Dr. Kilde was the former Chief Medical Officer in Lapland (Finland).
She describes here how HAARP can strongly alter feelings from naturally arising ones, to their complete opposite. https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7A76fMNAJ6/?igsh=MXd4dHo2YXo3ZDgxZQ==
HAARP is military technology.
So, too, was the military equipment hidden under Boulder Mountain beaming out transgender frequencies. And, while not military technology, children's gadgets (phones, Ipads, TVs, games) have also been emitting mind affecting frequencies.
Why is no one asking why the hidden equipment under Boulder Mountain and the children's gadgets, have both been doing this utterly weird thing (putting out mind-altering frequencies)?
Might sending out transgender frequencies promote body dysphoria and body dissociation?
If putting out trans frequencies is not for generating trans feelings, why else would those specific frequencies be put out? And why on such a mass scale?
What would be the mass scale effect?
And how was it that international legal, political, educational, and medical frameworks were in place for transgenderiam .... in advance of any large scale arrival of transgenderism?
Jennifer Bilek talks about the billionaires who are heavily invested financially in medical treatments for transgender transitions.
But why did those billionaires expect there to be masses of young people to use those treatments?
Then, boom, transgenderism suddenly appeared as a cultural phenomenon.
Were the billionaires clairvoyant?
Why is no one asking HOW transgenderism could have so rapidly shown up?
Did anyone imagine it could have been brought about and on a large scale?
Could anyone even imagine there might be a secret means to disrupt or destroy million's of children's normal biologic identification and certainty?
Would Mind Control through HAARP (and/or the smaller scale technologies) offer a means?
If so, is this not a gigantic Crime against Humanity?
Were parents pressured into going along with their children's sudden expression of transgenderism "out of compassion" - as well as out of intense fear being there was a threat of young people's suicides if they were not treated as trans?
Was language itself (pronouns) suddenly linked to compassion and if pronouns were not "correct" (the opposite of what people saw), was language deemed a threat and loving people - grandparents, extended family members, friends and acquaintances - also pressured and if they didn't comply, were cut off?
Did the "compassion demand" and fear and odd language pressure, distract from basic questions about transgenderism, such as WHY and HOW huge numbers of children would suddenly stop identifying with their own bodies?
And did the gloved "compassionate" push to support transgenderism include a large iron fist - excommunication socially or even the use of government force (removal of children from the home) for anyone who did question or refused to go along?
Did a similar intense "compassion demand" - as well as fear from the threat of killing "grandma" and others - also distract people from basic questions about the untested jabs, and also come with an iron fist - being blocked from engaging in all social life and the use of government force (mandates for the jabs) for anyone who did question or refused to go along?
Does this same formula of "compassion demand," and threat of catastrophe and deaths, and looming government power [over movement, fuels, food, etc.] also fit the promotion of climate change?
Does the repeating pattern of compassion, fearful threat, and force, define all three cultural movements as planned agendas?
Does transgenderism stand out as the only one to involve intense mental confusion and morbidly rejecting thoughts about one's natural body and feelings of repugnance at one's core being?
Shall we ask the Big Question directly?
Did HAARP create "transgenderism"?
If rejection of one's biologic sex is labeled as "transgenderism?, did HAARP create "transgenderism"?
Was HAARP used to Mind Control our children and youth globally into feeling dissociated from their own bodies and natural biologic identities, and thus rejecting them?
Did HAARP - - one of the most far-reaching and most powerful technologies in existence (capable of controlling all weather on earth) - disrupt children's and young people's natural biologic connection to their own bodies, and cause body dissociation and intense mental confusion and in many young people, even anguish?
If yes, then is HAARP responsible for suicides? For destruction of families?
For destabilizing the entire culture? For "madness"? If yes, who inserted this Mind Control program into HAARP? (Were the billionaire investors in transgenderism involved?)
Can HAARP's affects be reversed?
The whole world wants its children to once again simply be who they are .... and go out and play.
With deep Gratitude to Dr. Rauni Kilde for connecting HAARP to Mind Control. "A woman God chose to enlighten not just this generation but all future generations. May God bless her soul, we owe her so much." @philtuljxen5466 9 years ago
Note to the reader: This article will have considerable repetition - because these ideas about "preferred pronouns" are new; include neurology, linguistics, biology, history, psychology, etc.; and may be hard to take past insistent political noise - in order to offer different lenses to view the topic through. The aim is to remove emotional reactions so we can all start looking much more closely and seriously at "preferred pronouns," with the repetition, inviting the reader to explore their own scientific and logical reasoning to the subject.
For the first time in human history, pronouns have been criminalized.
How very curious!
Which pronouns? The appropriate ones that fit the biologic facts of the person being referred to.
Also highly curious.
Preferred pronouns fit within a broad series of anomalous and show-y transgender behaviors that other people react to.
["anomalous" ... adjective
Deviating from the normal or common order, form, or rule.
Equivocal, as in classification or nature.
Deviating from a general rule, method, or analogy; abnormal; irregular.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.]
But the "preferred" pronoun is unique in four ways.
It is NON-visual.
It is the least reacted to of transgender behaviors.
It demands others' participation.
And it may be permanently harmful.
1. People strongly react to transgender males claiming to be female and entering and winning female sports events,
2. People intensely react to transgender or transvestite males reading to toddlers at the public library, often about whether they would like to be a boy or girl, or are they sure they are a girl or boy,
as well as react strongly to drag queens cavorting with the children physically or teaching them to pole dance or to put dollar bills into performing drag queens's underwear.
3. People strongly react to the dismissal of parental objections (by labeling the objections as bullying or hate speech)to Drag Queen Story Hour sessions between their little children and grown men dressed as women, or to their elementary school age children being taught about sodomy and having to put condoms on dildos.
4. People strongly react to celebrities promoting their children as transgender, and thus promoting transgenderism to the culture.
5. AND people react to the fact that people can lose jobs for NOT using false pronouns ("she" for a male, "he" for a female, "they" for a single person, etc.) and that in some places, NOT using the "preferred" pronoun has now been criminalized with fines.
That bears repeating because while the visual elements of transgender behavior is most reacted to, it is the non-visual, less emotionally disturbing "preferred pronouns" that those behind the LBGTQ leadership use to demand PUBLIC PARTICIPATION and ....
NOT using FALSE pronouns:
has been criminalized,
has led to loss of jobs,
has ended social connections,
has even destroyed family connections.
Based on their entangling people in crimes who are simply speaking normally, in economic disaster, and in heart-breaking social and family losses, "preferred pronouns" deserve much more attention.
The preferred pronoun -, the abnormal pronoun, the untrue pronoun - is the least emotionally charged of the transgender orbit of behavior and one that is even becoming normalized in the culture (with commercial mugs at Target and other major chain stores and online, showing the pronouns people "prefer") yet not using it can actually be damaging - professionally, socially and to families.
But "preferred pronouns" are also a neurologic threat.
"New research suggests that pronouns may play a far greater role than simply replacing a proper name in a sentence [.... and] that pronouns help keep the brain’s complex circuitry and limited memory system from being overloaded.
"Using fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging), psychology researcher Dr. Amit Almor and colleagues studied the brain activity of 21 adults, ages 19 - 34, who were asked to read sequences of sentences to compare the brain’s response to pronouns versus proper names. ....
“The brain lit up with activity when proper names were used, including areas that are not associated with language,” Almor said. “We saw considerable activity in areas of the parietal lobe that involve spatial processing that was absent when pronouns were used.” [All emphasis is by this author.]
"Almor is the first researcher to use brain imaging to explore the neurological underpinnings of humans’ preference for pronouns. ....
"The brain responds to proper names by creating a representation of the person in the mind, drawing from various parts of the brain to construct complex visual, sound and other information associated with that person. Every time the name is repeated, the brain responds by activating a process that creates a new representation of the person.
"The brain initially holds each created representation in memory. The integration of these multiple representations requires effort that can disrupt the brain’s ongoing processing of what it hears during spoken conversation.
"Pronouns, while faulty for their potential ambiguity, don’t cause the same disruptions in the brain that proper names do when used in the right context. In fact, they allow the brain to move easily from one thought or sentence to another. This seamless transition allows a person to digest more fully the meaning or intent of the thought being conveyed without the neural circuitry interference that proper names cause, said Almor.
“ 'We are at the mercy of our memory system, which is limited,' Almor said. 'The more items or representations we hold, the more effort we need to spend so as not to lose information.Pronouns let us avoid that juggle in our brains. I expected to find activity in classic language areas of the brain. I was surprised to see activity in the spatial areas, but it makes perfect sense.'
Almor says American Sign Language uses a similar system to protect the brain from such “juggling.” In ASL, a person will sign a proper name on first reference and then point to a specific location in the air, as if “placing” that name on an invisible computer desktop. Instead of re-signing the name, which causes the brain to create a new representation of that person, the signer will point to where he or she had “placed” that name so that the other person will understand to whom he or she is referring.
“ 'Language has evolved to meet our brain’s needs, and sign language is no different,' said Almor. 'In fact, although sign languages are often studied through comparison to spoken languages, in this case sign language may show the internal working of the brain’s language ability more transparently than any spoken language.'
“ 'Our study suggests that, just like signers, English speakers place people that were previously mentioned in space, although in the case of English speakers, this space is a ‘virtual’ brain space.' "
Now watch the problem with "preferred pronouns"
1. "Pronouns, while faulty for their potential ambiguity, don’t cause the same disruptions in the brain that proper names do when used in the right context."
But "preferred pronouns" are all intentionally in the wrong context.
2. "[T]hey [pronouns] allow the brain to move easily from one thought or sentence to another. This seamless transition allows a person to digest more fully the meaning or intent of the thought being conveyed without the neural circuitry interference that proper names cause."
But what happens to neural circuitry when the reference of "preferred pronouns" is to something:
actually wrong or false, and
when the :preferred pronoun" itself is highly charged politically and emotionally?
3. " 'The more items or representations we hold, the more effort we need to spend so as not to lose information. Pronouns let us avoid that juggle in our brains ' "
But what happens if the "preferred pronouns" themselves bring in highly unusual "items and representations" that might tend toward making people lose other information or distract them from it? What if "preferred pronouns" thus complicate or even overload the job of the brain rather than simplifying it?
(The images below are an example of "items and representations" that "preferred pronouns" reference.)
4. "American Sign Language uses a similar system to protect the brain from such “juggling.” .... Instead of re-signing the name, which causes the brain to create a new representation of that person, the signer will point to where he or she had “placed” that name so that the other person will understand to whom he or she is referring."
But what if the "preferred pronouns," in not fitting the biology of the person, are pointing AWAY from the person allegedly being referenced and instead toward highly charged representations and/or to an entire intensely emotionally loaded political paradigm?
5. " 'English speakers place people that were previously mentioned in space, although in the case of English speakers, this space is a ‘virtual’ brain space.' "
But what if "preferred pronouns." in not fitting the person being referenced, can find no virtual space, or are creating a second space in the brain, one for falsereferences?
As we can see, pronouns aren't a superficial thing or just something "preferred" - as in a minor or irrelevant social nicety. Pronouns are core neurologically.
There are allegedly over 70 new "preferred pronouns" that were recently INVENTED (by whom?) and forced on the public under threat of various significant punishments. Here are only a very few of them (leaving off the pronouns he and she and they that are biologicallyor numerically false references
HE/SHE
HIM/HER
HIS/HER
HIS/HERS
HIMSELF/HERSELF
zie
zim
zir
zis
zieself
sie
sie
hir
hirs
hirself
ey
em
eir
eirs
eirself
ve
ver
vis
vers
verself
tey
ter
tem
ters
terself
e
em
eir
eirs
emself
To get specific, the "preferred" (or wrong) pronoun is a lie. But it is not just any lie but one using pronouns which play a major role in language that affects the brain in particular ways.
Pronouns work at the level of syntax. Syntax structures speech itself. And pronouns have a unique role in that structuring.
Thus "preferred pronouns" are not "just any ole words" added to vocabulary or "just a preference" of one word over another. No, they operate as part of syntax with pronouns performing a highly specific job.
Normal pronouns, based on studies to understand their neurologic function, appear to play to streamline representations in a way that helps the brain manage limited storage.
Do "preferred pronouns" which are lies of biological referencing or lies of plurality or which reference nothing known (e.g. zee")
mess up the simplifying referencing that normal pronouns do?
complicate referencing in general?
alter how the brain must now store information?
create a bifurcated storage system?
overload rather than streamline storage?
affect thinking itself?
"Preferred pronouns" are syntactical LIES that are being implanted or embedded neurologically, and even into very young children and teens whose brains are not fully developed..
