others have been reporting, and I have been sharing, is true and the general public has been fed a very sophisticated and narrated mixed cocktail of truth and fiction this entire time. Manufactured by politicians and politically motivated public health officials, perpetuated by mainstream news media, and ultimately parroted and defended by decent people who STILL want to believe the leaders in these arenas would never lie to them.

I apologize for that long lead-in. But sometimes tooting your own horn feels too good to pass up.

Here’s the latest:

CDC/FDA confess: they had no virus when they concocted the test for the virus
by Jon Rappoport

The CDC has issued a document that bulges with interesting and devastating admissions.

The release is titled, “07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.” [1] It begins explosively:

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.”

Many people believe this means the CDC is giving up on the PCR test as a means of “detecting the virus.” I don’t think the CDC is saying that at all.

They’re saying the PCR technology will continue to be used, but they’re replacing what the test is looking FOR with a better “reference sample.” A better marker. A better target. A better piece of RNA supposedly derived from SARS-CoV-2.

CDC/FDA are confessing there has been a PROBLEM with the PCR test which has been used to detect the virus, starting in February of 2020—right up to this minute.

In other words, the millions and millions of “COVID cases” based on the PCR test in use are all suspect.

To confirm this, the CDC document links to an FDA release titled, “SARS-CoV-2 Reference Panel Comparative Data.” [2] [2a] Here is a killer quote:

“During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation.[Emphasis added] While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: We, at the CDC, did not have a specimen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when we concocted the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Yes, it’s unbelievable, right? And that’s the test we’ve been using all along. So we CONTRIVED samples of the virus. We fabricated. We lied. We made up [invented] synthetic gene sequences and we SAID these sequences HAD TO BE close to the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, without having the faintest idea of what we were doing, because, again, we didn’t have an actual specimen of the virus. We had no proof THERE WAS something called SARS-CoV-2.

This amazing FDA document goes to say the Agency has granted emergency approval to 59 different PCR tests since the beginning of the (fake) pandemic. 59. And, “…it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

Translation: Each of the 59 different PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 told different lies and concocted different fabrications about the genetic makeup of the virus—the virus we didn’t have. Obviously, then, these tests would give unreliable results.

BUT, don’t worry, be happy, because NOW, the CDC and the FDA say, they really do have actual virus samples of SARS-CoV-2 from patients; they have better targets for the PCR test, and labs should start gearing up for the new and improved tests.

In other words, they were lying THEN, but they’re not lying NOW. They were “contriving,” but now they’re telling the truth.

If you believe that, I have Fountain of Youth water for sale, extracted from the lead-contaminated system of Flint, Michigan.

Here, once again, I report virology’s version of “we isolated the virus”: [[3] thru [3i]]

They have a soup they make in their labs.

This soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and all sorts of other random genetic material. Because the cells start to die, the researchers ASSUME a bit of mucus from a patient they dropped in the soup is doing the killing, and THE VIRUS must be the killer agent in the mucus.

This assumption is entirely unwarranted. The drugs and chemicals could be doing the cell-killing, and the researchers are also starving the cells of vital nutrients.

There is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup, or that it is doing the cell-killing, or that it exists.

Yet the researchers call cell-death “isolation of the virus.”

To say this is a non-sequitur is a vast understatement. In their universe, “We have the virus buried in a soup in a dish in the lab” equals, “We’ve separated the virus from all surrounding material.”

Virology equals “how to spread bullshit for a living and scare the world.”

Other than that, it’s perfect.

SOURCES:

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html

[2] https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/sars-cov-2-reference-panel-comparative-data

[2a] https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2020/fda_updates_the_sars-cov-2_reference_panel_comparative_data.html

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/18/sars-cov-2-has-not-been-proven-to-exist/

[3a] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/26/sars-cov-2-has-not-been-proven-to-exist-shocking/

[3b] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/21/isolation-of-sars-cov-2-refuted-in-step-by-step-analysis-of-claim/

[3c] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/04/26/the-non-existent-virus-and-the-implications/

[3d] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/20/the-pandemic-virus-that-doesnt-exist/

[3e] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/21/more-on-the-coronavirus-that-doesnt-exist-and-the-pink-demon/

[3f] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/05/31/wuhan-lab-bioweapon-gain-of-function-but-the-virus-doesnt-exist/

[3g] http://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com

[3h] https://drtomcowan.com

[3i] https://greatreject.org/dr-stefan-lanka-claims-about-viruses-are-false

Written by DCL

July 29, 2021 at 3:46 pm

Posted in Health, News, Politics, Science

Tagged with , ,

Liberty is NOT a Man Made Concept

leave a comment »

Editors Note:

Mike Jensen is a freelance writer and journalist who, according to his bio lives in Colorado. Back in 2013 he wrote an article for the Canadian Free Press where he talks about a teaching in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (The Mormons) that explains why Mormons are so adamant about free agency and liberty. I found it to be a very interesting perspective coming from a non-Mormon who isn’t familiar with the teachings of the church and wanted to share it here on my blog.

Title of Liberty

 

“SMART MORMONS?”
By Mike Jensen Tuesday, January 22, 2013

During the 2012 presidential campaign, that awesomely deep well of perpetual wisdom, Alec Baldwin, proclaimed that if Barack Obama were not black, his vote total would have been 20 percent higher.

People of real intelligence realize that the opposite was probably true: if he had been white, his vote total would have been 20 percent lower. The African-American voting bloc combined with enough whites suffering from liberal guilt guaranteed a higher vote total for Obama.

