Proven, Natural, Safe, Effective and Inexpensive Ways to Enhance Your Immune System
Download the Report to Protect You and Your Family From COVID-19
In a flashback to how art that offended the Soviet regime was blacklisted, streaming giant Spotify is now censoring song lyrics that contain “misinformation.”
Music icon Ian Brown revealed that Spotify had deleted his anti-lockdown song Little Seed Big Tree, which was originally released last September.
“SPOTiFY stream the streams and censor artists like they have with my last song TOOK IT DOWN just put it down the memory hole! FREE EXPRESSiON AS REVOLUTION,” tweeted Brown.
SPOTiFY stream the streams and censor artists like they have with my last song TOOK IT DOWN just put it down the memory hole! FREE EXPRESSiON AS REVOLUTiON
— Ian Brown (@ianbrown) March 12, 2021
The song included the lyrics;
Masonic lockdown, in your hometown
Masonic lockdown, can you hear me now
From the top down, soul shock down
State shakedown, mass breakdown
Global orders, riding over borders
Get behind your doors for the new world order
Brown has been a vehement voice against lockdown and mandatory vaccines, announcing that he had refused to be the headliner of Manchester’s Neighborhood Weekender festival because organizers indicated proof of COVID-19 vaccination may have been a condition of entry.
The former Stone Roses frontman asserted that he would, “NEVER sing to a crowd who must be vaccinated as a condition of attendance. NEVER EVER!”
“Spotify prohibits content on the platform which promotes dangerous false, deceptive, or misleading content about COVID-19 that may cause offline harm and/or pose a direct threat to public health. When content that violates this standard is identified it is removed from the platform,” a Spotify spokesperson told Reclaim The Net.
The practice is a continuation of enforcing a monoculture of thought by ensuring any form of art that carries a message which offends technocratic elites is blacklisted.
Throughout the course of the Soviet empire, dictators mandated that ‘socialist realism’ be the prescribed style of idealized art.
This meant that every sculpture, statue and painting had to conform to an established aesthetic in order to “educate citizens on how to be the perfect Soviets.”
In order to entrench loyalty to the Communist Party and advance a utopian image of Soviet society, “The purpose of socialist realism was to limit popular culture to a specific, highly regulated faction of emotional expression that promoted Soviet ideals.”
Since communism (and fascism) was a social control experiment conducted by western robber barons, this “liberal” thought control in the “land of the free” should not be a surprise.
They tell us vaccines are “safe and effective.”
They tell us the risks of common diseases outweigh the risks of vaccines.
They tell us vaccine risks are “rare.”
What if none of these claims are true?
In 2019, Joy Garner with The Control Group set out to answer that question by conducting a litigation survey of never-vaccinated people. They found that, in every case, the claims we hear from our vaunted government and TV experts about the risks and benefits of vaccines are demonstrably false.
In fact, they learned that the tiny, vaccine-free minority of Americans is far healthier overall than the vaccinated majority.
But let’s step back for a moment to the questions we should all be asking about those familiar claims.
(Q) ARE VACCINES SAFE?
In its 2011 case, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, the US Supreme Court acknowledged that vaccines cause injuries.
“The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA or Act) created a no-fault compensation program to stabilize a vaccine market adversely affected by an increase in vaccine-related tort litigation and to facilitate compensation to claimants who found pursuing legitimate vaccine-inflicted injuries too costly and difficult.”
The Court noted that vaccine injuries are unavoidable.
“Most importantly, the Act eliminates manufacturer liability for a vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.”
Justice Scalia noted that the FDA regulations specify no criteria for measuring, much less ensuring, the claimed safety or effectiveness of vaccines.
“Indeed, the FDA has never even spelled out in regulations the criteria it uses to decide whether a vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use.” (Emphasis added.)
To make our answer even clearer, the law classifies vaccines as “unavoidably unsafe products.”
“Unavoidably unsafe products. There are some products which, in the present state of human knowledge, are quite incapable of being made safe for their intended and ordinary use. These are especially common in the field of drugs.”
The excerpt above aptly notes the common and more direct synonym for the word unsafe. That synonym is: dangerous….