This may be the first time in human history, people are being forced to lie to other people at the level of syntax. Totalitarian governments have forced people to lie about facts or speak fawningly of leaders or rejectingly of good people. Fascist governments and cultural revolutions are known for such manipulation of people's words.
But "preferred pronouns" are a manipulation or control at a syntactical level that negates a PRIMARY fact of life - who is male, who is female. They also negate what is singular, what is plural (in terms of people) and who is even being referred to.
As bizarre as this demand for a public lie is, it is backed up now by criminalization of those who won't lie.
This manipulation of syntax relates to what exists in the world, and thus to perception itself.
Pulling this out of the realm of LBGTQ or sex/gender a moment, imagine forcing everyone to refer to multiple things they see as though they were singular, or vice versa. One might then understand that the brain could be affected as the person would be lying about their innateperception.
So it is actually quite serious to twist syntax which relates us to the world we are in and informs us of it.
"Preferred pronouns" are bizarre because:
they are forced lies.
the lie is at the level of neurologically-built-in syntax
the lie is about reality
the lie is about perception
not using them - NOT LYING - is criminalized
even just referring through syntax to the reality of human biology is legally punished
Syntax!
People are being forced to use a neurologically deep part of speech. wrongly. How, out of that constant abnormal messaging to the brain, do people then generate a normal life?
"Preferred pronouns" distortion of syntax becomes serious as it becomes clear that it affects people neurologically.
We might assume those claiming "preferred pronouns" to represent themselves would be affected, but are those forced to commit these syntactical lies also neurologically affected?
The LBGTQ leadership (or those behind it), insist that transgender people should cut off from those who won't use the lying "preferred pronouns," so those who may already be confused about themseoves and isolated and often rejected, now lose even close relationships with family or friends who are honest and will not lie to them.
It's relevant to note that they are not being pushed to cut off from family members or friends out of being rejected by them for transgender feelings. The push to cut off family and friends who may not be rejecting them, is about their refusal use "preferred pronouns" which the LBGTQ leadership defines as not accepting them "for who they really are." So the reality of loving them, the fact of caring for them, or the connection of living with them don't matter. Only using "preferred pronouns" defines accepting them. The LBGTQ leadership (or those behind them) promotes cutting those friends and family off for that reason alone. What does this do to the already minimal life of those with transgender feelings?
Why are "preferred pronouns" so crucial to those pushing transgenderism?
What is going on?
Amit Almor's work on pronouns (above) suggests that the brain attempts to handle limited memory storage by using pronouns once the person has been identified. Logically, false pronouns would not ease the memory issue. Logically "preferred pronouns" as lies or inventions ("zee, zer") with no built-in reference to others, may even create a dual or multiple storage situation. Is Jim now Jane? Does using "she" for Jim make that easier for the brain or does the brain now have to deal with both Jim and Jane? Or if Jim, claiming to be Jane, chose some completely unique "preferred pronoun" detached from the simplicity of male/female biology, what is the brain to do? Is "zee" a reference to a letter? Is "they" for a single person a reference to others or denial of that single person's existence or a reference to multiple people within that person? What is the brain to do?
And what of the person (Jim/Jane) whose brain it is? Is there confusion in using pronouns that lie about Jim's/Jane's biology or in inventing pronouns that have little or no meaning to others in terms of referencing himself or herself, or is Jim/Jane perhaps personally losing self-reference altogether through "they" or "ve"?
In all this, can we begin to see how the lies of "preferred pronouns" might be harmful?
Go to 53.16 at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WeJ_syJtnU to hear Mark Christopher, the Chief Judge of the Federal Postal Court (whose jurisdiction is worldwide), describing a movie and the injury done to people linguistically. The identical issue exists with the pronouns.
When we went and watched this movie, called "Malignant," which is a recent movie, it was portrayed as a horror film. In doing the research, we realized that the Pharmaceutical Industry were trying to destroy and create a separation between your subconscious and your conscious mind so they are at war with each other, what they call "poisoning the spirit" so the spirit will attack your own body, .... that you're soulless.
"In doing so [in the film], it was a Pharmaceutical Industry with chemical lobotomy, which is still happening in the form of vaccines. They don't want your subconscious mind, your spirit, to fuse with your body and your conscious mind because when that happens, you will have the power, the strength, and the intellectual capacity of a natural creature.
Look at any natural creature outside of your window. It has thousands of times more skills than you do. It has all the navigational skills that you lack, not because you are less than them, it's because somebody hurt youLINGUISTICALLY, on paper, lied to you, vaccinated you, gave you death injections, got you smoking death sticks, and the rest of it. So the movie made that very clear."
(Emphasis by this author.)
It is the linguistic lie that is relevant here and its potential to create an on-going struggle between the unconscious mind and the conscious mind. Mr Christopher says that interferes with the ability of the mind and body to fuse with the soul. Perhaps the movie suggested this as well.
If one thinks logically about it, if you are male ('he') and telling yourself, and others are telling you through using wrong pronouns, that you are female ('she') or plural ('they") or something unheard of ("zee"), how would your unconscious mind handle that unceasing barrage of non-truth at the core of your very being? Even if your conscious mind thought the lie were true or was okay to go along,, would the subconscious mind buy the lie or would it out of some more fundamental and essential "knowing," reject it?
Two entities are involved with the lie - those being referred to with false pronouns, and those who are doing the referring. Are they each harmed?
Perhaps studies showing neurologic/physiologic evidence of the impact of lying, might help one consider more closely that being forced against one's will to use a pronoun that does not match one's own perception of another's biology - might be experienced as a lie. Or in the case of the person being referred to, would the non-matching ("preferred") pronoun be experienced as a lie they are supposed to accept as truth?
So, is there support to lend to what Mr. Christopher said - that the conscious and subconscious mind would not be at peace with lies - is there hard evidence that lies negatively affect our minds and bodies?
Brain imagining offers some supporting evidence that there is:
"Symptoms of anxiety arise because lying activates the limbic system in the brain, the same area that initiates the “fight or flight” response that is triggered during other stresses. When people are being honest, this area of the brain shows minimal activity. But when telling a lie, it lights up like a fireworks display. An honest brain is relaxed, while a dishonest brain is frantic.
[This refers to the brain of people telling lies, not to the brain of people exposed to lies but it indicates that the brain is reactive to lies.
".... In addition to short-term stress and discomfort, living a dishonest life would seem to take a toll on health. According to a 2015 review article, constant lying is associated with an array of negative health outcomes including high blood pressure, increased heart rate, vasoconstriction, and elevated stress hormones in the blood.
"Other studies suggest that long-term effects could be minimal since it appears that we get more comfortable with lying the more we do it. In other words, we develop an unsettling tolerance to being devious.
[Please note the verb "appears" and then note the adjectives "comfortable," "unsettling," "devious," which are all personal interpretations by the writer of the study - with the word "devious" being the writer's negative moral interpretation.]
"Brain imaging experiments conducted by Tali Sharot at University College London show that the brain adapts to dishonest behavior. Participants showed reduced activity in their limbic system as they told more lies, supporting the idea that each lie makes lying easier.
[This is yet another interpretation. It doesn't tel us what is actually occurring in the brain. Could the brain, with more and more lies, have become confused about what was true or real? Could the brain have become fatigued? Could the brain have had to in some way protect itself against its franticness? The author's moral interpretations tell us only about the author's emotional reactions to lying.]
[The author moves now from moral interpretations to predictions and we have lost all hold of brain activity. These long term studies suggesting some adjustment the brain may be making to lying, conflicts with the physiologic studies showing "high blood pressure, increased heart rate, vasoconstriction, and elevated stress hormones in the blood." So, is the brain actually adjusting or under severe stress? The personal, moral and now social interpretations all break away from what is sought here - facts about the brain's reaction to telling lies.]
"If our brain can cozy up to lying with enough practice, it would explain society’s disdain for dishonesty and why people hesitate to give liars a second chance. These strong social rules and the penalties that come from breaking them might be what really keeps us honest at the end of the day."
[The personal interpretation becomes more florid in "cozy up to lying." And that becomes the leaping off point into various "explanations" of society, penalties, etc. All of these ignore what matters .... the impact of lies on the human brain and the relation to the brain's "frantic" (fight or flight) behavior.]
The studies appear to indicate that the brain is struggling to cope with lies, and long-term, the body is highly stressed by telling lies. This does not address the impact on the person who is being lied to constantly (or lying to themselves) but it does suggest a negative physiologic impact on people in demanding that the public use "preferred pronouns" which are lies about another's biology. Pronouns, which perform an essential neurologic task, are being significantly warped away from what is true or real, and then their use is forced (by whom?).
Here is another place to look for an innate biologic sensitivity to lies.
"Plants Are Experts at Detecting Lies"
From "the Secret Life of Plants." The reader is encouraged to read the full excert of which this section is but a part (https://www.pureinsight.org/node/1496).
"Generally for experiments involving lie detectors, electrodes are connected to a suspect and then the suspect is asked meticulously designed questions. Everyone has a clear-headed side, which is usually called "conscience." Therefore, no matter how many reasons and excuses one gives, when lying or committing a bad deed, that person knows clearly that it is a lie, a bad deed. Hence, the body's electric field changes, and this change is what is recorded by the equipment.
"Backster did an experiment in which he connected the lie detector to a plant and then asked a person some questions. As a result, Backster discovered that the plant could tell if the person was lying or not. He asked the person what year he was born in, giving him seven choices and instructing him to answer "no" to all of them, including the correct one. When the person answered "no" to the correct year, the plant reacted and a peak was drawn on the graph paper.
"Dr. Aristide Esser, the director of medical research at the Rockland State hospital in New York, repeated the experiment by asking a man to incorrectly answer questions in front of a plant the man had nurtured and cared for since it was a seedling. The plant did not cover up for its owner at all. Incorrect answers were reflected on the graph paper. Esser, who had not believed Backster, saw for himself that Backster's theories were correct."
Brain imagining and studies with plants both indicate that biology reacts to lies.
Yet those behind the LBGTQ leadership are pushing everyone to lie and continuously. with "preferred pronouns," to people who may (or may not) be transgender, and have even arranged criminal fines and severe personal losses for those who refuse.
The transgender movement, a part of deconstructionism which asserts there is no actual truth - each person has his or her own truth - is having a powerful effect in detaching people from reality .... and "preferred pronouns" play a major role in that. The following comments by a depressed boy who believes that everything about him has been assigned to him - his name, his nickname, his pronouns, even his gender. Did choosing his "preferred pronouns" lead to a sense of everything about him being chosen, with nothing real or inherent?
This boy's account supports Mr Christopher's assertion that linguistics is affecting the conscious and subconscious minds' ability to be at peace with each other. When linguistics itself (syntax) is a lie, what does that do? Mr. Christopher might say of the boy below that "somebody hurt him LINGUISTICALLY."
"My name is joshua. My pronouns are they/them/theirs and joshua.
"I am neuro-queer and gender-vague.
"I also have no name; or pronouns; or neuro-type; or gender; and i am no-one.
"Having a break-down woke me up to the understanding that my identity has been largely shaped by external sources.
“My” given birth-name is Joshua, and “my” given nick-name is Josh.
“My” given pronouns are he/him, and “my” given “sex/gender” is male/man.
"And so on.
"I didn’t choose these things as fundamental parts of my identity. I agreed to them."
He is saying one either "chooses" or "agrees" to elements of one's identity and none of it happens naturally. And yet one thing is a fact and was not assigned to him or chosen by him. He is male. But he isn't male by virtue of his own decision or someone else's imposition of that designation, but because he has xy chromosomes. No one assigned that to him unless God was present to direct the coming together of a specific sperm and a specific egg.
No amount of "believing" otherwise, or feeling otherwise, or any political line of thought or argument, or any wardrobe of clothing, or any sadness, or rage, or any drugs, or even any surgery, can ever change his xy chromosomes which are what make him male.
His xy chromosomes give him his first immediate truth about himself in life, which came to him by nature, or naturally. They were not chosen or assigned. He came into the world, through and through, male. That truth of himself is one on which he could build a REAL life, one that is not "gender-vague."
The wrong pronoun, however, in not fitting the biology of the person, in being a lie, may be affecting children, teens, and young adults) in a way that not only might destabilize that foundational fact of being male (or female), but may create such a disturbance between the conscious and unconscious mind, that it prevents their mind coming together and fusing with the body and soul to complete a full, normal, human being with all the normal powers such a completely unified human being would naturally have.
Lost in the dramatic VISIBLE transgender activities, the lies of seemingly irrelevant "preferred pronouns" are doing physiologic harm . Is that unseen harm intented?