The truth of the matter is, if Mitt Romney had not been a Mormon, his vote total might very well have been significantly higher.

In fact, according to a Galup poll released in June of last year, while 4 percent of people said they would not vote for a black president, a full 22 percent said they would not vote for a Mormon. In fact, only atheists and gays ranked higher.

So Baldwin probably had it backwards, which he usually does, so that comes as no surprise.

What did come as a surprise to me is why people would have such negative views of Mormons. I have known lots of them in my life, and in most cases they have been hard-working, kind, generous, family-oriented people—just the kind of people this country used to value (and maybe that’s the problem right there.)

Mormons have intrigued me ever since Mike Huckabee back in 2007 claimed that Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers. With the recent election over, I decided to check out Mormons a bit more.

My hope in doing this was to explain to readers who Mormons are and whether or not 22 percent of the people were justified in opposing having a Mormon president.
But instead I’m going to share an intriguing bit of Mormon theology I learned that I think makes them perhaps the most politically wise human beings on the planet. Ironically, this story stems from that Huckabee quote about the relationship between Jesus and the devil, but the lesson to be learned is one that, regardless of our political or religious views, we would all be wise to consider.

So here’s what I learned: Mormons, unlike most other Christian sects, believe that all humans lived a life before mortality. They call this the pre-existence or pre-earth life. At birth a veil is placed over our minds so that we don’t remember it (you’ll see why in a minute).

In this pre-earth life, we were all in the presence of God as His spirit children. Jesus was there—the first-born of God’s spirit children, and a leader in the councils in Heaven. Lucifer was also there, and was another leader among the children of God. He was called a “son of the morning.”

At some point in this existence, the Father called all of His children together to explain how things worked. All of His children would have to leave His presence and come to earth for a period of testing. The goal was to see if we would live a righteous life even when we had to live by faith, as we would no longer be able to remember God or heaven (that’s the reason for the veil).

If we would live a righteous life, we would be given the opportunity to return and live with God forever. Otherwise we would forfeit that chance, because no unclean thing can live in God’s presence. However, God knew that we would all make mistakes, so he would provide a Savior for the world. This Savior would live a sinless life, and because of that, he would qualify to pay for the sins of the world through what would be called the “Atonement.” If people would sincerely repent of their sins, then the Atonement would essentially erase their sins, and they could still return and live with God. The Father called for volunteers to be this savior, and two stepped forward: Jesus and Lucifer.

Lucifer said that he would be the savior and he would force everybody to live righteously, thus guaranteeing that all of God’s spirit children would return to Him in heaven. Jesus said that He would follow the Father’s plan and allow God’s children their free agency. They could choose for themselves whether to live righteously and take advantage of the Atonement or whether to live in sin and forfeit the opportunity to return and live with God.

God rejected Lucifer’s plan, causing Lucifer to rebel and declare war on God. One-third of God’s spirit children joined Lucifer in this rebellion. In the end, the rebellion failed and Lucifer and his followers were cast out of heaven. They came to earth without bodies and now, continuing the war they started in heaven, they tempt men to do evil to one another and lose out on the chance to return to God.

PAY ATTENTION HERE; THIS IS THE GOOD PART

Now, any traditional Christians reading this will see similarities to their own belief system. Most traditional Christians believe that Lucifer lived in heaven as an angel, but then declared war on God and was cast out.. However, the causes for that war are not necessarily clear in traditional Christian theology.

That is where Mormon theology is so intriguing. For Mormons, the greatest of all battles, the war in heaven, was fought over LIBERTY—or as they call it, “free agency.” Lucifer wanted to take it away, while God demanded that humans have it.

Although a Mormon might balk at my making comparisons between their religious beliefs and modern politics (and as I said earlier, every Mormon I’ve ever known was a very good person, so I apologize to any I offend), I see a direct correlation here. For a Mormon, the battle for liberty is not unique to this life; it is the core battle of the ages. Lucifer lost the war in heaven (he really thought he could beat God?), but the war continues on earth. So seeing the government become more and more tyrannical is not just a political concern; it’s a fundamental, eternal concern.

I’m inspired by this Mormon theological idea: God intended for humans to be free to make our own choices and live with the consequences of those choices. The Founding Fathers of this country said essentially the same thing in the Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be self-evidence, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

My study of Mormonism has not only given me newfound respect for this people and their religion; it has also made me evaluate my own attitude towards the liberty that seems to be slipping through all of our fingers. Is this just something that is nice to have, and for which I thank the Founding Fathers? Or is it really something that is endowed by God, and that He expects me to fight for. According to Mormon theology, I already fought for this once. The fact that I’m here says that I was on God’s side in the war in heaven, and fought for liberty.

A Mormon might ask, why should any of us be less willing to fight for it here than we were there?”

Written by DCL

June 28, 2021 at 7:35 pm

That Time I Quit Meth and Found My Savior, Jesus Christ

leave a comment »

Guest Blog by J. A. Ebberts – @JAEbberts on Twitter

Love of Christ

Editors Note: This was taken from a thread in J. A. Ebbert’s’ Twitter feed by permission.

So there I was, minding my own business on day 3 or 4 of a meth induced “walking coma”, checking from behind the mini-blinds at every car that passed by my house to make sure it wasn’t the “Po-lice” or some sort of body snatching skin-walker…

Paranoia had riddled my mind. I lay in bed and could feel my body shutting down from exhaustion, but my mind refused to shut up long enough for me to get some sleep.

