FACTS. The human body is populated by virus' and since the beginning of mankind the planet has been overrun by virus' - it's a part of life, it's how the body - our virus body - learns and survives.We must not resist but allow the human body to learn from each virus so that mankind can quickly adapt and become stronger. Lockdowns weaken us and don't make us stronger.

If we do not create new institutions or radically alter existing ones, most of the ones we have now are going to take our freedoms away.

First Amendment Rights Being Eroded by Technocrats: Director of Citizens for Free Speech



JP SEARS  Big Tech Cleans House! - Everything We Want You To Think

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions

With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it's critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community.

Think Globally, Act Locally

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC's free Advocacy Portal at gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.


Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is presenting only one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you: You have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at


COVID-911: From Homeland Security to Biosecurity    
9/11, as we were told repeatedly in the days, weeks, and months after the attack, was the day that changed everything. And now a new event has come along to once again throw the world into chaos. But whereas the post-9/11 era introduced America to the concept of homeland security, the COVID-19 era is introducing the world to an altogether more abstract concept: biosecurity. This is the story of the COVID-911 security state.



Today’s brave new world may be heading in directions beyond what Orwell and Huxley imagined.

It’s facilitated by made-in-the USA covid and economic collapse. 

For ordinary Americans, it created worse hard times than during the Great Depression.

It’s facilitating the greatest ever wealth transfer from most people to the privileged few.

It’s part of a grand scheme for transforming the US and other Western states into ruler-serf societies.

Covid is another form of seasonal flu/influenza, an annual epidemic in the US and elsewhere that effects millions of people. 

It comes and goes like clockwork without mass hysteria fear-mongering, partial or full shutdowns causing mass unemployment, mask-wearing that does more harm than good, and social distancing.

All of the above with likely more on the way seems more like a Hollywood horror film than reality.

Interventionist hawks comprising the Biden/Harris regime’s national security team likely means escalated militarism and endless wars over the next four years while vital homeland needs go begging — along with all of the above.

The World Economic Forum-promoted Great Reset may be on the way — a scheme promoted executive chairman Klaus Schwab.

Paul Craig Roberts called him an “insane tyrant,” his scheme intended to “end…human autonomy, (facilitated by) implantable microchips (to control) our bodies and brains.”

It aims to control and exploit ordinary people so privileged ones can benefit more than already.

It’s a dystopian nightmare — wrapped in deceptive equitable socioeconomic rhetoric.

Neoliberal harshness expanded a large-scale underclass in the US and West. 

Great Reset planners intend expanding it further toward their goal — ruler/serf societies in the West and worldwide.

Digital health passports may be part of their scheme to facilitate hazardous mass vaxxing.

Will they be required for employment, attending school, air travel, other public transportation, hotel reservations, restaurant dining, in-store shopping, attending a sporting event, and other social interactions?

Will daily lives and routines no longer be possible without proof of covid immunity?

Will what was inconceivable not long ago become reality ahead?

Will something similar to what Britain’s Boris Johnson has in mind be on the way?

Despite unreliable PCR tests that produce false positives and negatives time and again — rendering them useless — Johnson aims to start mass-testing.

He wants to “identify people who are (covid) negative…who are not infectious so we can allow them to behave in a more normal way, in the knowledge they cannot infect anyone else.”

Will he require a health passport for Brits to resume daily life — which includes mass-vaxxing?

Rushed development of hazardous to human health covid vaccines are close to being rolled out.

Is something similar to what’s planned in Britain coming to the US and other Western societies — a brave new world more unfit to live in than already?

On Friday, Children Health Defense chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. said the following about Pfizer and Moderna covid vaccines:

Will “a significant percentage of people who are going to get the vaccine…get sicker than they would from covid…?”

Moderna vaccine development showed “100% of the people had some side effects, many of them mild.”

But “20% of the high-dose test subjects had serious side effects.”

“(W)e have to ask ourselves (if it’s) better to get covid, at least for most age groups, then it is to get the vaccine?”