Has an effort been made by those behind the LBGTQ movement to ensure that mentally sound, self-knowing, soul-connected people fail to develop, and, instead, people become fragmented at a neurologic level? Does a young person being perpetually flooded with lies about the core reality of themselves by all those around them (however well meaning those around them might be) leave that young person's conscious and subconscious minds in constant conflict? Does that perpectual conflict affect their souls abililty to solidly merge with their bodies and minds?
How would it be possible for "preferred pronouns" to have such a deteriorating impact on the solidity of a person?
Gandhi says very simply:
"Truth is God."
"Preferred pronouns" which do not fit the biology of the person referred to, are NOT truth.
Could they even be considered ANTI-truth?
In using Gandhi's view of God as Truth, could "preferred pronouns" be ANTI-God?
Through "preferred pronouns," children and young people are being swamped in lies about their physical reality.
Who could possibly build a sane, whole, solid life on that?
Part 2 described the immense damage to a child of the question, "Are you sure you are a boy (or a girl)? Part 3 will look deeper into what is happening to the child mentally.
Who carries children forward into life? Is that responsibility not sacred?
Fiji (photo by Steve McCurry)
And Joy is Everywhere; It is in the Earth’s green covering of grass; In the blue serenity of the Sky; In the reckless exuberance of Spring; In the severe abstinence of gray Winter; In the Living flesh that animates our bodily frame; In the perfect poise of the Human figure, noble and upright; In Living; In the exercise of all our powers; In the acquisition of Knowledge; in fighting evils… Joy is there Everywhere. – Rabindranath Tagore, 1861-1941
Is Tagore's description of joy, not our ultimate goal of education for our children - to enlarge their curiosity about and love of the world?
And do we not want our children to have whole and stable minds and personalites?
My mind to me a kingdom is, such present joys therein I find, That it excels all other bliss – Sir Edward Dyer 1543 – 1607
So why are the schools pushing things on our children which would break them?
Below are excerpts from material indicating the US Government has been involved for a long time in experiments and programs to break people down, even just through questioning.
Theodore Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, was a participant in one of Henry Murray’s experiments at Harvard where Murray’s team bullied, harassed, and psychologically broke down participants. Henry Murray had previously worked for the CIA’s predecessor and may have been funded by the clandestine MKULTRA program. ....
[Murray] .... conducted tests on brainwashing, and determined how well soldiers could withstand interrogations. The interrogation studies included intense mock interrogations on soldiers as part of assessing the limits of their psychological breaking points (Chase, 2000). From 1959-1962, Murray conducted such interrogation studies on Harvard undergraduates (Chase, 2000). Theodore Kaczynski .... was one of the 22 participants in Murray’s study, subjected to several years of interrogations designed to psychologically break the young man.
From the website "Illuminati Rex" with emphasis added:
Project MONARCH is an alleged government black program to create mind-controlled slave for use as spies, assassins, couriers, and prostitutes. Monarchs carry out their assignments and consequently have no memory of their actions. According to some estimates, there are over 2 million Americans currently under mind control.
Monarch slaves are taken as infants and are traumatized using electroshocks, drugs, sexual abuse, mind games, and hypnosis in order to force the mind to split and create an alternative personality to deal with the pain. The victim imagines that someone else is being tortured and the mind is forced to split.
.... Although, accounts vary on the exact methods used, the common key ingredient is trauma. ....
Walt Disney and Hollywood Mind Control
Disney, the man, the studio, and the theme parks are often cited by Monarch victims as an essential part of the government’s mind control program. Programmers use electroshock in combination with Fantasia’s imagery to induce dissociative personalities and for programming. .... [T]hey worked with Walt Disney in designing his theme parks to include facilities for mind control programming. Many of the rides are designed for use in mind control and to traumatize young children.
MGM’s Wizard of Oz and Disney’s Alice in Wonderland are favorites of Monarch programmers. Victims are told to go “over the rainbow”, or “there’s no place like home” to reach a safe place in Wizard of Oz programming or “go through the looking-glass” if using Alice in Wonderland. “Follow the yellow Brick Road.” or “Follow the White Rabbit” are triggers to follow the programmer’s commands.
Illuminati programmers designed Star Wars for use in trauma-base mind control programming.
Monarch programming is also used on the masses via movies, televisions, and music. They are used to desensitize the public or to trigger programs in mind-controlled slaves.
.... Researchers quickly forgot the notion of consent so-praised a few years earlier for its inclusion in the Nuremberg Code. Soon, apologists were using the same excuses as Nazis convicted as war criminals to justify their research. CIA doctors broke their Hippocratic Oaths in which they swore to abstain from doing harm.
.... Psychology professor George H Estabrooks was one of the early proponents of hypnosis. ....
"I can hypnotize a man — without his knowledge or consent — into committing treason against the United States."
"I will take a number of men and will establish in them through the use of hypnotism thecondition of split personality."
Corydon Hammond
Dr. Hammond spoke at a gathering of therapists held at the Radisson Hotel Plaza in Alexandria, Virginia in the summer of 1992. His lecture, entitled Hypnosis in MPD: Ritual Abuse [MPD - Multiple Personality Disorder]
Hammond publicized many of the elements that would later become staples of Monarch mind control survivor testimonies.
He talked on how infants are taken at around two and half year old and are made dissociative through sexual and physical torture. Five years later, the abuse is kicked up a notch until the end of their teenage years and reinforced periodically on adults.
The point of all this is to establish that people's minds can be broken and they can more easily be broken starting very young and trauma is key to that breakage.
The situation in schools imposing a transgender curriculum (who designed it? who funded it?) is one of physical control over the child. If that child is disturbed by being asked "Are you sure you are a boy (or a girl)?," they can't just get up and leave. They are trapped in that situation.
Tthe situation of the teacher in Canada coming to school wearing gigantic fake breasts is a good example of students (even older ones) being locked into a condition that could be intolerable or even traumatic, but unable to leave or object. They were caught in an emotionally and neuologically overwhelming, and potentially even traumatizing, situation. How were their brains handling it? Was there any disssociation to escape it?
Torture depends on people being entrapped. Students are.
How are 3 and 4 year olds to leave if they are disturbed by being asked "Are you sure you are a boy (or a girl)?" How are they neurologically handling that question that violates that whole life and sense of being, or its constant repetition, or the offer of different pronouns, or the books suggesting wearing opposite sex clothes? They are being flooded with questions and material that turn their world on its head. Is that not traumatic to them even if they are silent? Are their brain and unconscious not locked into impossible confusion and conflict?
Children are taken at very young ages to program through the Monarch system because at those ages their brain is easier to force to disassociate.
Experiments at Harvard were designed to psychologically break students, so clearly, questioning someone relentlessly (and aren't questions about what sex someone is repeated through the year and in subsequent years?) can create a breaking point.
Might the psyche's of children in preschool forced into situation that questions the most basic thing they know about themselves (their sex), not fragment to escape the situation?
Notice that the Monarch system relies on Disney figures and different story lines to aid in reinforcing the disassocation.
Are Drag Queens serving that purpose?
Why are they everywhere now? Why are they everywhere and in sync with the imposition of transgenderism being forced on children? Are they part of breaking down children's neurologic functioning in which their right brain and unconscious and soul fully know what sex they are and also what adult is a man or woman?
Are they are supposed to attract children as a substitute for the innocent imaginative world being ripped away from children?
Why are Drag Queens everywhere now in the culture? Are they there to reinforce in the children the mind clobbering question "Are you sure you know you are a boy (or a girl)?" so there is no escape from it? So there is not going back to knowing what is real, even about themselves?
Are the Drag Queens omnipresent in the culture now to confuse children and upset the public? That surface confusion and upset distracts from the fact that Drag Queens being everywhere would reinforce in school children the trauma of their school's transgender curriculi that the children have been neurologically and emotionally tortured by.
People are understanding now that most of those seeking "transition" drugs and surgery have personality disorders.
Maybe, though, it's time to consider that personality disorders can be, and likely are being, created in children being exposed to a transgender curriculum that nightmarishly violates what a child's brain and unconscious know is real. So, for the child, there are two worlds. The adults have not stopped the false one but at least are working hard to stop the physical mutilation and sterilization of the confused children.
This MKULTRA/MONARCH attack on our children has been right in our faces all along. We just have been so distracted by the sexual or grooming aspects of it all that we haven't stopped to think more literally - how would forcing questions on children that strip away their foundational knowledge of self, impact a child neurologically. And who came up with this reality questioning curriculum?
People have recommended taking children out of schools with transgender curriculi because they don't want them indoctrinated. But the situation is much, much more serious than that. Children are being broken down mentally and are unable to escape from it.
Once parents understand that Transgenderism was RIGGED and that the US government, the CIA, and others, have been breaking children's minds and even young adults' minds on purpose for years - through ceaseless questioning, or through trauma - parents will rescue their children from the mental torture they can't escape on their own.
Truth matters. The mind literally needs it.
Kindness matters. The mind and body literally need it, too.
Be good to each other. Our children need that kind of world.
And how is it being wrecked with this single question:
"Are you sure you are a boy (or girl)?"
To begin to grasp what that question may be doing to small children or young people, we have to begin by thinking about what childhood is and its essence. Is it naivete? Innocence? Is it play? Is it children a-lit with curiosity or joy?
Unless we can feel in ourselves what it is, we can't experience deeply what is being done to children with that one question "Are you sure you are a boy (or a girl)?
“Every child has known God, Not the God of names, Not the God of don'ts, Not the God who ever does Anything weird, But the God who knows only 4 words And keeps repeating them, saying: "Come Dance with Me." Come Dance.”
I am full of Light even before the sky Can greet the sun or the moon."
Borrowing from Hafez:
When I think of children I see great parades with wildly colorful bands Streaming from their minds and hearts, Carrying wonderful and happy messages To the birds and animals and sky
Little children go to school.
What happens there?
Hafez says
“O thou who are trying to learn
the marvel of [Life]
through the copybook of reason,
I am very much afraid you will never see the point.”
is Hafez in The Gift talking about what we hope will happen for children at school?
“For we have not come here to take prisoners Or to confine our wondrous spirits,
But to experience ever and ever more deeply Our divine courage, freedom, and Light!”
Now, having thought and felt about childhood and its wonders and "the copybook of reason" and taking no prisoners, and experiencing being free, it's possible to talk now about what may be going on in children that is changed when they go to school.
Children are predominantly using their right brain before they go to school.
Guided by emotions
Loving arts and creativity
Contextually aware
Visually skilled
Intuitive
Imaginative
Having emotional intelligence
Seeing the bigger picture instead of focusing on the details
And to help you feel that world again, the questions posed above about childhood were right-brain oriented - visual or poetic.
Children are aware of the world, even in love with it. Who hasn't seen a child stop and become mesmerized by some little thing we go past without noticing?
“There is no end to the beauty
for the person who is aware.
Even the cracks between the sidewalk
contain geometric patterns of amazing beauty.” – Matthew Fox
Left brain characteristics are different:
Thinking in words
Linear thinking
Facts
Logic
Sequencing
We all know how it feels to color versus how it feels to take tests. Coloring is right-brain pleasure, tests depend on left-brain thinking and often include anxiety about doing "right."
Now, to "the question" children are currently asked in school:
When a teacher asks a child whether they are a boy or a girl, the right-brain child is confronted with a perception-obliterating, entire-life-context shaking, sense-of-self upturning, challenge.
And on what can children fall back on in that moment?
Because the blow to their previous healthy narcissism is immense.
The child has (Ideally) been lovingly mirrored his or her whole life by parents who reflect back to them even without words that they are a boy or a girl. The parents does so based on seeing the child's external genitalia at birth which are an biologic expression of either a boy's xy or or a girl's xx chromosomes. The child by the age of 5 (kindergarden) has non-verbally integrated into themselves that they are male or female and are aware that their male or female genitalia "means" that. And they would know that their clothing would be in sync with that or not be.
So, who and why is this big person, suddenly asking them what they are and offering them words to use (pronouns) that go with something else?
And what are they to do?
They are at the moment of that single question being forced to question their core being. And the question is being asked of them in a setting of power and authority where their parents left them, urging them to "be good and listen to the teacher."
As a predominantly right-brain functioning child, they must suddenly shift to their left hemisphere to answer a spoken question which completely violates their right-brain non-verbal understanding of their very being, and may disturb their unconscious which certainly would be aware of the sex of the child. The question may even violate the child's soul.
Do they go along? How do they feel? How do they even begin to "think" about such a question since that aspect of their life has not be about thought but contextual knowing or awareness?
The teacher (or whoever invented this curriculum) just imploded the child's means of normal functioning - living in a predominantly non-verbal awareness that does not depend on language or logic - leaving the child only confusion and perhaps floundering based on a sudden shock to something absolutely foundational in his or her world.