Every shadow in my room concealed some terrible entity bent on my destruction. I was tired, I was sick and I was rapidly losing my mind.

A few weeks earlier I had met some dudes in Dallas heavily involved in the trafficking of a certain party drug, and has some friends who were moving down there to set up a “business.” I was invited to participate with them and was seriously considering the offer. All of my friends had moved down there and the parties were a non-stop love fest of good vibes and PLUR nonsense, but in an inexplicable moment of clarity, like a focused beam of sunlight piercing a storm cloud, I had the awareness to ask myself “is it worth it?”

Was the paranoia, the physical emotional and mental toll on my body, the self-inflicted annihilation worth it?
after finally finding maybe an hour or two of sleep, I decided that I needed to know, once and for all, what this life was all about.

For about 6 months prior to this moment, I had a nagging feeling like there was something “more” I needed to be doing. I was agnostic. I didn’t care to really know if God was real, because if he was, and he was who they say he was, then he totally understood why I did what I did and wouldn’t judge me harshly for it. “He gets it”, I reasoned. And that worked for me.

But still, there was something more to be had and I somehow knew it. I felt like there were good and malevolent forces around me all the time. I remember a girlfriend kind of making fun of me for saying so, but still I felt it, even without context.

I’ll spare you the details of a very specific mescaline trip that in retrospect served as a tipping point for the lifestyle I had been leading (maybe a story for another time?), but here I now found myself on the brink of making a decision.
A decision that could very realistically land me in prison, land me dead, or who knows what.

While mulling it over, I remembered something my dad had said to me a year or two prior to this moment. In his efforts to get me to consider a larger spiritual existence (and clean up my act) he approached me one day and said “Adam, you’re a logical guy. Why don’t you apply the scientific method to this question?” He said “These are the things that we are told to do, if we want to receive an answer to whether or not God exists. This is the experiment and these are the conditions for replication. Why don’t you try it and see?”

At the time, I didn’t really give it another thought, but in this moment, that idea became very attractive to me. Why couldn’t I find out, once and for all, what was real and what was not? Replicate the experiment and see what happens. So, as I sat in my room contemplating my future, I decided to first find out if God was real or not. Once and for all. If nothing happens, then I have nothing to lose and can move to Dallas with my club-kid friends and move massive quantities of MDMA. But if he was real… if he did show up for me… then suddenly I have another option. Maybe even more than one option. Maybe an entire universe of possibilities opens up to me. All it takes to find out for sure is a little commitment to find out and some honesty with myself.

So, taking my cues from what I had heard and read about how to conduct this experiment, I decided to fast with the purpose of having God reveal himself to me.

I began my fast with a prayer, probably the first real prayer I have ever offered in my life. I told him that I wasn’t sure if he was there, but was going to fast anyway and if he was there to show me in a way unmistakable to me and that I would accept whatever that answer ended up being. I would ACT on whatever response I got. If I got nothing, then call me Dopey McSlangsalot and I’ll see ya in Dallas.

But if I got something, I was willing in that moment to do whatever that something required with no preconditions. No bargains. If God was real, then I was willing to accept that and let it transform my life. It’s not like I was doing anything productive with it at that point anyway.

So, I prayed, and I fasted. I went without food and water and had determined to do so for the next 24 hours at least, while I sought to overcome the self-imposed damages to my mind and body, and “recenter” myself.

It wasn’t long before I started to notice some things. Thoughts came to my mind, sometimes faster than I could grab them and really understand them. I started having some sensations in my body that I had no words for. At one point I thought I was having an acid flashback or something, as everything became quite vivid and clear. An overwhelming feeling of purpose and importance filled me.

I want to be careful here about what I share, because some of this experience I consider sacred and not for general consumption. I was told, in my mind in a voice not my own, in no uncertain terms, that I was receiving my answer. That what was taking place in and around me was the beginning of what would last for the next several hours as I sit alone in my room, upstairs in my parents’ house.

Not only was God real, but I was given some understanding about man’s complete insignificance in the universe. That at any moment the four walls that I thought protected me could explode in infinite directions, leaving me alone in space. I was powerless to stop it from happening and imagined myself left to ruin in the vacuum and the void and then almost simultaneously I was given the understanding of the complete care and love and intentional nature of this entire existence. That all of this was held together and in place for ME. For MY benefit and progression.

It immediately challenged everything I thought I had believed about so many things at that point that I don’t have time to list them. But I knew God was there, I knew he had real, tangible power and I knew, for the first time, that he answered sincere prayers.

I also knew that yes, there was something else for me to be doing. There was a better use of my time and talents than selling ecstasy to frat boys and that the time had come for me to be about whatever that was.

In an instant, I was transformed. The knowledge I had gained that night changed EVERYTHING about who I was. It changed every appetite that I had, and it took every paranoid thought and craving I had been wrestling with.

Through Christ, through the grace of God, I found real healing in the moment I had been willing to do, without precondition, whatever God wanted me to do, if he would reveal himself to me. I quit smoking, I quit meth and acid and X all immediately. That very night. Threw it all away and never had another craving or desire to ever touch the stuff again.

When we say “born again”, I was truly, born again. I was a new man much to the displeasure of many of my friends I may add. The very next day my best friend at the time came over with about 40 X-tabs and “a hot tub full of girls waiting for us.” I immediately recognized it for the temptation it was and turned him down. Not only did I turn him down, I started to tell him about what had happened to me the night before! He was confused and then angry and then maybe a little sad as he left.