On his Children’s Health Defense website, Kennedy discussed a New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) mass-vaxxing strategy.

It recommends voluntary use initially. If “unsuccessful,” mandate it, adding:

“(P)rinciples of public health ethics support trying less burdensome policies before moving to more burdensome ones.” 

Voluntary vaxxing “should be limited to a matter of weeks” — followed by federal and state legislation that mandates it. 

Noncompliance should incur “substantial penalties…(like) employment suspension or stay-at-home orders.”

According to Kennedy, authors of the NEJM article are connected to the (Bill) Gates Foundation, a leading promoter of mass-vaxxing.

The NEJM’s “article is a revealing — and horrifying —  blueprint for Pharma’s imposition of mandates that could require hundreds of millions of reluctant Americans to submit to a risky medical procedure with poorly-tested, ineffective, zero-liability vaccines,” Kennedy explained, adding:

“The NEJM has once again confirmed its former editor Marcia Angell’s warning that this once renowned journal has devolved into a propaganda vessel for Pharma.”

Other than diabolical brave new world plotters, who could have imagined earlier what’s unfolding in real time now.

Air travel may be affected early in the new year.

According to the International Air Transport Association’s Nick Careen:

IATA is “in the final development phase (of a) digital passport” to show if international travelers were vaccinated against covid.

IATA will urge all international carriers to adopt what the association is promoting.

Will domestic carriers in the US, West and elsewhere go the same way?

Will federal and local governments, businesses, and operators of whatever involves public interactions follow suit?

If voluntary compliance with covid vaxxing doesn’t work, will mandating it be implemented?

Is a draconian new way of life on the way under hardened police state rules?

Mass nonviolent resistance is the only alternative, pushing back against what no just societies would tolerate.


ROBERT KENNEDY Jr and Alec Baldwin Interview. August 6 2020, TRUTH episode #10   

My takeaways below this video.


There are parts of the interview I would have answered differently but all in all it helps to get a better grasp on the big picture and key underlying factors.

A few takeaways. 

1. Viruses mutate/morph/change every year.   

2. Last year's vaccine does not work on this year's virus.  

3. Antibodies last months not years BUT the bottom line is that: 
There are NO safe vaccines. So why bother discussing antibodies in the first place PLUS they do not protect against vaccine damage. 

4. The odds of vaccine damage (sickness, brain damage or death) are 40-1. If you knew you or a loved one has a 40 to 1 chance of sickness or death from taking a vaccination would you still do it? 
So I (MGW) ask what can happen if you get more than one up to say 40 vaccinations?  The odds of harm surely must increase. Do the odds after 40 vaccinations increase to one to one?  Do they react with one another to cause multiple compounded damages after one has taken more than one?

5. Bottom line is to strengthen the immune system.

6. Vitamin C to bowel tolerance (5,000-15000 units until you get the runs then back off till they stop - Linus Polling stated in his book that he took 15,000 units daily; Zinc -ask your health professional; Selenium -ask your health professional; Melatonin;  Vitamin D3 - Mercola says 20,000 units daily; Magnesium - ask your health professional; Glutathione- ask your health professional. No processed or fried foods. Hydrate. No refined sugar.  I ADD HEAVY METAL CHELATES LIKE BLUE GREEN ALGAE 


 Bobby K, Tony M and me  MORE ABOUT TONY



RON PAUL    As Covid Hospitalizations Disappear, Authoritarians Refuse To Give Up


Nazism, COVID-19 and the destruction of modern medicine

Stand for Health Freedom recently had the honor of sitting down with Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav and capturing her personal story on film. It’s a story that every individual needs to hear. A renowned champion of human rights and expert in biomedical research ethics, Ms. Sharav offers rare and valuable insights into the public health arena and state of emergency affecting each and every one of our lives. She also draws parallels between what happened in Nazi Germany and what’s happening in our society today — and discusses why it’s more important than ever for us to take a stand. 