The child, asked if it's really the opposite sex (and the word "really" may have been emphasized which the child would surely pick up on) is supposed to do what, having just in that moment lost the whole known, comfortable, non-verbal, gestalt of his or her life? And that gestalt is and was utterly congruent with what he or she sees of their own body as well as with their parents relationship with them and their activities, clothing, and all social relationships up to that moment.
To call that question - "Are you sure you are a boy (or girl)?" a narcissistic blow is a vast understatement.
And for any who believe right-brain dominance in a child is informationally weak in some way and should be gotten past for the sake of learning, one has only to look at art work done using the left brain and art done by the same person moments later using the right brain, to question which part of the brain is "aware" of more.
The images drawn using the left-brain are on the left and the images drawn using the right-brain images are on the right
School curriculi pushing transgenderism on children based on questioning the unconscious self-awareness of a child or young person of their own sex, take a sledge hammed to each child's developmentally natural, built-in, immensely rich, neurologic functioning.
It takes a sledge hammed to the gloriousness of childhood itself which rests on a marvel - creative, imaginative, non-verbal whole-world awareness that is neurologically lushly functioning.
And offers instead, extremely painful confusion and distrust in who one even is, and would make it almost impossible for a child to recapture the utterly natural and rich world of knowing.
Parents who think their children have somehow passed safely through such experiences have reason to sue based on the neurologic assault on the miraculousness of their children and the loss of their indescribably, rich childhood.
When we speak of childhood "losing its innocence," are we actually describing something that is occurring neurologically? Does a serious loss occur with the imposition of developmentally inappropriate demands on a child neurologically that then impacts a child's normal neurological functioning?
Is our gut sense of a "loss of childhood innocence" our way of describing a loss of a magical level of functioning in children? Are we feeling a loss of children's wondrous love for and natural awareness of the world, and attempting to describe, in a non-biologic way, the impact of neurologic clobbering?
We know that clobbering occurs in sexual abuse of children or physical abuse.
Are schools forcing transgender curriculi on children (as young as 3 and up to the teens) who arrive inchoately solid in themselves and filled with wonder about the world, actually physically assaulting their brains? Are the children being quite literally clobbered by questions and material that is impossible to process neurologically since it violates what the mind innately knows is true?
These curriculi are wrenching normal childhood away from its grounding in right-brain functioning and intimate knowledge by attacking children's minds repeatedly with inescapable and impossible questions about whether they are a sex that is perfectly visible and known to the child (and teacher). Are the curriculi designed to damage the child's thinking processes by forcing him or her to accept what their own brain tells them is not real?
Who designed this mind-damaging situtation: children trapped in classes and asked questions that violate their inherent knowlege of the world and which harm their brain-functioning?
Naomi Wolf just wrote what may be the most honest, humble, courageous, and gentle political statement in US history - and her statement may in itself help shift the country out of the most profoundly divisive time in American history.
It was a political statement, for sure, but it was something much more and much deeper. It was Gandhian in its truth and ahimsa.
Truth and ahimsa were the two things Gandhi used in his fight to free India from the tyrannical rule by the British.
Ahimsa
ahimsa - (Sanskrit: "noninjury") in the Indian religions of Jainism, Hinduism, and Buddhism, the ethical principle of not causing harm to other living things, can be distilled into a practice of non-violence in all aspects of life, from the physical to the mental and emotional. Non-violence is defined by honest compassion and true love.
Ahimsa is non-violence in thought, word and deed.
Gandhi brought down the British empire (the globalists) without firing a shot. He did it by uniting all religions and classes for Indians, even the most down-trodden, and guiding them using truth and love (ahimsa). He instilled in them a willingness to suffer without returning any violence, and even to die in the face of great abuse from those in power. Their AHIMSA even when confronted with the horrific brutality of the British Empire - its TRUTH - exposed the British and the empire collapsed out of public sympathy for the Indians and stunned horror at the British.
The media of the day covered the Indians' Salt March to the sea to gather free salt (essential for life but "owned" by the British), their being physically attacked by the British military, and though beaten and unarmed and some dying, the Indians kept coming, and kept being struck down, and kept coming still.
Non-violent Indians in exposing the horrifying truth of the British empire, destroyed British rule in India.
MLK, inspired by Gandhi, did a similar thing in teaching black people to hold their ground peacefully in the face of police dogs and fire-hoses, and with non-violence ennobling themselves and garnering the respect and support of the public.
When Obama got into office, he was almost immediately awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and a global stage for his Peace Prize speech. The award was given though Obama had not done anything in terms of peace [he would go on to start 7 wars]) Here is his speech in full.
It is of enormous significance that in his Peace Prize speech to the world, Obama immediately criticized both Gandhi and King.
We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations - acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago - "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life's work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak -nothing passive - nothing naïve - in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.
But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism - it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.
But for those who noticed, Obama's criticism was a telling moment. Why did Obama straight away attack, and on a global stage, the two greatest leaders of peaceful movements for human freedom in the world? His speech seemed almost a statement on behalf of empire and those currently running the world (including the British) that fear and violence and hatred were back and that despite Gandhi and King's non-violent examples and huge successes for humanity, Obama was announcing there would be no holds barred militarily.
It's crucial to notice that Obama's take on Gandhi and Kingwas at the level of "tactics" (non-violent protests being a means to an end) whereas Gandhi and King were driven by, and succeeded in uniting giant movements across every class and religion and race, not by using a tactic but out of their profound and deeply-held moral (or religious) beliefs.
Obama spoke as though Gandhi and King's both believing deeply in God was not central to their ability to unite people, to inspire, and to overcome immense obstacles to achieve human freedom.
MLK and We Shall Overcome
Go Tell It On the Mountain
Once Obama was in office, the moral guidance of Gandhian love and truth was dropped and what went into effect were "tactics" to undermine what had been Gandhi and King's successful peaceful protests and their uniting of people across classes and races. The Ferguson protest began like Dr. King's protests had, peacefully. But now people had been hired and inserted as violent provocateurs. Now, peaceful expression of public suffering or disagreement with government actions - was destroyed by paid violent actors. And Media coverage - which had once filmed Gandhi's Salt March and the attack on peaceful black protestors in Alabama - ceased to be an honest voice for the people and had became an orchestrated show scripted by those in power to control the minds of those watching. The public's natural compassion about abuse was prevented by Media focusing on chaos and "paid violence," which instead engendered public fear of legitimate protesters, though they were not responsible for the havoc.
"Buying violence" became the political trickery used by globalists in power - the same ones Gandhi had defeated. And MLK who had begun to shift his protests for civil rights at home into questions of economic justice and war internationally, in effect taking on the same global powers as Gandhi had, was murdered as Gandhi had been.
Non-violence was replaced by bought-violence and the essential work of Gandhi and King in bringing people together to express themselves to right wrongs safely and with love for others, was utterly subverted.
J6 comes to mind.
How does this relate to Naomi Wolf's article? She talked about J6.
It was theatre by paid agitators, including FBI, specifically designed to defeat the potentially moving non-violence of the marchers, a non-violence that connects people through compassion, and which could move the country as other marches on DC (such as MLK Jr's., or the March against the Vietnamese War) have done. Gandhi and King inspired such huge non-violent gatherings as a means for the people to speak to their country and the world
Naomi Wolf's article was Gandhian in its truth, and full of Ahimsa in its gentleness (non-violent in thought and word).
Both Gandhi and MLK spoke of love and of God. Obama's first big international speech spoke of their inadequacy in a time of terrorism, immediately negating divine-inspired truth and love for the sake of military license to do anything (and Obama went on to use drones to routinely kill huge numbers of innocent civilian people in the Middle East and elsewhere).
But this open abandonment of Gandhi's Truth (he said "God is Truth") and ahimsa (love/compassion expressed as non-violence in thought, word and deed) which had inspired and united millions of human beings, got darker.
HRC in running for office, spoke of those who didn't vote for her as "deplorables," teaching the left it was fine to viciously verbally attack those who didn't think as they did.
And verbal attacks then became screamingly and even insanely ugly against Trump. Needless to say, they were far from Ahimsa and extremely far from the truth as Naomi Wolf's article helps people see.
Racist? A man who pees on women? Misogynist? Hitler?
Naomi W0lf is bringing Truth.
Here is Judge Brown on whether Trump is racist.
The video goes on that most people don't know that Trump funded Jesse Jackson's run for president.
The promotion of such unhinged and horrifically hate-filled assaults didn't just fill the political world with the lowest level of interaction but also affected liberal universities such that not going along with scathing hatred of Trump could threaten a promotion or the job itself and that morphed in rejection of professors for not following various political agendas (all of them globalist).
Gandhi and King used their standing to unite people of different races, social caste and religions, but once HRC opened the door to calling millions of other people, "deplorables," vitriol (not-AHIMSA) became a standard of behavior as did lies (not-TRUTH) and the very opposite of Gandhi and King became normalized. All moral limits were removed on how Trump could be treated. And this spread out and severely separated and degraded the whole country (and affected people internationally as well.).
Gandhi and King brought belief in the power of non-violence. That was explicitly dismissed by Obama and along with it went love itself - as in "love your neighbor as yourself" and "love your enemy" - which undergirded non-violence, about non-violence in our thoughts, words and deeds.
A great cultural insanity took hold when HRC ran against Trump. Putting aside spying on him and all the illegal political things done to prevent him from winning or to get him out of office, but focusing only on the once-friendly connections between Americans even if they disagreed with each other politically, something intense and immensely harmful to everyone happened.
The pink hat protest comes to mind. It literally made "fashionable," even culturally de rigueur - for liberals to detest Trump. Pink Hats and Hillary's Mass Murders
The hats made it fun to hate together, to humiliate and mock someone (Trump) together .... about as far as one could get from Gandhi and King speaking of love and non-violence and God. What happened to the personal morality or character of decent liberals, suddenly happily participating in this culturally sanctioned mob of haters?
And that mob wasn't by accident. This was the Salt March turned on its head.
The Globalists had learned how to do that - to organize protests not to unite through ahimsa and truth, but to undo a country's connection through hatred and lies. Sometimes they paid violent agitators, and sometimes - as with the pink hat protest - they used social media to round up sincere liberals who didn't realize they were being used for globalist purposes. The protests divided the country, and liberals traded in normally high personal standards of relating for unprincipled, degraded personal attacks on Trump and his supporters.
What globalist (anti-Gandhi) supported it? George Soros.
Once Obama rejected Gandhi and King (who deeply believed in God), and HRC attacked her opponents and the left began attacking not just Trump but all those who thought differently, we seem to have fallen into the Globalist trap we were all warrned against - divide and conquer. How can we see what is happening or fight for what our country needs if we are fighting each other?
if someone supported - or was even thought to support Trump - they were called racist, and things have devolvied so seriously that across the country families have separated, with grandparents who've done nothing wrong to anyone, not allowed to see grandchildren.
The pink hat protest at Trump's inauguration seemed almost a celebration of the left's (at least leftist women's) conversion into a culturally acceptable, culturally-unifying community of hatred.
But lost in the pink hat protest against Trump was the most horrific reality about HRC. The Clinton Foundation was running and profiting off of mass murders of black men, women and children on HAITI.
If the video links in the article above describing this horror are broken, that censorship is how things have worked
"If we weren't dividing ourselves up into identity politics, this incredible lionizing of a woman responsible for the murders of other women and of children, and this hatred of a big loudmouth [was he? or was he trying to be heard past the incessant vicious lies?''] but still a man profoundly innocent by comparison, could never have happened."
If the beyond-imaginable hatred unleashed toward Trump was not about some horrible evil he had done, then was it because of who or what he threatened? What great thing was at stake for them?
Naomi Wolf's article is not just a humble apology to conservatives, full of truth liberals may find it hard hear from a fellow liberal. She may understand that, and that other liberals and progressives have not come forward as she has, yet. But does she realize she just provided the long-needed counter to Obama's having stripped Gandhi's Truth and Ahimsa and MLK's belief in the power of God and love from this country?
She, with gentle truth (Gandhi)'s ahimsa and truth) and with love and fine character (MLK), reinjected their loving morality back into this country.
Perhaps we need to have another big march, a new sort of march, to unite us and convert us back to being the loving people we really are? Shall we have a march to celebrate each other for surviving during such hard timse for everyone. And will we at that march, at that moment look around and really see others as people, again?. And will we recognize ourselves in them and feel what we have all been through? And will we start to talk together again, and say "fiddlesticks to division" and with those 3 words, leap over tall agendas and perilous pronouns and bullying beliefs in a single bound? And then, and then, will we hit an shocking and wonderful truth, that love is all there is? Will we start to understand we can either love other people like we love ourselves or lose happiness for ourselves, our children and us all? Will we see each other and see our country embodied in each of us, and want to help each other again, and from here on out?
And some know that big chicken houses around the country have been burning up.