Dr. Mercola Exposes The Great Reset; Vaccine Passports Coming?; Newborns Separated from Covid Moms; Sen. Pan’s Plan to Crush Our First Amendment.
“Don’t ever make the mistake we made. Never give up your guns. If you look at what is happening here, it could never have happened if we had not given up our guns.”
~ An Australian Solari Report subscriber to Catherine, 2021
By Catherine Austin Fitts
I am often asked, “What are the actions that are important for me to take?” Here is an essential area for your consideration in 2021.
The political pressure to challenge our inalienable right to own and bear arms has been growing for decades. In the United States, much of the legislation that attempts to compromise this right is debated and passed at the state level. With the Republicans losing a Senate majority in the U.S. 2020 elections, the battleground at the state level will grow in power and importance….
The bankster-financed and blackmail-organized crime cartel which markets itself as a government expends a great deal of energy waving the flag and handwringing over every social ill imaginable except its own bloody history of torture and mass murder around the world, child trafficking, satanic abuse of children and continual theft of labor from its serfs. This is a country under occupation. The mask of democracy has nearly worn out its usefulness. Underneath it is something you don’t want to see.
The ‘false’ pandemic: Drug firms cashed in on scare over swine flu, claims Euro health chief
The swine flu outbreak was a ‘false pandemic’ driven by drug companies that stood to make billions of pounds from a worldwide scare, a leading health expert has claimed.
Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, accused the makers of flu drugs and vaccines of influencing the World Health Organisation’s decision to declare a pandemic.
This led to the pharmaceutical firms ensuring ‘enormous gains’, while countries, including the UK, ‘squandered’ their meagre health budgets, with millions being vaccinated against a relatively mild disease….
A young girl is given an inoculation at a medical centre in Cockermouth, England. Millions were given vaccines against swine flu, with pharmaceutical companies being paid huge sums by the government…
I collect Soviet newspapers. Years ago, I used to travel to Moscow’s Izmailovsky flea market every few weeks, hooking up with a dealer who crisscrossed the country digging up front pages from the Cold War era. I have Izvestia’s celebration of Gagarin’s flight, a Pravda account of a 1938 show trial, even an ancient copy of Ogonyek with Trotsky on the cover that someone must have taken a risk to keep.
These relics, with dramatic block fonts and red highlights, are cool pieces of history. Not so cool: the writing! Soviet newspapers were wrought with such anvil shamelessness that it’s difficult to imagine anyone ever read them without laughing. A good Soviet could write almost any Pravda headline in advance. What else but “A Mighty Demonstration of the Union of the Party and the People” fit the day after Supreme Soviet elections? What news could come from the Spanish civil war but “Success of the Republican Fleet?” Who could earn an obit headline but a “Faithful Son of the Party”?
Reality in Soviet news was 100% binary, with all people either heroes or villains, and the villains all in league with one another (an SR was no better than a fascist or a “Right-Trotskyite Bandit,” a kind of proto-horseshoe theory). Other ideas were not represented, except to be attacked and deconstructed. Also, since anything good was all good, politicians were not described as people at all but paragons of limitless virtue — 95% of most issues of Pravda or Izvestia were just names of party leaders surrounded by lists of applause-words, like “glittering,” “full-hearted,” “wise,” “mighty,” “courageous,” “in complete moral-political union with the people,” etc.
Some of the headlines in the U.S. press lately sound suspiciously like this kind of work:
— Biden stimulus showers money on Americans, sharply cutting poverty
— Champion of the middle class comes to the aid of the poor
— Biden’s historic victory for America
The most Soviet of the recent efforts didn’t have a classically Soviet headline. “Comedians are struggling to parody Biden. Let’s hope this doesn’t last,” read the Washington Post opinion piece by Richard Zoglin, arguing that Biden is the first president in generations who might be “impervious to impressionists.” Zoglin contended Biden is “impregnable” to parody, his voice being too “devoid of obvious quirks,” his manner too “muted and self-effacing” to offer comedians much to work with. He was talking about this person:
Forget that the “impregnable to parody” pol spent the last campaign year jamming fingers in the sternums of voters, challenging them to pushup contests, calling them “lying dog-faced pony soldiers,” and forgetting what state he was in. Biden, on the day Zoglin ran his piece, couldn’t remember the name of his Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, and referred to the Department of Defense as “that outfit over there”:…
We now know in advance that every Biden address will be reviewed as historic and exceptional. It was only a mild shock to see Chris Wallace say Biden’s was the “the best inaugural address I have ever heard.” More predictable was Politico saying of Thursday night’s address that “it is hard to imagine any other contemporary politician making the speech Biden did… channeling our collective sorrow and reminding us that there is life after grief.” (Really? Hard to imagine any contemporary politician doing that?)