It went that way with nearly all of my friends. None of them stuck around. None of them could abide me and my newly found Christianity, though many of them acknowledged that they could see the difference in my face and in my eyes.

The next 9 months of this story contain a lot of ups and downs. A lot of spiritual lessons and incredible truths and experiences prepared me to eventually serve a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Perhaps I’ll share some of those stories with you sometime. Stories about all of this and to those who consistently claim that I am not a Christian because of my Church membership.

There is absolutely NOTHING but the REAL Christ who could have saved me at that time and in that way.

Nothing but the REAL Christ would have had the power to transform a 130 pound drug addled punk rocker into what I am today and into what I am yet to become.

No other power exists in this universe to transform men in this way.

None.

There is no argument anyone can make about history, the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or God himself that will have enough power to take this from me.

Written by DCL

March 26, 2021 at 1:41 pm

Social Media Censorship: “Oh No You Don’t!”

with one comment

The Social Media giants have moved so far to the left and have become so political, driven by an extreme ideology, that what was once a bastion for free thought, speech, and communication, is now a dictatorial groupthink tank where those who do not share the same thoughts and ideas, or comply with the dictators demands, are ostracized, punished, and/or banned.

The Twitter that helped the world see the atrocities of the Chinese Communist Party through the tweets of Chinese human rights activists in 2010 is, only a decade later, the Twitter of censorship and selective activism spawned from classic cultural Marxism.

This dramatic shift in what will and what will not be allowed on social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook is far from being just an ideological war on words. It is now putting people’s lives at risk by removing and banning truth and evidentiary information simply because that truth and evidence doesn’t align with the dictatorial edicts of the founders of those platforms.

Case in point, yesterday I posted an article by journalist and Senior Editor at TheBlaze.com, Daniel Horowitz, discussing ongoing censorship of medical doctors and researchers regarding the outpatient treatment of COVID-19 using Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine. It is well researched and fact laden and in my opinion a must read for anyone wanting to learn about very real and very effective options to treating COVID even at late or more advanced stages of the disease. You can READ IT HERE.

Within minutes of posting I received this notification from Facebook:

Facebook CensorshipFalse information?!? Resulting in physical harm? Are you kidding me? It’s the suppression of this information that is resulting in unnecessary suffering and deaths around the world!

Incensed by this rebuke and outright lie by Facebook, I took a screen shot determined to make it clear this was not false information and that Facebook was censoring verifiable truth and documented science. So I posted the screen shots with a short line that read: “Share an article about censorship and get censored. FB knows more about medicine than my doctor…”

Immediately another notification popped up on my screen. Facebook had seen enough. They were putting me in Time Out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Harassment and bullying? Wait…what?

Facebook slapped me with a 24 hour suspension for attempting to shame them in their dishonesty which in their liberal world is “harassment and bullying.” Well, they showed me by golly! They even blocked the screenshots so no one could see their pathetic actions. Next a notification popped up explaining their lie and why their opinion is more important and accurate than the truth. Then another notification popped up asking me if I agreed or disagreed with their decision. Of course, I disagreed and this was their reply:

I have to be brutally honest I would have been less angry and frustrated had they just replied like this:

 

So there I was, banished for 24 hours for being so bold as to scoff at the Face of the Book. Any attempt to like or comment on other posts resulted in a quick reminder of my crime.

 

Personally this wasn’t a big deal, but professionally it kinda was. I manage and moderate several Facebook groups for clients of mine. Guess what? Once Facebook finds you guilty of defying their dictatorial edicts, your punishment goes beyond activity on your personal page. They don’t let you do anything, not even unrelated work on someone else’s page or group as an admin. The Silicon Valley soy boys really know how to throw a virtual punch. My mouse is stinging.

Finally, on March 18, 2021 at 1:00 PM Mountain Standard Time I was released from my 24 hour detention…now to find a way to get that article up on Facebook.

I wonder how long the sentencing is for a second conviction?

 

Written by DCL

March 18, 2021 at 1:55 pm

Talent On Loan From God

with 2 comments

Rush Limbaugh

I first heard Rush Limbaugh in 1988 on KFI AM radio as I drove through SoCal traffic from Moreno Valley to Anaheim and back every week, Monday through Friday. Those of you who’ve lived in Southern California know how that commute along the 91 freeway provides plenty of slowdown time where there isn’t much else to do but listen to the radio.

I was 28 years-old, married with two little boys and a little girl on the way and just living life day to day, working to provide for my small but growing family. I had no real political identity at the time other than I voted for Ronald Reagan twice.

To be honest I can’t remember how I discovered Limbaugh. Whether someone recommended tuning in or if I just stumbled onto him one day, but I remember how his words resonated with the principles and values I had always held and believed in and I was hooked. It was his understanding of the founding principles of our nation, the founders themselves through their writings, and the documents they crafted to create the greatest and freest nation on earth, that ultimately won my admiration. Not all of his opinions aligned perfectly with mine. Sometimes we even disagreed, though usually such disagreements were on his chosen delivery or the stinging way in which he sometimes made his point. I understand why he delivered his daily monologue and opinions the way he did and it could come across as rude, belittling, or sarcastic, (for those listening in Loma Linda) but it got your attention and if you could get past the showmanship and not be offended, you’d learn something.

It was Rush Limbaugh who helped me solidify my identity as a political conservative.