Some of those who know both things are understandably glad they raise chickens themselves.
And some of those who raise chickens noticed that their chickens have stopped laying eggs.
This fact went out across the internet and people learned if they stopped using Tractor Supply's brand (Producer's Pride) and switched to another brand or made their own feed, the chickens began laying again.
Some people did some investigation of who owns Tractor Supply. From Survive the News.
"Its board of directors is composed of 10 people, some of whom are tied to globalist entities like the World Economic Forum (WEF).
Joy Brown, a former executive at Vanguard, a $5 trillion index fund, is one of them. Vanguard is one of the “big three” index funds – BlackRock and State Street are the other two – boasting major financial support from the WEF and possibly even the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in China.
Andre Hawaux, another Tractor Supply board member, is a former ConAgra executive. ConAgra, as you may recall, is a heavy proponent of genetic engineering (GMO) that one Wyoming farmer told the independent media is comprised of “a bunch of crooks.”
ConAgra is one of the GMO top dogs that produces “terminator” seeds that eventually go sterile – and that also cause the soil they are planted in to go sterile. The gene-splicing technologies employed by ConAgra are “bad for both plants and humans,” this same farmer confirmed.
Then we have Mark Weikel, another Tractor Supply board member who worked as president of Victoria’s Secret, owned by Leslie Wexner, from 2003-2007. During that particular time period, pedophile pervert Jeffrey Epstein had a power-of-attorney document in his possession that allowed him to hire, manage, and fire all of Wexner’s employees and take control over the company’s finances and entities.
And then there was the culling of tens of thousands of chickens from people's chicken businesses because of avian flu. But some people know it's easy to declare a virus and freak the public, and then wipe out perfectly healthy animals in the tens of thousands, leaving people only corporate food.
And some know Avian flu is particularly popular among those wiping out the little guy's livelihood.
Given all the chicken house fires, the government's avian flu "declarations," and the high price of eggs, reasonable people may be getting interested in raising their own chickens.
Suddenly, some veterinarians in Australia are saying it's BAD to raise chickens.
Did Bill Gates or didn't Bill Gates say he thinks that there should be vaccines in the food? There are so many denial websites around that topic, it's kind of looks like he did.
In any case, whatever he said, what do they often use to culture viruses for vaccines? Eggs. So, if they were going to put vaccines in the food, would eggs be a particularly likely food to choose?
But the vaccine fellows would have to be fast and unbelievably clever to get their vaccines into home-raised eggs before little Susie or Billy snatch the eggs out from under their laying hens so quickly the hens barely have time to squawk, and off the children run nto the kitchen for the eggs to be cooked for the family breakfast.
"This study evaluated the potential efficacy of EggYolk Antibodies (IgY) as a neutralizing agent against the SARS-CoV-2. We investigated the neutralizing effect of anti-spike-S1 IgYs on the SARS-CoV-2 pseudovirus, as well as its inhibitory effect on the binding of the coronavirus spikeprotein mutants to human ACE2."
That looks like eggs (or the yolks in them) are bad news for the Virus and the Vaccines' spike protein. If certain people happened to want harm from those two V's, it seems that eggs might fowl up some of that harm.
Did the virus happen about the same time as the burning down of chicken houses, screwing with chickfeed so hens stop laying eggs, declarations of avian flu in perfectly healthy-looking hens, and paying off veterinarians to sound like exceptionally complete idiots about chickens?
The final news is a question. if the people behind all the less-than-niceness towards chickens and people, are aware and more and more anxious that more and more ordinary people are catching on to the ways the world is being run, could it be the not-so-nice people want eggs to be so extremely expensive so that no one could afford to throw eggs at them on their way to prison?
Ignore the perverted teachers, grooming curriculum, the drag queens with toddlers and the men in women's bathing suits. They are meant to be a highly upsetting distraction, even while they further the narrative.
One piece of hidden equipment suggests that the sudden explosion of transgenderism may be rigged. It certainly exposes malign intent at the highest levels by people with immense power.
According to Gene Decode, a 20 year veteran and an expert on tunnels all over the world, there was military-grade equipment hidden under Boulder Mountain, beaming out transgender frequencies.
"This research explores the current capabilities of the US military to use electromagnetic (EMF) devices to harass, intimidate, and kill individuals and the continuing possibilities of violations of human rights by the testing and deployment of these weapons. To establish historical precedent in the US for such acts, we document long-term human rights and freedom of thought violations by US military/intelligence organizations. Additionally, we explore contemporary evidence of on-going government research in EMF weapons technologies and examine the potentialities of continuing human rights abuses. This weapon can be used also to disperse protesters.
"Although some devices are labelled as Microwave Weapons; the microwave range is commonly defined as being between 300MHz and 300GHz which is within the RF range.A directed-energy weapon (DEW) emits energy in an aimed direction without the means of a projectile. It transfers energy to a target for a desired effect. Intended effects on humans may be non-lethal or lethal.
"Aside from uses on people or as a potential missile defense, directed energy technology has also been shown to stop or disable moving cars, drones, jet skis and electronic devices such as mobile phones.
"The energy can come in various forms:
Electromagnetic radiation, including radio frequency, microwave, lasers and masers
Particles with mass, in particle-beam weapons (technically a form of micro-projectile weapon)
Sound, in sonic weapons"
Some examples of what has already been done in affecting human bodies and human mind control:
There is also constant exposure to frequencies from towers and devices in everyone's homes which can be used for mind and body control.
And then there are all the children's own gadgets - from games, to phones, to ipads, to TVs, etc. If one adds the content of the games and the story lines of the cartoons (Disney's transgender characters, for example), there could be an additional mind-control impact on a child.
But how can frequencies affect a child or young person's sense of their gender?
You can go on youtube to see there are transgender frequencies used to promote a particular gender's "sense of self" and those frequencies actually have an impact on hormones. So a child could not only be mind-controlled, and be given a transgender narrative from whatever they are watching, but also be hormonally impacted as well.
There are also frequencies in the other direction - to encourage masculinization and to block estrogen.
But why call this a genocide?
What is the "compassionate" end result of transgenderism supposed to be?
Is it not "gender-affirming" transition to the opposite gender?
What do ALL of those "transitions" entail?
Is it not removal of the gender parts of a child?
Those gender parts are what make the child fertile.
Remove them and the child is sterile.
"Transition" is Sterilization.
If you ignore the disgusting sexualization of children, the insanely perverse school curriculum, the creepy narcissistic teachers, the constant LBGTQ rainbow flag-waving celebration of transgenderism, and the gross drag queen shows, and particularly if you ignore imagining what's involved in trying to turn a man into a woman or vice-versa, and you focus ONLY on WHAT CAMEFIRST but was HIDDEN and on WHAT COMES LAST but is NEVER SAID .... you are left with:
MilitaryfrequencyWEAPONRY and Big Tech frequency emitting GADGETRY and STERILIZATION.
That is, there has been
HIDDENMILITARY MIND CONTROLleading toUNMENTIONEDSTERILIZATION OF CHILDREN
".@BostonChildrens is LYING to parents about the effects of puberty blockers (chemical castration drugs). This is medical malpractice on steroids. They are knowingly sterilizing children and telling parents the drugs are reversible when they know they aren't."
"Boston Children’s Hospital’s transgender insanity reveals how unhinged elites make money off our kids"
".... activist “Billboard” Chris Elston broke the story of videos promoting “gender affirmation” for kids as young as 2 at the hospital .... medics promoting the idea that kids young enough to be in diapers have a clear enough sense of their own identity to justify far-reaching changes such as “social transition,” in which everyone around a child agrees to pretend he or she is the opposite sex. A hospital psychologist even insisted in one video that “a good portion of children do know as early as from the womb.”
".... the US Justice Department came out in defense of the hospital last week, normal parents might be forgiven for thinking America’s rulers have taken leave of their senses. But what’s afoot isn’t insanity so much as a government-approved gold-rush. The “resource” these speculators are fighting over? The healthy bodies of American children.
"The Boston Children’s Hospital has reportedly shown gender affirming videos to children as young as two."Brian Snyder/REUTERS
"Data show that “socially transitioned” children are far more likely to go on to medical interventions. And perhaps this is the point: After all, transgender is big business. Gender-transition surgery can cost upward of $100,000. [$200,000 to $300,000 in California - which is going broke and has declared itself a sanctuary state for "gender-affirming" transitions, no parental permission required.] The US gender-surgery market was valued in 2021 at $1.9 billion, with predicted annual growth of more than 10%. And when hormone therapy costs $1,500 a year, for the rest of a patient’s life, no wonder entrepreneurial medics want kids on the treatment treadmill as young as possible. Clinics are popping up like mushrooms to take advantage of this new business opportunity: The first American pediatric gender clinic opened in 2007, and there are now more than 50 nationwide.
"This all comes with a federal seal of approval. Rachel Levine, a transgender individual born male and serving as America’s assistant secretary for health, recently declared on Twitter, “Gender-affirming care is medical care. It is mental health care. It is suicide prevention care. It improves quality of life, and it saves lives. It is based on decades of study. It is a well-established medical practice.”
"In reality, every sentence of this is contested. Several European nations have suspended or drastically restricted support for this supposedly “well-established medical practice” following new evidence.
"Research reveals, for example, that pediatric transition delivers poor or no mental-health improvements for those who undergo it. The cancer drug used off-label to halt puberty has been shown to cause shocking side effects, such as stunted growth, cognitive impairment, brittle bones and even blindness. And of course once a surgeon has cut your teen daughter’s healthy breasts off [or more to the sterilization point, removes her ovaries or cuts a son's testicles or penis off], they ain’t growing back — even if she changes her mind later on.
"I write from Britain, where the UK government recently shut down the Tavistock gender clinic for endangering kids — by taking exactly the treatment approach Levine approvingly promotes. .... "
[Doctors and the government, for sure, are highly interested in the huge sums of money involved, but we miss the true depth of evil of this if we ignore that the end result is ALWAYS sterilization. The Global elite - who were in involved in the Holocaust and are involved in the havoc of the current shots and in their nonetheless being mandated - want a drastic reduction in population. Money is a great prod with "gender-affirming treatment," as it was for the doctors, hospitals and the governments during the false pandemic, but the ultimate goal of those running the world is depopulation. If those evil people get to wreck the bodies and lives of children and youth and to destroy the American culture and family, also get a Satanic pleasure in having parents bring their own children to be sacrificed, that might all be a bonus.]
[Nowhere in this article on the huge increase in transgender subjects do they mention the hidden military-level frequency equipment putting out transgender frequencies, suggesting that this giant new money-making scheme may have beencreated on purpose, just like pharma did in putting SV40 (Simian Virus 40, a known cancer-causing virus in the mandated polio vaccines in the mid 1950's AFTER first creating the "impression" of a polio epidemic by spraying DDT where children swam and played and getting parents to spray their children's bedrooms with it. (Polio had been proven easily cured by IV vitamin C in 1949 by Klenner, 6 years before the Rockefeller/Sabin/Salk vaccines. https://www.seanet.com/~alexs/ascorbate/199x/landwehr-r-j_orthomol_med-1991-v6-n2-p99.htm)
Transgenderism has suddenly warped the entire culture, twisted language (forcing false pronouns and making it impossible to discuss the issues that were showing up), twisted education out of all shape, torn families apart, and set about wrecking our wonderful children and young people.
Has the massive increase in transgenderism been "caused" and if so, by whom?
And at the heart of it all, and in the twisted name of a "compassionate" horror called "gender-affirming care," is sterilization. If military-grade equipment and Big Tech gadgets have been showering children with gender confusion, and the transgender curriculum in schools, Drag Queens shows, children's books, cartoons and games, could all support that confusion for even prompt it. The child would want relief and schools and medical clinics are in place to suggest "help," moving the child along toward sterilization. It is a bizarre genocide - perverted, politicized by LBGTQ groups, and heavily disguised .... but all of it heading toward destroying or removing what makes a child capable of creating new life - ovaries or testicles.
Puberty blocking drugs ARE sterilizing and that they are lying about that fact is significant.
The goal is sterility.
The Sterilization of Masses of children is Genocide.
THE GOALisGENOCIDE.
If the venal doctors - or venal media, or venal teachers' unions, .... - jump at the money, all the better. Everyone profits from destroying the bodies of this generation of children and ending all their future progeny.
(If millions of other children are also psychologically damaged by it all, emotional and mental wreckage create yet more profit for professionals. And it looks suspiciously like the Frankfurt School's plan to destroy a country from the inside by destroying culture and family).
A small aside: The Rockefellers' (Big Pharma) creating their own patients was not a one time thing. (Ask embarrassed Pfizer.) The Rockefellers also funded the horrific experiments in the concentration camps, to create sterilizing vaccines. http://www.salem-news.com/articles/november072011/experiments-auschwitz-rg.php (Ask Pfizer whether their vaccines are sterilizing people.)