This stuff is relatively harmless. Where it gets weird is that the move to turn the bulk of the corporate press in the “moral clarity” era into a single party organ has come accompanied by purges of the politically unfit. In the seemingly endless parade of in-house investigations of journalists, paper after paper has borrowed from the Soviet style of printing judgments and self-denunciations, without explaining the actual crimes….
Are you starting to get the picture? There’s nothing behind the facade but more facades. The MSM is a calculated distraction, designed to divert our attention from the daily destruction and depravity imposed on us and the rest of the world by the puppeteers of the press. Meanwhile the economy has been deliberately wrecked, public education is indoctrination into learned helplessness, autism rates and vaccination schedules are off the charts, family breakup, teen suicide and forced male genital amputation without pain relief is practically universal and on and on and on.
For god’s sake turn off your TV. You’d learn more about the world by staring at a blank wall. You’d be forced to think.
Like nearly all US states, Georgia imposed a stay-at-home order in March 2020 in response to demands from public health officials claiming a stay-at-home order would lessen total deaths from covid-19.
But unlike most states, Georgia ended its stay-at-home order after only 5 weeks, and proceeded to lower other restrictions quickly.
The legacy media responded with furious opposition. For example, an article in The Atlantic declared the end of Georgia’s lockdown to be an “experiment in human sacrifice.” The Guardian approvingly quoted one Georgian who insisted the end of the stay-at-home order was “reckless, premature and dangerous.”
A few weeks later, other states began to end their stay-at-home orders and to end other restrictions as well. Florida was the largest among these states.
Shortly thereafter the Daily Beast declared the scaling back of restrictions in Georgia and Florida were “terrifyingly premature” And quoted one expert who insisted “If you lift the restriction too soon, a second wave will come, and the damage will be substantial both medically and economically. We don’t want to throw away the sacrifices we have made for weeks now.”
All this hyperbole about human sacrifice and recklessness leads us to conclude that states which ended lockdowns quickly must have experienced far worse numbers of deaths from covid than states which maintained lockdowns longer. Indeed, when it came to lockdowns, we were told, the longer the better. Ideally, lockdowns shouldn’t be loosened up at all until everyone can be vaccinated.
But things didn’t turn out that way. Experts have scrambled to come up with explanations for why this is the case, but the fact remains some of the most strict states (i.e., New York and Massachusetts) have covid deaths at far worse rates than the “reckless” states like Georgia and Florida.
Moreover, with little to show for their lockdowns in terms of “public health” these states with extreme lockdowns also have some of the worst unemployment rates. This occurred in spite of the fact that experts insisted that a failure to impose lockdowns would doom a state’s economy to later economic disaster.
State-to-State Comparisons Aren’t Helping the Prolockdown Narrative
A year after stay-at-home order began, even the usual media outlets are being forced to recognize the outcome aren’t what was predicted. The Associated Press reported earlier this week:
California and Florida both have a COVID-19 case rate of around 8,900 per 100,000 residents since the pandemic began, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And both rank in the middle among states for COVID-19 death rates — Florida was 27th as of Friday; California was 28th.
Connecticut and South Dakota are another example. Both rank among the 10 worst states for COVID-19 death rates. Yet Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, imposed numerous statewide restrictions over the past year after an early surge in deaths, while South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a Republican, issued no mandates as virus deaths soared in the fall. …
Like Florida, Missouri had no statewide mask mandate, ended business restrictions last June and has a cumulative COVID-19 death rate similar to California’s….