I know his sarcasm and criticism coupled with his staunch unrelenting conservative positions rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. His detractors and haters are many, but what human being throughout recorded history who wasn’t afraid to stand on their convictions, on principle, and what he or she believed was right and true to their last dying breath, didn’t have haters? I’ve always maintained the real haters, those who sickeningly and despicably celebrated today, never listened to his shows. Never listened long enough to understand the context in his opinions or the depth of his analysis, which always circled back (Jen are you listening?) to the profound conservative principles he so thoroughly understood and taught. I’m confident they only listened to the carefully chosen sound bites fed to them by their chosen like-minded media and the pundits who interpreted Limbaugh’s words for them.

Their loss.

Needless to say he was a lightening rod.

The announcement of his passing today by his wife Kathryn, who took the microphone in his place was, sadly, not unexpected. It was just too soon. He hadn’t been on-air for several weeks and then, during what would be his final on-air appearance, the weakness from the illness that was slowly eating away at his lungs could be heard in his voice. He apologized to his audience for his periodic coughs or need to clear his throat, but he pushed through and gave his fans 3 solid hours of pure Rush.

Back in December Rush said this to his listeners, “The day’s gonna come folks when I’m not gonna be able to do this. I don’t know when that is. I want to be able to do it for as long as I want to do it and I want you to understand that, even when that day comes, I’d like to be here. ‘Cause I have this sense of needing to constantly show my appreciation for all that you have done and meant to me.” Rush genuinely loved his audience.

Rush Limbaugh single handedly changed radio. He created and grew a medium while providing the personality, charisma, and style necessary to catapult conservatism into the mainstream and help millions come to know and understand those principles in their purest unapologetic form. He is solely responsible for bringing millions of Americans into the conservative movement and for schooling millions of Liberals on who and what we really are.

I am proud to be counted in his audience and among his fans. He was not a perfect man. He admitted and reflected on his flaws but he never dwelt on them and he never let them define him. He was unabashedly optimistic and confident. He fought through his trials and came away better for them and he encouraged his listeners to do the same in our own lives.

Today God decided it was time to take the talent back, but He couldn’t do it without taking the man.

Heaven is better for it.

Thank you Mr. Limbaugh. God rest your soul.

Written by DCL

February 17, 2021 at 4:55 pm

PCR Tests “Whoops, our bad! We’ll fix that.”

leave a comment »

WHO Notice on PCR TestsThe Law of Truly Large Numbers says, there are no coincidences.

A month ago I shared information gleaned from the CDC and Jon Rappaport, an investigative journalist who has done the deepest dive into the COVID-19 data of anyone I’ve encountered to date.

Rappaport has made some startling and controversial claims in his blog, but he has always provided source citations and often uses the “words of the experts” to incriminate the experts. The information I shared previously explained flaws in the PCR tests, how it was administered, and how it had no apparent standard. The result was millions of positive “cases” over the past year even when a majority of those cases (people) never experienced a symptom.

Where this became a serious problem was with regard to state governments basing their covid lockdown policies and mandates on case numbers. The rights and freedoms of Americans in all 50 states were severely restricted and in some cases stripped completely. When journalists or physicians questioned the tests, they were ignored or silenced. It became politically incorrect to question the authorities, because, for heaven sakes people were dying! How could anyone be so cold hearted and question those who were just trying to save lives?

But every American life was being grossly effected by government edicts based on bad data from tests that were being grossly mishandled. As a side note and in a twist of irony, all other leading forms of death in the US in 2020 decreased while COVID deaths filled the gaps. A study published by Johns Hopkins University made this astonishing discovery. It was so astonishing and controversial that Johns Hopkins retracted it almost as soon as it was published, but not before the cat was out of the bag and a fleeting moment of transparency exposed the narrative again.

Now to the “coincidence” which occurred this month on the very day the new president of the United States officially took office. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued a little-noticed technical report that calls into question many of the policies that we have adopted to control the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. At the heart of all the data on COVID-19 cases is the, you guessed it, PCR tests.

According to The Hill, “the WHO’s guidance on the RT-PCR test emphasizes two things that have long been known in the scientific literature and public health practice but inexplicably ignored in COVID policy for almost a year. First, they point out that a positive COVID test does not necessarily mean that someone has any capacity of infecting someone else with the virus. Therefore, it instructs laboratories to report a key statistic that indicates how likely a positive test result actually constitutes infectious COVID-19. And second, the WHO warns against relying on a single test for patients without clinical COVID-19 symptoms.”

Observation #1: This is a contradiction to the daily narrative repeated by the media throughout 2020. Yes, they briefly discussed a problem with false positive tests, but quickly made it appear they were not a problem and “new tests” were better and false positives were rare. This wasn’t true, but it’s what people came to believe and even defend and governments continued to use case numbers, not the number of infections but the number of cases (positive tests), to continue their lockdowns and mandates.

The report goes on to say, “the PCR test is not designed to identify active infectious disease but rather genetic material (dead, alive or partial) from the virus. PCR amplifies this material in samples to find traces of COVID-19, so while it often identifies people with active, infectious disease, it can also indicate people as “positive” erroneously. Dead COVID-19 RNA in the nose or mouth of someone who was never sick could create a positive PCR result. Recovered patients who test negative and are non-infectious can still come up positive repeatedly in the following months. These are neither new cases nor infectious ones needing quarantine but could be incorrectly counted as such.”

Are you listening governors?