[Boston Children's Hospital has been in the lead of the push occurring for "affirming care" that is in fact mutilating children's bodies. But is this skimming the surface of even more horrific human experiments going on nationally, including creating human-animal hybrids? How much is occurring in Boston? Jeffrey Epstein ran human-animal hybrid experiments under the "temple" on his island. He also funded MIT and Harvard. Did he provide subjects for human experiments to them? https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2019/08/29/harvard-mit-and-epsteins-dirty-money ]
The title of the article about Boston Children's Hospital refers to Unhinged Elite. "Unhinged" is polite for what BCH is doing, right now, out in the open, in mutilating and castrating children - an evil that surpasses Mengele's.
Biden, in pushing "gender-affirming care" in states across the country, is in functional terms promoting the sterilization of American children. Newsome is setting up California to be the heart of such "care" - the "sanctuary state" for children who may have been injured (mind-controlled) by military-grade weaponry beaming out transgender frequencies and by the collusion of Big Tech putting out those frequencies through all the children's gadgets.
California is now welcoming mind-controlled children from all over the country, and without needing their parents' consent, to be sterilized. Newsome is .... in essence .... arranging for mass genocide.
In exposing the transgender frequencies beamed out by military equipment and by children's gadgets, and that "gender-affirming care" is ALWAYS STERILIZATION, we can instantly see past all the sexually perverse distractions to a heavily and bizarrely disguised GENOCIDE.
Parents and all decent people who love children and young people and who want a wonderful future for them, for all families, and for our country - may through knowing of this hidden frequency assault on children, now be in a better position to stop it.
Below is an abbreviated version of the article. Read the full article by clicking here.
"There is a potential antidote to the current spike protein contagion which is called Suramin. It’s found in many forests around the world, in Pine needles. Suramin has inhibitory effects against components of the coagulation cascade and against the inappropriate replication and modification of RNA and DNA. Excessive coagulation causes blood clots, mini-clots, strokes, and unusually heavy menstrual cycles.
"Pine needle tea is one of the most potent anti-oxidants there is and it’s known to treat cancer, inflammation, stress and depression, pain and respiratory infections. Pine tea also kills parasites.
"Possible Antidote for the V-Serum and the Current Spike Protein Contagion
"Dr. Judy Mikovits has revealed that the medical establishment has known all along about the antidote to the contagion – a contagion that is now being seen today by thousands of people who have not taken the serum, but have merely come in close proximity with others who have taken the jab. ....
"This antidote to the contagion, that has been known of by the upper levels of the medical establishment and insiders of the elitist class for almost 100 years, is called Suramin, an isolated compound originally derived from an extract of pine needle oil.
"Suramin further decreases the activities of a large number of enzymes involved in DNA and RNA synthesis and modification: DNA polymerases (103, 104), RNA polymerases (103, 105, 106), reverse transcriptase (18, 103), telomerase (67), and enzymes involved in winding/ unwinding of DNA (107, 108) are inhibited by suramin, as well as histone- and chromatin-modifying enzymes like chromobox proteins (109), methyltransferases (110), and sirtuin histone deacetylases (111)
[The tea inhibits] the inappropriate replication and modification of RNA and DNA.
"This comment in the PDF also reveals Suramin’s ability to inhibit micro-clots:
Suramin also showed inhibitory effects against components of the coagulation cascade (71, 130)
.... "The whole herbal source (needles) is superior to the single compound extract (Suramin) – because the needles possess a full complement of phytonutrients providing numerous additional benefits that the extract is incapable of.
.... "Pine needles are high in vitamin C and A among numerous other compounds which provide a long list of benefits:
A 2011 Korean study demonstrated using pine needles in tea was the best way to access the antioxidant benefits from pine needles.
The study demonstrated that the hot water extract of pine needle proanthocyanidins and catechins offer the highest levels of antioxidant benefits compared with chemical extract processes.
There are other known benefits that pine needle tea and the tea made from other conifers share, which include:
Herbalists the world over have known all along about the benefits of this simple natural tea. Pine needle tea has been used medicinally worldwide for thousands of years.
In addition, black slaves used turpentine (from PINE TREES) as "the cure" for everything. Many, many people in the south remember being given turpentine as children when they were sick or regularly to keep them well.
Does it include Suramin? If so, it is another antidote to the spike protein.
This video with Dr. Jennifer Daniels, describes her experience with it and how to use it.
2. Two Antidotes to Nanobots: Degaussing Bucket and Alfalfa Bath
The injected nanobots are meant to be part of a digital operating system downloaded into the body to connect to a person's DNA for control over them. It's almost too evil and scifi to believe but it's real and covered by Microsoft patent #060606.
If you did not know about or consent to this take--over of your DNA and would like these nanoparticles out of your body, here is a means to get rid of them. You'll be stronger then to join the largest class action lawsuit in the history of the world being filed by Reiner Fuellmich and other international lawyers.
Here are two verified means to remove them from the body.
Bucket with Degaussing Field
(Degaussing is the process of decreasing or eliminating a remnant magnetic field. The gauss, a unit of magnetism named after Carl Friedrich Gauss.)
"Tony Pantallesco, a brilliant naturopath, herbalist, and researcher offers information on how to remove the tiny, invisible bits of nanotechnology/synthetic biology raining down on us everyday that lodge in our skin and organs and blood and alter our DNA, clog our blood, and deprive our brain of vital minerals, among other unsavory effects. “We are being genetically engineered.” is enclyclopedic in his information on nanoparticles." https://everydayconcerned.net/2016/04/03/how-to-detoxget-rid-of-the-nanotechnology-from-chem-trails-in-your-body/
Once you set up the bucket and use it, you'll be able to see the nanoparticles coming out of you.
Alfalfa bath: Excellent to pull nanobots (injected via the corona virus shots) out of the body.
From yet another person helping humanity by sharing his immense knowledge.
This protocol was originally developed to remove Morgellons which people acquire from chemtrail spraying (which includes nanobots) either by breathing them in or ingesting them from sprayed food. Like the nanobots in the shots, Morgellons are nano-particles that replicate and move inside the body.
"Items needed:
Non-Chlorine Organic Soap (Sun was the kind this person used, but not necessary)
Alfalfa – Use tablets or cubes. Pellets (like the kind for hamsters) are not as good since they contain chemicals.
"Here is this person’s amazing story and solution:
"I have been Morgellons sufferer for over ten years. … Well, one day … I was filling the bath and I was pretty dirty from housecleaning so I put some Sun powdered laundry detergent with colorsafe bleach into the water, just a tad, because it really cleans the skin.
"Anyway, I left the bathroom for a minute or two and heard a crash that sounded like one of my cats getting into something. When I returned nothing seemed amiss, so I slid into the water for a soak. Everything seemed normal until the bubbles parted, and I got the sight of a Morgellons sufferers’ lifetime dream: those black and grey specks MIGRATING OUT OF MY SKIN AS FAST AS THEY COULD IN DROVES BY THE HUNDREDS FROM EVERY SQUARE INCH OF MY BODY!!
"… I also noticed several large oblong things “dissolving” in the bottom of the tub. I picked one up, and it was an alfalfa tablet. Then I noticed the bottle on the counter next to the tub was overturned, and about 25 of them had fallen into the water! They were the cause of the migration of all things Morgellons out of my skin in a fantastic migration for about an hour!"
"This works because the Morgellons (or nanopbots) leaves the body to go to the alfalfa because it sees the alfalfa as a more vibrant source to feed on.
"Use the hottest bath water you can tolerate as nanotech does NOT like heat and soak until the water turns. It’s also good in general to keep yourself warm and body areas warm – even while you sleep to help it from gaining power while you’re sleeping!
"How long and how many times you soak depend on the intensity of the breakout. Generally one soak a month until clear should be good. If you had the vaccine or the outbreak is severe, soak once per week until clear. After the soak, shower with Dr. Bronners (or other natural) peppermint soap and rinse the tub with a mudmix solution, about 1 tsp of the mudmix (all 4 ingredients) in 2 cups of water. Use paper towels or rags to wipe out the tub to prevent AI going down the drain, put in a garbage bag that you tightly seal before tossing it in the garbage."
"MudMix:
Food Grade Diatomaceous Earth – 1 teaspoon
Food Grade Zeolite (powder, not liquid) – 1 teaspoon
Food Grade Bentonite Clay (also known as Aztec Clay) – 1 Tablespoon
Food Grade Activated charcoal – 1 Tablespoon
More information from another site with same protocol.
"Nano-bodies carried in the blood stream would be perfect targets for chlorine dioxide gas to destroy so a four-drop dose of MMS taken internally would be a perfect compliment for this bathing process. Note also that MMS can be used in swimming pools and also safely in a bathtub. MMS is a water purifier first and foremost. For a tub one might mix a 40 drop dose of MMS for bathing (not drinking).
"MMS, The Master Mineral Solution aka “The Universal Antidote”
"To understand more about MMS, how to use it, and for all of Jim Humble’s protocols – including specific protocols for viruses and more – [it is] STRONGLY encourage you read his book in its entirety before using MMS.
Robert Kennedy Jr. said we were at an inflection point.
He nailed it.
Yes, we're on the cusp of one of two permanent world changes - either total fascist control over humanity via a chipped vaccine from the pharmaceutical industry which funded Hitler, ran the hideous experiments in the concentration camps, ran the sadistic Tuskegee Experiment, ran the disgusting Guatemala experiments, and did so much more you'd be horrified at - OR .... mankind achieving freedom for fear of disease and from the control that has come with that fear).
Robert F. Kennedy Jr's inflection point is real and so is the core of the issue he pointed to: "There is nothing to fear but fear itself." (FDR)
So, let's slay fear of viruses right now, for good and all.
Please forgive the repetition here but we need to know a few biology facts and know them deeply to stop fear being used against us.
To destroy Pharma's power to promote terror around infectious diseases is simple. We only need to know one thing. Vitamin C is an absolute viricide.
It doesn't matter what kind of virus, or if it mutates or not, or even if it is man-made. Vitamin C kills viruses through the Fenton Reaction which also kills (some) cancer cells in the same way and just as simply.
If we truly understand that and how it works (quoted below), "medicine" as we know it will be changed utterly.
The NIH group has confirmed many of the results that Klenner achieved during his pioneering vitamin C treatments. They have also confirmed that the efficacy of vitamin C in this cancer treatment is related to generation of hydrogen peroxide, as originally concluded by Linus Pauling. [8-10] Perhaps most importantly, the study of the pharmacokinetics of vitamin C has greatly clarified how vitamin C destroys invading organisms, such as viruses, bacteria, and fungi. [11-12]
The next paragraph has been broken down so the reader will go slowly and take it in fully. This matters because, oddly enough, the largest threat to humanity have come, and is coming now, from the pharmaceutical industry, using viruses as its weapon. So understanding this one molecule's ability to destroy viruses is crucial not just to health but to human freedom itself.
1. "Diseased cells tend to accumulate iron."
2. "The ascorbate (vitamin C) ion contributes to the production of hydrogen peroxide."
3. "In a reaction called the Fenton Reaction, an iron ion reacts with a molecule of hydrogen peroxide molecule to produce free radicals (reactive oxygen species, ROS) that can oxidize and damage any other molecules in their proximity. "
4. "When this activity occurs inside the diseased cell, the inner workings of the cell are destroyed, and the cell is rendered inoperative." [13,14]
5. "A similar Fenton reaction mechanism can disable viruses before they invade a living cell." [15,16]
6. "Any cell types, for example some cancers, that lack normal levels of the catalase enzyme (that removes hydrogen peroxide) are susceptible." [17]
"The important point here is that:
"this anti-viral mechanism has nothing to do with the type of the target viral particle or its molecular antigens .... which is the strategy upon which modern vaccines depend."
Vitamin C's anti-viral mechanismhas nothing to do withthe strategy upon which modern vaccines depend.
Vitamin C's anti-viral mechanismhas nothing to do withthe strategy upon which modern vaccines depend.
How Vitamin C works to kill viruses has nothing to do with
the type of the target viral particle or
molecular antigens.
The Fenton Reaction of vitamin C bypasses all scientific complexity normally involved to deal with viruses.
None of that complexity matters.
One doesn't need to find out anything complex or anything at all about the virus in question.
One doesn't need to come at the virus in complex scientific ways.
One doesn't even need to know what virus it is.
One doesn't need to develop anything to deal with it
One doesn't need to track whether it mutates into a new virus.
One doesn't need to do anything complex to try to deal with mutations before they mutate.
Why not?