8 predictions for the world in 2030 

full story on  ALSO  WEF.CH

Fear Secures Obedience in COVID-19 War


Bob Livingston Alerts

Governments since the Roman Empire have created enemies to instill fear in the population so that the people are manipulated into giving more police power over to the government. Politicians always go along with this Machiavellian deception.

Much liberty and freedom has been sacrificed in the interest of "keeping us safe." In the 19 years since 9/11 and right on through to our current "lockdowns." If any period in the U.S. ever exceeded the past 20 years in terms of liberty lost while our military is "fighting to protect our freedoms" in wars around the world it would only be the period just prior to, during and immediately after the war of Northern Aggression.

Whenever I hear that our military is fighting wars "to protect our freedoms," I have to shake my head. If this is true, then why are our "freedoms" being eroded away like a beach in a hurricane? Perhaps it is not Muslim terrorists who are a danger to our "freedoms," but our own politicians and unelected bureaucrats.

The U.S. establishment has created a confusion of cause and effect by and through a flag-waving mania in America. "Patriotism" and "safety" throughout history have covered a multitude of mischief. We are seeing it now!

Phony patriotism is strong leverage against a population ignorant of the ways of treason by its own government. The American people may be the most propagandized people in the history of the world. I also have no doubt that U.S. history is full of wars "for democracy" killing millions under the propaganda of patriotism with the majority support of the people and the full support of all but a small cadre of "elected representatives" — who are paid by the federal government, incidentally.

When George Washington said "government is force," he meant that government is force against its own people.

Since by definition government is force, then it follows that the government will use any ruse imaginable to increase its power. Increased use of government force or power could backfire unless skillfully handled and justified in the public mind. Therefore, governments rarely take action unless accompanied by skillful propaganda.

A whole generation of Americans has been raised to adulthood and beyond who have not seen peace in their lifetimes. Now, they might never see freedom or personal liberty ever again, if the current crop of power-grabbing politicians have their way.

Thankfully, there's been a ray of hope in Pennsylvania. After six months of lockdowns, a Pennsylvania Federal Court in Butler County v. Wolf reviewed the indefinite "emergency" restrictions imposed by the executive branch of Pennsylvania government, declaring limitations on gathering size, "stay-at-home orders," and mandatory business closures unconstitutional.

Refusing to accept the alleged need for a "new normal," the Court stated that an "independent judiciary [is needed] to serve as a check on the exercise of emergency government power."

Too bad most judges are members of the cadre of elites that have contempt for the average person. So we will see what comes of this. One can and must always hope. Meanwhile, thanks to the war on [name your crisis here], we can't move around without being "tested," all our communications are intercepted by the American spying apparatus, we are humiliated and groped and fondled by agents of government if we choose to travel, our bank accounts are monitored and banking activities reported to the government, we can be stopped and required to submit to warrantless blood draws if we're suspected of driving impaired, and politicians — including Trump — are openly advocating for laws to "legalize" stealing our weapons from us based on unverified reports of mental illness or threats — or just because some politicians are frightened of them, and business owners are arrested if they try to make a living.

The Bill of Rights is but a memory, sacrificed for "national security" and "to keep us safe." The American people have barely protested. As I wrote last week, we have entered a post-Constitutional America.

Exercising the 1st Amendment right of civil disobedience or even contrarian speech can get people labeled as terrorists. Certainly, they are subject to "cancellation."

One very important psychological mechanism of deception is to promote fear of the loss of something that has actually already been lost.

For example, the government authorities tell us of the threats posed to democracy and our lives… when America is already a fascist country. It is not unpatriotic to say this because it is a fact. Democracy is only the mask so that they can steal your wealth and freedom and, more importantly, your sons and daughters.

I feel the need to state this before it gets memory holed. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The right of a citizen to peaceably assemble and express one's views should be guaranteed by the Constitution. Will we let our freedoms be washed away?