I have received literally dozen of emails for the past week from people wanting me and Health Impact News to cover the recent interviews that “virologist and vaccine expert” Geert Vanden Bossche has given warning about the dangers of the new experimental COVID vaccines.
But until now, we have not covered his interviews, because honestly he was not adding anything to the current discussions about the dangers of the experimental COVID vaccines that other doctors and scientists that we do feature here at Health Impact News have made. He claims to have worked with Bill Gates at GAVI, and I guess that is the reason so many find him interesting and credible.
But as I read his bio, I found him far less credible than other physicians and scientists we have featured here at Health Impact News, as he is very clearly pro-vaccine and believes vaccines are necessary. He himself says publicly:
“I can assure you that each of the current vaccines have been designed, developed and manufactured by brilliant and competent scientists.”
Really? I have publicly called some of these same people he calls “brilliant and competent scientists” mass murderers. So why would Health Impact News take seriously anything this man says? My first impression was that this man was “controlled opposition” with some unknown hidden agenda.
I simply could not understand why so many in our readership would want us to cover what this man says, and yet most of major names in the alternative media were giving this man a platform for his views.
Today, I finally came across someone who shares my skepticism about what this man is saying. I first read her article on Off-Guardian.org, but the original source is her own website, and we reproduce it here for our readers.
The Curious Case of Geert Vanden Bossche
by Rosemary Frei, MSc
On the surface, Vanden Bossche appears to perhaps be addressing credible concerns about Covid.
He’s saying that the current crop of Covid vaccines will cause the novel coronavirus to mutate into a “super-infectious virus.” And therefore he’s calling for an immediate halt of the use of the current vaccines.
If humans are “committed to perpetuating our species, we have no choice but to eradicate these highly infectious viral variants” via “large vaccination campaigns,” Vanden Bossche claims at the conclusion of his open letter. However, he continues, in contrast to the currently used Covid vaccines, these new vaccines must focus on stimulation of mass production of the component of the immune system known as natural killer cells, he asserts.
But Vanden Bossche bases his views on unproven hypotheses. This is similar to, and builds on, high-profile modeling-paper authors who use theoretical frameworks to inflame fears about the supposed dangerousness of the new variants.
Despite this, Vanden Bossche’s views were very quickly and positively received by high-profile vaccine sceptics such as Del Bigtree in his March 11 episode (starting at 57:25) and Vernon Coleman in his March 13 video and article.
Bigtree and Coleman virtually unquestioningly accept and amplify Vanden Bossche’s views. They strongly insinuate to their overwhelmingly credulous subscribers that there’s virtually no fact-checking or pause for sober second thought required.
But from my experience as a former long-time medical writer and journalist (1988-2016) — particularly a four-month stint with media-relations giant FleishmanHillard in 1994 (yes, I’ve worked for the dark side) — this has all the hallmarks of a drug-company astroturf campaign. It’s another step in the decades-long erasure of the fact that our sophisticated and highly effective immune systems work well and don’t need any assistance from the biomedical/pharmaceutical industry.
There’s abundant evidence that Vanden Bossche has a not-so-hidden agenda. For example, just before the three-minute mark in the video interview of Vanden Bossche by McMillan, Vanden Bossche indicates he’s a long-time vaccine developer. He adds he’s now focusing on vaccines that “educate the immune system in ways that are to some extent more efficient than we do right now with our conventional vaccines.” Clearly he’s got significant conflicts of interest. Therefore he has zero credibility when it comes to advising the public or anyone else about how to avoid negative effects of mass vaccination.
However, Bigtree, Coleman and others don’t point out any of the red flags. Despite taking Vanden Bossche’s assertions extremely seriously, these high-profile alternative-media figures don’t even do basic due diligence such as looking into McMillan, who’s the man who interviewed Vanden Bossche, or the company McMillan is apparently affiliated with, Vejon Health. Bigtree, for example, relies heavily on the McMillan interview for the content of his March 11 segment.
As far as I know, McMillan and Vanden Bosch aren’t among the thousands of MDs, PhDs, and other people with graduate degrees or equivalent qualifications who have thoroughly debunked the official Covid narrative over the last 12 months. Rather, the pair suddenly popped out of the woodwork….