Because Vitamin C is naturally and fundamentally, and always, anti-viral .... against ALL viruses. Vitamin C is simply built to destroy viruses.
"If the invading organism mutates, the Fenton reaction process will destroy the cell all the same -- without any need of appropriate antibodies. The diseased cells self-select, since it is they that are hoarding the iron. The increased availability of ascorbate and hydrogen peroxide leaves the healthy cells untouched."
What does this mean to us?
We don't need scientists to figure out what kind of virus.
We don't need vast sums of money for research and development.
We don't need Pharma to create a vaccine to kill that particular virus.
We don't need pharma vaccines to deal with any of the viruses (measles, mumps, polio, tetanus, rabies, etc, or the ones Pharma created itself - SARS, swine flu, ebola, Zika, etc.)
It means pharma just lost its power over mankind.
It is through our fear of "contagious" diseases and our trust in pharma's "scientific expertise and their caring about our health" that we allowed them to inject things into our bodies, things we knew nothing about.
Thanks to work by Claus W. Jungeblut, it's been known since 1935 that vitamin C kills the polio virus and many other viruses as well. Why weren't we told? Didn't pharma know?
It was confirmed again in 1949 by Klenner, that vitamin C cures polio (in two days).
And it's here that the reality of Pharma is exposed. Klenner brought his wonderful,, "life-saving" cure for polio to the March of Dimes, the Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, the AMA. All were run by Pharma (or the Rockefellers, to be more exact), but they weren't interested. They were not interested in a cure. Instead, they had invested in the polio epidemic which they expected to lead to the mandating of vaccines they were producing.
In a situation very similar to the 1918 "Spanish flu" and the current CV "pandemic," they had concocted the epidemic. They had gotten DDT (which causes the same symptoms as the quite rare polio virus) sprayed everywhere (pools, ponds, lakes, playgrounds, children's bedrooms, children's bodies). With it, they engineered a "seeming" polio epidemic (crippling and killing children in the process) and waited for enough terror to seize hold of the public, to move forward with MANDATED polio vaccines. They rigged the numbers and hid that their polio vaccines actually caused polio.
And very much like with the corona virus and the chip that will be in it, the Rockefeller weren't just interested in the sale of their mandated vaccines but much more interested in the cracker jack prize inside their polio vaccines - SV40, a simian virus already known to cause cancer. They prepared fear on the front-end so authorities would call for mandated vaccines forced on the whole population (a fortune!), but the "little something" they'd tucked inside the polio vaccines on the back-end, after the vaccines were given, would be endlessly profitable because it would start a cancer epidemic.
In The Origin of the 42-Year Stonewall of Vitamin C, Robert Landwehr calls 1949, "the year that will live in infamy." Had Klenner been able to get anyone to hear that vitamin C cured polio, the world would not have gone fully down the road to pharma's take over of "health" and their propagandized "miracle polio vaccine," setting the stage for the public's misguided but deep "belief" in vaccines as the answer to their fear of diseases. Instead of learning how easily vitamin C inactivates all viruses, Pharma generated fear and ignorance in people which opened the door to yet more rigged epidemics. Pharma has been creating them at will since then while putting in place state, national, and global pandemics laws (hidden martial law) that would force unknown, untested, unlimited vaccines on people "to protect the public."
The public became so fearful of illness and slavishly dependent on "medicinal experts," they overrode all common sense to allow Pharma to inject the most, filthy, outrageously anti-life, substances, into newborns, babies, children, teens, adults and vulnerable elderly, no just once but over and over and over again.
In 1949 with Klenner's evidence about vitamin C killing polio in hand, rather than Pharma choosing a new path of curing people (with vitamin C and other natural substances), Pharma continued on down its dark path of developing vaccines as bioweapons and profiting from the new diseases and physical and mental infirmities it creates.
"The marketplace for the pharmaceutical industry is the human body – but only for as long as the body hosts diseases. Thus, maintaining and expanding diseases is a precondition for the growth of the pharmaceutical industry."
Now that the world, thanks to Pharma, is on the verge of irreversible fascism via a chip inside the CV vaccine (or wherever they may be putting it since people are suspicious) that can turn off bank accounts, control the mind, control the body, and kill people instantly. It may sound implausible but even a cursory look at the history of the pharmaceutical industry, makes it clear that this industry has always been a severe danger to mankind.
"The Rockefeller Foundation was the front organization for a new global business venture .... Donations from the Rockefeller Foundation went only to medical schools and hospitals [which] had become missionaries of a new breed of companies: the manufacturers of patented, synthetic drugs.
"This was also the time when the first vitamins were discovered. It soon became clear however that these natural molecules had live-saving health benefits and that they were able to prevent many chronic health conditions.
"Thus, in its first years of existence, the pharmaceutical investment business already faced a mortal threat .... The elimination of this unwanted competition from natural [and thus unpatentable] micronutrients therefore became a question of life and death for the pharmaceutical business.
"The Rockefeller Foundation uses the Spanish flu epidemic [which it caused]– and the media (that it already controlled by this time) – to start a witch-hunt on all forms of medicine that were not covered by its patents.
"Within the next 15 years, all medical schools in the U.S., most hospitals and the American Medical Association all essentially became pawns on the chessboard of Rockefeller’s strategy to subjugate the entire health care sector under the monopoly of his pharmaceutical investment business."
To put it mildly, it seems critical to outflank this. It is not enough to take on vaccines one at a time. Pharma can just ramp up the fear with a new "horrifying" virus with more inflated numbers put out by the WHO and CDC and media, all controlled by Pharma.
Humanity MUST overcome its fear of disease, NOW.
A cure for ALL viruses could help that happen. And vitamin C is exactly that.
The reality must be said:
"Vitamin C makes ALL virus-related vaccines OBSOLETE."
Thanks to the Fenton Reaction, vaccines for viruses are exposed as an absolute absurdity. The vaccine paradigm is about to hit a scientific brick wall of truth.
Vaccines for viruses often don't work or very poorly, can cause the disease they claim to prevent, can cause other diseases and even death, are given to healthy people as merely a "promise" of preventing future viruses, and come with zero liability. for harm or death.
Vitamin C simply kills ALL viruses on contain. Healthy cells are untouched. Its side effects are beneficial.
Vaccines come with mind and body destroying ingredients.
Vitamin C does not include a single harmful ingredient, plus is needed and greatly beneficial for organs and endless processes in the body.
Vaccines for viruses are unneeded and can cause harm, including deaths.
Vitamin C kills viruses automatically, and does immense good, including healing illnesses and preventing deaths.
It is natural to fear what is dangerous, but if we are going to fear, let us at least choose our fears wisely.
We can FEAR nature (Spanish flu, polio, swine flu, etc.) and TRUST the pharmaceutical industry in saying they are here to save us, ignoring they killed millions of people with vaccines during 1918 (while attributing the deaths they caused to nature, an invented "Spanish Flu") and 25 years later they funded Hitler's killing of millions more people during the 2nd World War, and used vaccines in grotesque experiments in concentration camps.
Or we can do the opposite.
We can TRUST nature(God)'s goodness in providing humanity with a vast array of healing substances, including vitamin C, a safe and absolute viricide, and FEAR a still fascistic Pharmaceutical industry..
That pharmaceutical industry has blocked, censored or demonized effective treatments for the corona virus, even going so far as to shut down the world, destroy economies, cut people off from elderly family and a social life, and cause suicides from hopelessness, while telling everyone they must wait for their vaccines as the only way to be free again.
Though with HCQ or vitamin C, people could have been well and free all this time.
All this for a virus that doesn't even meet the "deaths outside of normal" definition of an epidemic?
No, all this for a chip that can control people's bank accounts, control their bodies, and control minds, and can even kill them. Pharma which funded Hitler, has come up with a hidden means to do what Hitler and the Nazis dreamed of - a means to rule Humanity for all time.
They've come up with Injectable Fascism. Human freedom will be lost forever.
Bill Gates is behind the CV vaccine and the chip. Despite the endless debunking articles on the internet calling that conspiracy theory, there's no denying his spending a fortune to set up contact tracing .... 6 months before the CV existed, or his massive investment in 7 CV vaccine factories. People know the truth. All his hand flailing doesn't convince anyone, which is why he is followed everywhere by truck loads of really poor denial. There is so much smoke about this, it's like Portland, where the protests are peaceful and there is no fire.
"The key to the entire project, to succeed on a massive scale, would be access to all humans’ bloodstreams, which would be forced by widespread, mandatory, no exclusion, adult vaccinations. US Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY) has said he believes governments are acting to continue imposing lockdowns based on new cases until a mandatory vaccine can be rolled out.
"DARPA is funded by the taxpayers, and has a checkered past of experimenting with humans in ways that can only be labeled insane"
Because of our fear, we are on the verge of selling our birthright and our souls as free people to those who are still seeking Hitler's dream of total world control over every single human being.
Our fear is the ultimate threat to human freedom.
RFK Jr was right to cite FDR. The only thing to fear is fear itself.
Shiv Chopra, the Canadian microbiologist known for having helped stop the approval of rBGH, did so not by making true but complex arguments about its association to cancers, but by reducing the issue to an undeniable biological fact and thus to a simple legal issue.
The law said that no factory containing so much as a single rat dropping or feather is considered clean. rBGH gives cows mastitis which leads to pus in their milk. rBGH thus turns cows into pus factories.
Wikipedia (articles there on vaccines appear to have been written by industry), says that “Vaccines are among the greatest achievements of modern medicine.
Dr. Chopra called them “cluster bombs.”
Wikipedia also says, “A vaccine is a biological preparation that improves immunity to a particular disease.”
Dr. Chopra said vaccines do nothing of the sort and, in fact, violate the very laws of biology.
As with rBGH, he has a talent for reducing things to understandable and undeniable facts and when it comes to vaccines, he begins at the beginning by describing how the immune system works to protect people from disease.
Dr. Chopra said there is a constant war going on between an individual’s bodily integrity and invading organisms.
Most people would most easily recognize this war when they think of bodies rejecting organs from another person or animal. That very same rejection occurs at a microlevel as well – against foreign viruses and bacteria. But rejecting what is foreign, no matter the size, is not just a nice thing or just “how the immune system protects the body” but it does so for a cardinal purpose – to maintain bodily integrity.
And the definition of “integrity” is crucial to understanding the brilliance of the immune system. “Integrity: the quality or state of being complete; unbroken condition; wholeness; entirety; the quality or state of being unimpaired; perfect condition …”
In the simplest terms, Dr. Chopra explained that the immune system maintains wholeness or “self” versus “non-self” in the face of invaders.
And it is precisely that wholeness or integrity which vaccines destroy.
The immune system works by breaking down whatever foreign matter enters your body – be it protein, fat, starch or sugar – into single molecules in the digestive system. Starches and sugar must be broken into glucose, fat to fatty acids, and proteins into amino acids. The last two the body then takes and rebuilds into the person’s own, no longer foreign, fat and protein. Anything that remains foreign is and must be rejected.
Bodily integrity must be maintained so the immune system repels invaders by breaking them to pieces or ejecting or destroying them.
In this context, sneezing, coughing, diarrhea, vomiting can be appreciated as protective immune mechanisms to get rid of foreign protein or other matter, while foreign material that gets past into the body is deconstructed by the gut and fever is stimulated as a means to weaken or destroy it.
With this background, one understands that in four steps, Dr. Chopra was laying bare the core scientific fallacy of vaccines.
Chopra says that anyone knowing the Basics of Biology should know:
1. That ALL vaccines by their very nature are antigens and that every antigen by definition must be a foreign protein …;
2. That no foreign protein can be absorbed into the blood stream unless it is digested in the alimentary canal into its basic amino acids;
3. That it is these amino acids which after being absorbed into the blood stream are reconstituted into one’s own proteins and it is these proteins which distinguishes every being of existence, into self and non-self.
4. That any interference or tampering with these laws of existence can bring calamity to the being in which it occurs such as by causing auto-immune conditions like autism, etc.
Why calamity?
What happens is that vaccines force foreign protein into the body, bypassing all mechanisms used by the immune system to avoid such invasion.
Think of organ transplants. The immune system must rid itself of what is foreign. It will not stop until it has. It will attack itself to do so if necessary – so fundamental is the integrity of self versus invader.
Imagine this were happening to your own home. People have doors and windows and alarm systems exactly to stop invaders. Normally we think of them coming to steal but imagine they came to stay, to take over. The need to eject them and keep the home your own would be unceasing. Imagine they came in not through the doors or windows for which you had defenses, but through the chimney, through the ventilation system, though the electrical system, and there was no way to be rid of them. Would it be your home anymore? Would you be safe? Would you ever be able to function normally again or would you be on a permanent state of high alert and stress trying again and again to get rid of them? Might you throw things at and damage the walls, or shoot at them and break things, tearing up your own home? Would you become exhausted? Might you break down physically from trying, but could you ever stop trying? If you did, would it not mean it was no longer your home, but indistinguishable from theirs or maybe even more theirs, having defeated you?