Continuing, the report indicates “multiple studies showing that the number of amplification or duplication “cycles” performed via PCR to amplify the sample has a relationship with infectiousness – at a certain point, the more cycles needed to get positivity from a sample the generally less viral replication the sample shows.” In plain English this means the more cycles the more positives. Meaningless positives. “An article in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that among positive PCR samples with a cycle count over 35 – a common lab occurrence – only 3 percent of samples showed viral replication.” This really tells us that the high number of daily cases was due to bad testing, but no one will admit it.

Observation #2: In my previous article Case vs Infection – The COVID Con I discuss the problem with the cycles used in the PCR tests and how there didn’t seem to be any real standard. Here’s a portion of that report.

The PCR test is run in “cycles.” Each cycle is a quantum leap in amplifying or magnifying the original tiny, tiny piece of material taken from the patient’s swab sample. It’s like blowing up a small photo to an amazing size.

The question is: how many cycles should the PCR test be run at? This is vital issue, because the number of cycles changes the result.

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology” [1]: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [1]): “…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

Here’s the kicker. The FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, was recommending the test be run at 40 cycles. Uhhh, Houston, we have a problem.

The lapdog media was quick to jump to the rescue and make sure we all understood the WHO wasn’t admitting the testing was flawed or giving misleading numbers of cases, they were just making sure the test was being correctly administered with a “standard.” The Associated Press and Politifact and the social media fact checkers were quick to place their spin on the report to make sure NO ONE attempted to use this new information to demean or refute the media’s long held narratives. Politifact headline: “WHO did not say PCR tests grossly inflate positive test numbers.” Well, not in those words perhaps, therefore they can say that claim is FALSE.

The Hill concludes, “The questionable quality of COVID-19 testing data, alongside loose COVID-19 case definitions, means we cannot effectively work to build an efficient, effective system to address the disease at the individual or community level. Data that are available now are inadequate to inform local and statewide policymakers, business owners, school administrators and the public at large. As we collectively understand trends in infectiousness and fine tune our testing system, we can act more effectively and efficiently, and reduce disruption to people’s lives, schools and businesses.”

Translation: Now that Trump is gone we can be honest and use the PCR tests as intended and with the proper number of cycles which will result in a dramatic reduction in the number of positive tests (cases) allowing governors to stop shredding the constitution and giving Joe Biden credit for defeating the evil China Virus…whoops that term has been banned…I mean, evil COVID-19 and bringing freedom back to the Democracy by way of Executive Order. Or something like that.

Coincidence?

Written by DCL

January 29, 2021 at 10:04 pm

Double Standards are the Only Standards Left

leave a comment »

Double Standards definition

There are two major political ideologies in America.

Left and Right. Liberal and Conservative.

In 2021 that appears likely to change to just one when it comes to control of the federal government. The Progressive-Democrat-Socialists have managed to gain total control of the Presidency, House, and Senate and they have wasted no time doing what they have wanted to do for decades: eliminate their opposition.

One method to accomplish this goal is having the ability make the rules. However, when making those rules make them such that they only apply to one side, the opposing side. Double standards are manipulative and dishonest at their core. They are infuriating and damaging to anyone on the wrong side. They are the height of hypocrisy and have no place in political discourse or societal governance, yet by all indication that is exactly how the game is going to be played in 2021.

Consider these examples:

Stating condemnation for what occurred at the Nation’s Capitol Building last week is only accepted if you’re a Democrat. If you’re a Republican you are an insurrectionist or domestic terrorist by default. These sentiments have been parroted by Left Wing media and Democrats holding public office. According to CNN’s Don Lemon, you are allied with ‘The Klan and Nazis’ if you even voted for Donald Trump.

President Trump called for protests that would be ‘peaceful and patriotic’ and he got labeled a national security threat. Even though CNN has reported that authorities now know the storming of the Capitol was a “planned event’ and intelligence agencies knew at least 2 weeks before January 6th of these plans. But on the other side, Representative Maxine Waters, from California, can call on her supporters to get ‘physical’ and ‘in the faces’ of Republicans and she gets the chairmanship of the financial services committee.

Republican members of congress, utilized a process described in the constitution to offer an objection due to the improper and unconstitutional changes made to the election rules in some states and they were labeled seditionists. Democrats in congress raised money for groups who attacked our police, burned our cities, destroyed our businesses, and established autonomous zones, but they were celebrated as justice warriors.

Last week Democrats called for unity, democracy, and healing. Days later, seeking power and political advantage the Democrats have gone back to their natural state. The party of impeachment, removal, and division.

Jim McGovern, the Democrat Chair of the House Rules Committee, said in his opening remarks during the 2021 impeachment proceedings, that “Republicans last week voted to overturn the results of an election!” Guess who was the first objector to Donald Trump’s election on January 6th 2017? The very first objector was none other than Jim McGovern. Guess which state he objected to? Alabama. The very first state called. Alabama. President Trump won Alabama by 30 points.

They can object to Alabama in 2017 with no grounds or evidence to support them, but then turn around and tell Republicans they can’t object to Pennsylvania in 2021 when there are legal grounds and evidence to support it.

  • Pennsylvania, where the state Supreme Court unilaterally extended the election from Tuesday to Friday without legislative input.
  • Pennsylvania, where the Secretary of State unilaterally changed the rules, ignoring the constitutional role of the state legislature to make changes to election laws.
  • Pennsylvania, where county clerks in some counties and you can imagine which ones, let people “fix” their ballots. That’s against the law. They allowed them to take secured mail-in ballots and “fix” them in direct violation of the law.