Yours for the truth,

Bob Livingston
Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter®







Matt Taibbi Unsubscribe

12:55 PM (1 hour ago)
to me

S--t Public Defenders See: Innocent, But Fined

The state of Iowa collects millions of dollars in fines from people whose charges were dismissed. There's also a Catch-22: financially, you're better off guilty

Matt Taibbi Nov 27

On August 9, 2014, in Ferguson, Missouri, a veteran police officer named Darren Wilson shot and killed an 18-year-old Black man named Michael Brown. The resulting furor led to protests across the country, igniting a debate about brutality, use of force, and policing tactics that rages to this day.

In the wake of the protests in Ferguson, Barack Obama’s Justice Department opened a federal civil rights investigation of the city’s police department. On page 2 of the resulting report, the DOJ zeroed in on something unexpected: revenue. Ferguson police, the feds said, were under constant pressure from financially-strained burghers to generate cash, and essentially ordered to ticket as many people — poor people — as possible.

The most penniless residents of the St. Louis exurb were written up for everything from actual crimes to municipal code violations like “High Grass and Weeds,” “Barking Dog,” and “Dog Running at Large.” Between 2010 and 2014, the city wrote up 90,000 summonses and citations, and the number in the last year of that period was double what it was in the first year. Either crime and dog-barking were skyrocketing, or police were experiencing more pressure to write tickets. As the report wrote:

The City’s emphasis on revenue generation has a profound effect on FPD’s approach to law enforcement. Patrol assignments and schedules are geared toward aggressive enforcement of Ferguson’s municipal code, with insufficient thought given to whether enforcement strategies promote public safety or unnecessarily undermine community trust and cooperation… The result is a pattern of stops without reasonable suspicion and arrests without probable cause…

For a lot of Americans, this was the first time they were introduced to the idea that cash-strapped municipalities were using the justice system as a means of generating revenue. The grotesque angle was that cities were so desperate that they were reduced to systematically ticketing people who couldn’t pay.

While this was going on, Alex Kornya, a public defender at Iowa Legal Aid, was experiencing his own sub-journey through one of the more bizarre corners of the criminal justice labyrinth.

“It goes back to Ferguson,” says Kornya. “A large part of the story of Ferguson was how the criminal justice system has been driven into overdrive, because of this need for revenue.” What he was witnessing was related, but weirder, and worse.

In December of 2015, a woman named Lori Dee Mathes was charged with a single count of possession of a controlled substance. Police were really interested in someone else, but executed a warrant on her property and charged her with a low-level offense based on what they found. Nearly two years later, in October of 2017, the state filed a motion to dismiss “upon agreement of the parties.”

Mathes was off the hook — sort of. She was sent multiple bills: $40 for “court reporter fees,” $100 for “filing and docketing fees,” and $1,815.28 in “indigent defense fee recoupment,” i.e. counsel fees.

When Mathes tried to argue an inability to pay these bills, the state balked. After all, there was no more case! On what basis could she argue?

It was a classic Catch-22. If Mathes had been found guilty, she’d have a right to appeal not only the disposition of the case, but also an ability to pay penalties. However, as a higher court eventually ruled, there was no right to appeal anything after a case like hers had been dismissed.

Citing a case called Berman v. United States, the Iowa Court of Appeals wrote that judgment is final when “‘it terminates the litigation between the parties on the merits’ and ‘leaves nothing to be done but to enforce by execution what has been determined.’”

Meaning: if we find you guilty, there’s something to argue. If we drop the charges, there’s “nothing to be done.” Thanks to this logic, as Kornya put it, “people who have dismissed criminal charges end up owing more money than people who are convicted.” As a cosmic punishment, it seemed, for arguing an inability to pay the initial few thousand, Mathes ended up owing $3000 more in appellate fees.