So what happens to the immune system when vaccines jump past the immune system's neutralization of foreign proteins before they can enter the bloodstream, and instead foreign matter is injected into the body? Just like you would do with home invaders, the immune system must attack whatever is shot into it, and in being unable to rid itself of that matter or break it down, the immune system attacks again and again, attacking the body itself. This is a description of autoimmune reactions, which are self-attacks. But it is also a description of te outcome of vaccines shooting foreign antigens into the body PAST the immune system's defenses. The more vaccines, the more foreign protein is being shot into the body, the more the reactions, the more the body attacks itself. (How many vaccines do children bet between birth and 18? More than 70?)
Vaccines do not, as claimed, “improve immunity.” Even the most rudimentary understanding of what the immune system does would make that obvious. Vaccines jump the immune system to deliver foreign matter that could never have gotten past it otherwise. This is foreign matter that the immune system is left helplessly unable to rid itself of. Foreign matter is lodged permanently in the body, leaving it no longer perfect but broken, impaired. Bodily integrity is literally destroyed.
“[R]esearchers argue that these attenuated forms of the viruses remain in the body causing continual antigenic stimulation of the immune system – meaning the immune system is always in ‘attack’ mode – which also weakens it and leads to auto-immune diseases.
“A placebo-controlled trial of acellular pertussis vaccines in Sweden compared vaccinated children with un-vaccinated children of the same birth grouping. During the trial, an invasive bacterial infection occurred among the vaccinated group resulting in numerous deaths. A review of the trial data led researchers to conclude that ‘The hypothesis of an immunosuppressive effect of the vaccines, which would explain the deaths…could not be refuted by the data.’ (xvi)
“As further evidence, one of the few double-blind trials that have ever been conducted on a vaccine shows the same immunosuppressive effect. In the trial, of the group who were vaccinated with the Salk polio vaccine, over 200 people went on to contract polio. Among the control group (unvaccinated), not one of them developed polio. (xvii)
“Citing references from numerous valid sources, including four recognized textbooks on paediatrics and immunology, Harold Buttram, MD and John Hoffman, PhD, conclude that:
".... childhood vaccination “cannot help but have adverse effects on the immunologic system of the child, possibly leaving this system crippled in its ability to protect the child throughout life…opening the way for other diseases as a result of immunologic dysfunction.” (xviii)
And it is not only foreign virus or bacteria that causes a problem.
Dr. Chopra writes:
“The foreign proteins in vaccines originate from not only the infectious organisms against which one wishes to produce infection-fighting antibodies but also from the artificial media in which these organisms are grown. Contained in such media may include one or more of the following materials:
bovine serum, horse serum, chicken egg, monkey kidney, insect cells and even human fetal cells.
“Apart from the foreign proteins, vaccines may also contain other harmful substances, including
plus untold number of stray viruses with the potential to cause
cancer, HIV, serum-hepatitis, and so on.”
The body is being filled with foreign protein from other human beings and from other species, none of which the immune system can expel, and yet it must if it is to maintain functional integrity – keeping the distinction between “self” and non-self.
None of these antigens from humans or other species would ever have gotten into the body naturally. Only through vaccines are they there.
Dr. Chopra, again:
“Meanwhile, evidence indicates that except for smallpox, no other infectious disease, e.g.: tuberculosis, cholera, typhoid, anthrax, measles, mumps, rubella, DPT, polio, influenza and others, has been eradicated and that this continues to be so despite the decades of vaccinations against each of these diseases.
“Also, during the same period, the incidence of many previously uncommon diseases such as autism, diabetes, allergies, and cancer, has been increasing in pandemic proportions.”
The person has been contaminated by vaccines with foreign matter, the “invader” now residing the body, the body attacking itself.
Patel Thompson, again:
“Vaccinal attenuated viruses attach their own genetic ‘episome’ to the genome (half set of chromosomes and their genes) of the host cell, and are thus capable of surviving or remaining latent within the host cells for years. The presence of foreign antigenic material within the host cell sets the stage for their unpredictable provocation of various auto-immune phenomena such as herpes, shingles, warts, tumors – both benign and malignant – and diseases of the central nervous system, such as varied forms of paralysis and inflammation of the brain.” (xix)
“Dr. Markowitz states that in addition, vaccines do not just produce mild versions of the original disease, but all of them commonly produce a variety of their own symptoms. In some cases,
‘these illnesses may be considerably more serious than the original disease, involving deeper structures, more vital organs, and less of a tendency to resolve spontaneously. Even more worrisome is the fact that they are almost always more difficult to recognize.’” (xx)
“In addressing scientists at a conference sponsored by the American Cancer Society, Rutgers University professor R. Simpson warned:
“‘Immunization Programs against flu, measles, mumps, polio and so forth may actually be seeding humans with RNA to form latent proviruses in cells throughout the body. These latent proviruses could be molecules in search of diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, Parkinson’s disease and perhaps cancer.’” (xxi)
In claiming vaccines “improve immunity,” the pharmaceutical industry seems to have no idea that the purpose of the immune system is not just to react but to protect biologic integrity, core to human health and life. Instead, the industry is filling the body with foreign protein and devastating the human immune system.They are using vaccines containing foreign DNA and a long list of toxic substances that “explode inside the body and hit every part of the body, every cell and molecule” – the “cluster bomb” Dr. Chopra speaks of.
So distant is the pharmaceutical industry from protecting immune function that with each “generation” of vaccines, the vaccines become more harmful.
They went from inserting whole viruses which they now admit were causing the very diseases they were supposed to prevent,
to using “recombinant components” (genetically engineered pieces) of a number of viruses, but still they could not get the response they wanted.
And now they have moved to the third generation of vaccines, DNA vaccines, that inject genetically engineered matter meant to be taken up by the person’s DNA, itself.
Wouldn't these vaccines then be hitting not just organs and cells but would potentially be contaminating the very biologic code of the person’s life, their DNA?
If this occurs, now the home invader analogy would include mutant (genetically engineered) invaders who would take over the host’s body, as well as their house.
If the new vaccines can imbed or cross contaminate with mutant (genetically engineered) pathogens that affect the DNA, vaccination would be undermining the integrity of self in terms of its instructional messages, the biologic coding of the runs everything in the human body. The immune system would be left struggling at a much deeper level of reaction, a spasm of reaction. The most core functions of the body, such as mitochondrial function (basic energy production) might be disrupted.
Chopra’s explanation of the immune system and how vaccination bypasses the immune system and leaves in place exactly what the immune system is tasked to get rid of (foreign protein), makes apparent why it is mistaken to refer to vaccination as “immunization.” Vaccines damage the immune system. Vaccination would more appropriately be called “anti-immunization.”
Patel Thompson says:
“The bulk of the evidence gathered from numerous countries points out that not only is vaccination ineffective at preventing the spread of infectious disease, but vaccinated children are actually at a higher risk of contracting these illnesses. In addition, the adverse reactions to vaccination are much higher than presently documented in the medico-pharmaceutical literature and the long-term damaging effect of suppressing the immune system is rarely addressed.
“In light of all the evidence to the contrary, why have vaccines been pressed upon the public as a necessary, beneficial way of preventing our children from getting sick? In the words of Dr. Raymond Obomsawin (who’s held senior positions in UNICEF and CUSO), referring to mass vaccination,
“It is reprehensible that such actions continue to be enforced by authorities, while parents and local health workers are not accorded any practical knowledge of the known dangers involved, and the extent to which there prevails a general ignorance of the longer term consequences.” (xxii)
Patel Thompson is not alone in seeing that something other than science is behind vaccines.
“Combine this ignorance with the millions of dollars in profit generated by vaccination that goes straight into the pockets of manufacturing companies, governments and medical doctors, and it becomes clear that vaccination is more of a political and economic issue, than a health issue.”
One sees that reality in the behavior of those invested in vaccines, such as Bill Gates. Rather than caring about the maiming of thousands of children in India or the 10,000 deaths of children in Pakistan and the uncountable deaths of children in Africa or addressing the solid and increasing scientific evidence exposing the biologic irrationality of vaccines (as well as the extreme danger a leading scientist is warning of), he has instead suggested that those who question his investment (vaccines) are committing involuntary manslaughter. Did the pharmaceutical industry insert the article on vaccines in Wikipedia? It too suggests that expression of concerns over vaccines are tantamount to manslaughter.
“[C]oncern has been raised that spreading unfounded information about the medical risks of vaccines increases rates of life-threatening infections, not only in the children whose parents refused vaccinations, but also in other children, perhaps too young for vaccines, who could contract infections from unvaccinated carriers (see herd immunity). A more extreme response to this concern is the claim that spreading false information about vaccine risks amounts to involuntary manslaughter, claiming that celebrity promotion of the vaccine-autism link was followed by “an increase in the number of vaccine preventable illnesses as well as an increase in the number of vaccine preventable deaths” and thus “may be indirectly responsible for at least some of these illnesses and deaths.” (Wikipedia, Vaccines) [Emphasis added.]
As the above quote indicates, the promotion of vaccines is relying on fear. Vaccine investors are using it (fear of flu, of swine flu, of meningitis, of hepatitis, of cervical cancer, of common childhood diseases – adding new fears all the time, most recently coronavirus)) to try to put in place the ultimate form of marketing – government mandates of their products. But educated people are learning that vaccines suppress and even damage the immune system, which is essential for fighting off diseases, and that vaccines were not responsible for the decrease in infectious diseases but can actually increase diseases.
So, to stop such information and the spreading rejection of vaccines, those invested in vaccines (with 200 more in the works) are portraying information (concerns, questions, etc.) about vaccines as lethal.
Yet, the pharmaceutical industry and Bill Gates cannot dispute the central biologic fact about vaccines – they are catastrophic to the immune system and it is the immune system that prevents disease, keeps people well or heals people of disease. The “science” behind the new vaccines is so shaky, the pharmaceutical industry admits it doesn’t even know how their DNA vaccines, which are based on “DNA uptake,” are alleged to work:
“This phenomenon has not been the subject of much research, so the actual mechanism of DNA uptake is not known.” (Wikipedia)
Vaccines triggered deaths in 1918 and abysmal ignorance of the immune system combined with intense international promotion of an early pharma product (aspirin) is now associated with deaths during 1918, not a flu or virus. The National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases discovered that common upper respiratory bacteria were responsible for the deaths, nothing viral. Aspirin is thought to have played a part as doctors did not realize it suppresses the immune system (or the value of fever), and that suppression allowed infections to take hold and worsen.
Additionally, aspirin killed healthy people outright (“well in the morning, dead by evening”) because of medical ignorance of its toxic qualities. Government, medical, and industry promotion came together to urge aspirin on the world, and multiplied the losses. (And now coming to light is the corollary – natural practitioners who avoided aspirin and supported immune system function, had stunning success in saving lives.)
Vaccines are promoted as miracles of modern medicine, just as aspirin was touted in 1918. The WHO even promotes vaccines as the means to save the world from another flu pandemic like 1918. But 1918 wasn’t a flu pandemic in the first place. To counter how many times people were wrongly told that a virulent virus (or flu) killed millions in 1918, it bears repeating that there was no flu pandemic in 1918 and that there has never been a flu pandemic in human history that killed millions.
Instead, 1918 appears most likely to have been a pharmaceutical industry disaster of global proportions based on global distribution of contaminated vaccines, then aspirin (lethal in high doses) greatly promoted by global advertising.
Vaccines make no sense as any response to epidemics now, not unless the drug industry wishes to replicate the calamity of 1918 by intensely promoting yet another pharmaceutical industry product which even more severely suppresses the immune system than aspirin and can permanently damage it. Today, though the pharmaceutical industry has gone further than promotion, and has gotten laws in place which mandate their “immune system damaging” product to everyone, without exception.
The millions of 1918 deaths offer a dire warning against any pharmaceutical product – no matter how much said to prevent death, no matter how much fear-mongering, no matter how much government agencies, medical authorities, or industry spokespeople urge it – that tampers with the immune system.
Jim Turner, a product safety lawyer and vaccine lawyer, says that Government has lost moral authority in mandating vaccines, since some will be maimed and some will die. Mr. Turner has brought things down to their essence, lost of morality in forcing something on people in which some will inevitably be harmed or lose their lives.
And how could vaccines not cause damage? We understand since Dr. Chopra brought vaccines down to their essence, biologically. They ALL violate the Laws of Biology
Vaccines don’t just tamper with the immune system. Dr. Chopra said "Vaccines are cluster bombs."