But they accuse the Republicans of trying to overturn the election and the media nods its collective head in agreement and reports it as if it was fact.

Guess who the second objector was in 2017? Jamie Raskin, the Congressional Representative managing impeachment number two for the Democrats.

Democrats objected to more states in 2017 than Republicans did last week but somehow this time it’s wrong.

Democrats can raise bail for rioters and looters last summer, but when Republicans condemn all violence, including the violence last summer and the violence last week, they are wrong.

Democrats were willing to investigate the President of the United States for fours years, but will not even look at an election that 80 million Americans, half the electorate, both Republicans and Democrats, have doubts about.

Americans are tired of the double standards.

These examples are from just the past week.

When will ALL fair-minded people, regardless of political affiliation, stand up and demand the double standards end?

How long before you’re on the other side of a double standard? Or do you suppose that will never happen?

If you’re a Democrat, you may be right. Your political opposition may be silenced forever.

But don’t think that’s a good thing.

Written by DCL

January 13, 2021 at 5:23 pm

Posted in Politics

Case vs Infection – The COVID Con

with one comment

Every state in the union is enforcing some sort of lockdown or restriction of its people due to “extremely high case counts” for COVID-19.

I have explained many times in social media posts and discussions with people I know how the case count alone is a meaningless metric and basing government policy decisions on this statistic alone is an example of profound ignorance at best and malicious intent at worst.

Jon Rappaport, an investigative journalist who has written articles on politics, health, media, culture and art for LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, Village Voice, Nexus, CBS Healthwatch, and reported on major television news networks over the past 30 years, has decided to take a deep dive into the COVID-19 data, the way its been reported by the media, and the confusion surrounding the pandemic since it was first announced.

Here are some of his findings as posted on his personal website, where he clearly cites credible sources including official sources such as the CDC, WHO, and NIH.

The lockdowns are based on high levels of COVID cases.

“We have so many new cases, we have to lock down.”

This claim is based on the diagnostic PCR test.

The more tests you do, the more positive results come up. A positive result is taken to mean: the person is infected with the virus.

But overwhelmingly, these so-called “infected” people have no symptoms. They are healthy. Nevertheless, each one is called a “COVID case.” This is absurd.

A case should mean the person has clinical symptoms; he is sick.

These people aren’t sick, and there is no indication they will get sick.

So…expand testing, test millions of people, obtain results claiming “infection,” call all these healthy people “cases,” and order lock downs.

IS THE PCR TEST DECEPTIVE?

You need one piece of background here.

The PCR test is run in “cycles.” Each cycle is a quantum leap in amplifying or magnifying the original tiny, tiny piece of material taken from the patient’s swab sample. It’s like blowing up a small photo to an amazing size.

The question is: how many cycles should the PCR test be run at? This is vital issue, because the number of cycles changes the result.

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology” [1]: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [1]): “…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. 

See the problem?

On December 3, Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida and the Florida state Department of Health announced that they are requiring labs to report number of PCR test cycles in all COVID tests. Rappaport continues:

COVID testing labs never tell doctors or patients how the PCR test is run.

This means the number of cycles is a secret.

A cycle is a step up in amplification of the tissue sample taken from the patient.

As even Tony Fauci has asserted, tests run at 35 cycles or above are useless. They’re also misleading. The results tend to be positive, meaning the patient is “infected with the virus.” But this is false.

However, as I’ve also reported, the CDC and the FDA recommend that the test should be run at up to 40 cycles.[2] [3] This is a direct hustle. It ensures false positives and higher COVID case numbers—used as justification for lockdowns.

Now, the state of Florida is doing something unheard of. It’s demanding that labs report the “cycle threshold” for every test they run.

Here is the relevant wording in a release from the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, and the state Department of Health, dated December 3, 2020 [4]:

“Cycle threshold (CT) values and their reference ranges, as applicable, must be reported by laboratories to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately.”

“If your laboratory is not currently reporting CT values and their reference ranges, the lab should begin reporting this information to FDOH within seven days of the date of this memorandum.”

We can assume there is only one reason for this order. The Florida governor and the Department of Health are aware that tests run at 35 cycles or higher are useless and misleading, and they want to stop this crime.

Imagine what happens if the trend of “new COVID cases” in Florida soon takes a sudden dip and keeps on falling—because labs are finally telling the truth. Because their deceptive test results are being rejected. The con will be exposed.

And imagine other states following Florida’s example.

People can’t make good choices for themselves, their families, or their communities if they are uninformed or misinformed. The politicization of COVID, the use of it to restrict the freedoms of American citizens, and the division it has and is creating is, in my opinion, being done with malicious intent by powers within America and beyond our borders who wish for global dominance and rule and see the United States as the one obstacle in their path.

Standing for truth isn’t always easy or popular, in fact it’s more often neither, but we are beyond the time for complacence. It’s time to choose where you’ll stand, but do so on verifiable trusted sources of information.

Hint: It isn’t in the established media of old.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/03/lockdowns-are-based-on-fraud-open-letter-to-people-who-want-freedom/ 

[3] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[4] https://www.flhealthsource.gov/files/Laboratory-Reporting-CT-Values-12032020.pdf

Jon Rappaport Blog

Written by DCL

December 10, 2020 at 11:14 am

Posted in Health, News

Tagged with , , ,

The Great Reset

leave a comment »

 

by Justin Haskins

On Nov. 3, Joe Biden could be elected the next president of the United States, but most Americans still do not know the truth about Biden’s radical ideology.