The Mathes case had grown more bitter with time. When Kornya tried to argue down the costs, prosecutors returned fire in the form of a threat with real teeth, writing in a motion that if any of the fees were to be reduced “in any manner,” they might re-file the criminal charge:

In the years since Ferguson, the public has become at least somewhat aware of the phenomenon of the state charging people for the pleasure of having to travel through the criminal justice system. In New York, for instance, people have to pay for the tests the state does to enter their DNA in a database. There may be additional surcharges of hundreds of dollars for felony convictions, “victim assistance” fees, fees for ankle monitors, etc.

People who are released from long prison terms often find themselves under an immediate obligation to repay years of costs racked up behind bars, with a failure to repay in some states leading to re-incarceration. In some states, defendants are assessed hefty fees for pre-trial detention. Kornya says an Iowa 16-year-old, tried as an adult, racked up over $50,000 in pre-trial costs in just one case.

The difference in Iowa is the angle of fees in dismissed cases.

“We've talked to hundreds, thousands of people who have this issue,” says Kornya. “From 2014 to 2019, there was $15 million in debt just associated with dismissed criminal cases with debts in Iowa.” He says the overall number of outstanding counsel fee debt is $177 million, and the collection rate is a pathetic 2%.

These debts arise from the vapor of a legal paradox. Although an Iowa statute, Woodbury County v. Anderson, says costs and taxes may only be assessed via “derogation of the common law,” there is no explicit statute outlining the state’s power to assess fees in dismissed cases. Prosecutors just do it.

How? Unlike plea agreements, which require the completion of a series of verbal or written formalities, there is no concrete mechanism with a dismissal. The attorney for a defendant like Mathes may agree to a deal, and the prosecutor simply has to represent to the court that a series of conditions, including fees, have been agreed upon.

“Are plea agreements perfect? Are there coercive elements to them? My God, yeah,” says Kornya. “However, what happens a lot with these agreements to dismiss is they have no formalities.”

A plea agreement may be required to be read into the record, in open court, with the defendant actually there, in front of a court reporter. Or there might be a written contract. But in dismissed cases like Mathes, Kornya says, “It’s basically just, ‘Oh yeah, she agreed to that.’”

Kornya was involved with another case dealing with a related phenomenon. In State of Iowa v. Jane Doe, a woman charged in 2009 with domestic abuse had her case dropped, for the sensible reason that she was actually the one being abused.

Upon dismissal, Jane Doe was sent a bill for “unpaid court costs” of $718.38, again involving counsel fees. Nearly a decade later, she tried to get her case expunged (a 2016 law had made this easier), but a district court ruled she could not. Why? She still owed court costs she had never been able to pay in the first place.

In an affidavit later filed by Iowa Legal Aid, Doe said her sole income came from two monthly assistance programs, totaling less than $1000. She listed the monthly expenses for caring for her two children (a third was on the way at the time) at $1445. The court finally did waive the fee, but Kornya and others tried to fight the larger issue of the stalled expungements. After all, there were masses of people applying for leases or jobs who were being held back by the appearance of a criminal record, thanks to unpaid fees assessed in dismissed cases.

“A lot of people were in the same situation as Jane Doe, who had a significant debt that only poor people owe,” says Kornya. A non-indigent person who didn’t pay off his or her privately-hired lawyer could be sued, or might face an adverse credit report, but the state couldn’t prevent their record from being expunged.

For a poor person, however, “the state can, and the state did. We thought that was a violation of the constitution.” They took the issue to the Iowa Supreme Court, but lost, 4-3 against.

In Iowa anyway, thousands of the poorest people are being assessed significant fees based on what comes down to parody of Kafka: an informal understanding of agreements informally settled upon, based on a nonexistent legal authority. There are echoes of taxation without representation here, except that like so many things associated with the criminal justice system, the concept is irrational and moronic in addition to being repressive.

“If you're talking about a policy that actually collects revenue, and to support the judicial system, going after people with no money is stupid,” Kornya says. “Because you're not going to get the money… However miserable you make their lives, they still have no money.”




Related Products

{{/products.length}} {{#products}}