Despite having sold himself as a “moderate” Democrat for decades, Biden has consistently shown that his views on globalism and America’s place in the world are far from mainstream.

This argument is best proven by examining Biden’s close ties to the World Economic Forum, which is now pushing for a remarkably troubling “Great Reset” of capitalism, and the many statements Biden has made over the past several years echoing Great Reset ideology.

The Great Reset movement has been widely adopted by numerous world leaders, including the head of the United Nations, Prince Charles, the International Monetary Fund, international trade unions, and CEOs of major corporations.

Using the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change as the justifications for a fundamental transformation of the world’s economy, the Great Reset movement aims to destroy modern capitalism and replace it with a system that embraces numerous left-wing social programs, such as basic income systems and the Green New Deal, as well as force all corporations around the world to adopt leftist social justice causes.

In an article published on the World Economic Forum’s website, WEF founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab — who is spearheading much of the Great Reset movement globally — wrote that “the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.”

“Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed,” Schwab also wrote. “In short, we need a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism.”

Schwab and other supporters of the Great Reset blame many of the world’s problems on the perceived failure of the existing “social contract” and what they call “shareholder capitalism” — the current economic system in much of the Western world.

Under “shareholder capitalism,” individuals can buy shares of companies, which are then expected to produce goods and services they can sell to customers for a profit. (Sounds terrible, I know!)

Although Biden, to my knowledge, has never been asked directly about whether he supports the Great Reset, he has made numerous comments echoing similar talking points. For example, in July, Biden called for the end of the “era of shareholder capitalism.”

Additionally, just like the World Economic Forum and supporters of the Great Reset, Biden has said government should use the coronavirus pandemic as a justification to “rewrite the social contract” of the United States.

Biden’s “Build Back Better” plans also come straight out of the Great Reset movement’s playbook. For many years, supporters of the Great Reset at the World Economic Forum and elsewhere have talked about “building back better” by dramatically expanding the power of government, pursuing costly “green” infrastructure plans, and substantially increasing the authority of international institutions.

Biden’s proposals would do just that, and the “Build Back Better” name is just too similar to what others affiliated with the Great Reset movement and/or the World Economic Forum have said to be a mere coincidence.

For example, in 2016, a development specialist at the World Bank, discussing climate change-related natural disasters, wrote for the WEF, “The pressure for governments now is not to wait until a disaster strikes to ‘build back better.’ Instead, the urgent need is to build better now, and to thoroughly assess current risks to industrial infrastructure.”

In May 2020, the World Economic Forum posted to its website an article titled “‘Building Back Better’ — Here’s How We Can Navigate the Risks We Face After COVID-19,” in which the writer argued, “We have looked at ways to ‘build back better’ and it’s very clear that investing in greener economies is going to be a huge part of recovery efforts.”

On July 13, 2020, less than a week after Biden called for an “end to the era of shareholder capitalism” while promoting his own “Build Back Better” plan, the World Economic Forum published a piece titled “To Build Back Better, We Must Reinvent Capitalism. Here’s How.”

And these examples are just the tip of the iceberg. There are many others showing the WEF using the “build back better” slogan prior to and following Biden’s release of his Build Back Better policy proposals.

Biden also has close ties to numerous Great Reset advocates and leaders at the World Economic Forum, where Biden has on multiple occasions delivered keynote addresses.

Former Secretary of State John Kerry — the co-chair of Joe Biden’s climate change “Unity Taskforce” and a man many believe could serve in Biden’s administration — has publicly backed the Great Reset and called for reforms to the American “social contract.”

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who has been named to Biden’s transition team, is a member of the WEF’s Forum of Young Global LeadersButtigieg’s climate policy adviser, David Victor, is affiliated with the World Economic Forum and authored in June 2020 a lengthy article for Yale University titled “Building Back Better: Why Europe Must Lead a Global Green Recovery.”

Further, Biden has close relationships with at least three World Economic Forum board members who support, to varying degrees, the Great Reset platform: Al Gore, David Rubenstein, and Laurence Fink, the chairman and CEO of BlackRock, whom many Democratic donors have reportedly pushed to be Biden’s choice for treasury secretary.

Additionally, WEF board member and Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff is a longtime supporter of Kamala Harris, Biden’s 2020 running mate.

More evidence of Biden’s intimate relationship with Great Reset advocates can be found in the launch of the Biden Institute, which is based at the University of Delaware. In 2017, when the Biden Institute first started, Biden said he wanted to model some of the new organization’s activities after the World Economic Forum, and he even met with the WEF’s leader and the world’s biggest advocate of the Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, to help develop a plan for the future of the Institute.

Taken together, Biden’s policy plans, campaign messaging, and connections with key Great Reset figures seem to point toward a very troubling conclusion: Joe Biden is likely an advocate of the radical Great Reset, a proposal that, if enacted, would completely overhaul the world’s economy in favor of more collectivism and the centralization of power in the hands of international elites.

That might sound unbelievable, but when there’s smoke, there’s almost always fire.

Justin Haskins (Jhaskins@heartland.org) is editor-in-chief of StoppingSocialism.com and the editorial director of The Heartland Institute.

This article was originally posted by TheBlaze.com

Written by DCL

October 26, 2020 at 3:27 pm