Full disclosure: I’m a huge fan of Netflix. I’ve been watching numerous Netflix-produced shows and movies lately, and I’m starting to notice more and more of them have consciousness rooted within them. However, I’ve also noticed some seriously strange forms of propaganda showing up on their platform. This got me thinking: Who funds Netflix?
Infamous investor and businessman George Soros reported at the end of 2015 that he owns 317,534 Netflix shares, which has an estimated worth of $32.79 million. If you’ve never heard of Soros, he is a key member of the elite, or the shadow government, disguised as a philanthropic billionaire. And Netflix isn’t his only concerning investment — he also holds shares in Google and numerous non-profits.
Who Is George Soros?
George Soros’ current net worth is $23 billion. After selling his company, Soros Fund Management, in 2000, he’s been focusing on his “humanitarian efforts” through his philanthropic Open Society Foundations (OSF). Soros started making strategic political donations to essentially fund revolutions in different European countries and made a fortune amidst the chaos. He also made a killing off European forced migration and other colour revolutions.
Anonymous targeted Soros for his link to the conflict in the Ukraine, as he was partially responsible for the Western-led coup that overthrew the democratically elected government of Ukraine.
Soros is well-known for financing and donating heavily to “left” groups, as he played a hand in creating the Black Lives Matter and Women’s March movements. Don’t get me wrong — I’m a strong advocate for equality and am happy to see people supporting one another. However, Soros’ investments in anti-discrimination movements seem to be politically driven, intent on stirring up conflict.
He’s also played a vital role in many of the lawsuits against Trump’s newest policies (not that I support many of them, at all). The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) started filing lawsuits against Trump’s executive orders, and ever since then their donations have skyrocketed, totalling over $24 million in one weekend, which is approximately six times the organization’s average annual donations. Soros’s Open Society Institute has donated over $35 million to the ACLU alone and millions more to other liberal organizations willing to file lawsuits against the Trump administration’s policies. Read more about that in our CE article here.
He also uses OSF to funnel money into Media Matters, which directly contributes to mainstream media outlets such as NBC and the New York Times, so he plays a role in manipulating MSM and the way in which politics is reported. You can read more about his previous investments in our CE article here.
George Soros’ Investments in Netflix and Google
So, why would he buy into Netflix and Google? Well, Google is a pretty safe investment, since it controls some of the world’s best technologies and our access to knowledge and information. Earlier this month, Google announced one of its latest technologies, “Cross Check,” which will supposedly help identify fake news. I wonder if this will actually be the case, or if this will be a similar situation to the Snopes and Facebook censorship. It’s easy to imagine how this form of censorship would benefit Soros.
Netflix, on the other hand, was a relatively questionable investment to make at the end of 2015. Although the stock price had seen an upswing of 20% over the course of a month at the time, Netflix’s entire business model was so innovative that it couldn’t really be considered a “sure thing.”
Nevertheless, Soros decided to invest millions into Netflix, a decision that paid off big time. Netflix announced that the company turned over $8.29 billion from streaming alone in 2016, which is a 35.2% increase from 2015.
The question here is: How much control does he get over what the company produces? The answer very well could be none. However, after Netflix released the documentary The White Helmets, I began to question that. Disguised as an incredible tale of real-life heroes saving innocent Syrian civilians, the film ended up being pure propaganda.
The group’s acting skills turned out to be far more impressive than their humanitarian efforts. They have been caught falsifying photographs, recycling footage of children, and literally faking scenes of them saving “civilians,” forcing one to wonder if the movie was even a documentary at all, or entirely staged.
Furthermore, the group is heavily funded by the U.S., the UK, and other countries in Europe, despite the fact that they deny accepting funding from any interested parties. It’s clear that the U.S. has vested interests in the Syrian war, since they’re selling arms to both the terrorist groups and non-terrorists.
The White Helmets also claim to be neutral and unarmed, which is far from the truth. As independent journalist Vanessa Beeley explains, “If we look at their claims to be neutral, they are embedded entirely in terrorist-held areas whether it is predominantly Al-Nusra Front or ISIS or any of the various associated brigades of terrorists that take their command very much from Al-Nusra Front, that is where White Helmets are exclusively.”
Beeley continues, “They’ve been filmed participating and facilitating an execution of a civilian in Aleppo. They post celebratory videos to their social media pages of the execution of civilian Arab soldiers.”
So, Netflix has most North Americans thinking that the White Helmets are a group of heroic, peaceful knights saving Syrians, when in reality they’ve been referred to as terrorists themselves, and even a “shadow government” — represented by the U.S., the UK, and other countries — in the making. You can read more about the White Helmets in our CE article here.
If you’re familiar with the details of Soros’ role in the Ukraine conflict, all of this seems extremely questionable. Why would Netflix voluntarily create a documentary spreading propaganda? Well, I’m not sure why Netflix would, but it’s easier to envision why Soros would.
Mainstream media tends to demonize Russia in regards to the Syrian war, which is exactly what Soros would want. You could say that Soros has a long-standing grudge against Russia, in part because they kicked out Soros’ company, OSF.
“It was found that the activity of the Open Society Foundations and the Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation represents a threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation and the security of the state,” a translated version of a Russian press statement read.
Soros has been extremely outspoken on Russia’s crimes against humanity in Syria, even though some of those news stories were falsified. You can also read a document here that includes notes from an OSF meeting about Russia that was released in the DC Leaks.
Netflix also got a ton of backlash regarding their upcoming series Dear White People. The title sort of says it all: It’s an attempt to provide insight into racial segregation, even though the title itself promotes separatism. There’s no telling if Soros was involved in any way, but perhaps he would’ve supported it since it has his infamous “activism that actually promotes separatism” branding all over it.
Soros’ investments here could be well-intended, but given his vast history of profiting off chaos, it’s easy to imagine him having an ulterior motive or a hidden agenda. Regardless of his intentions, I encourage you to always think critically about what you’re looking at. It’s difficult to distinguish what is fake news and what isn’t, so it’s crucial that we don’t just take things at face value anymore. Most importantly, follow your intuition, and learn to trust it!
A Documentary Series Exploring The Most Powerful ‘Alternative Medicines’ Known To Man
- The Facts:
A new 9-part documentary series called Proven: Healing Breakthroughs Backed By Science. Is set to begin. It's free to sign up for to watch, and you can do so in the link provided within the article.
- Reflect On:
Is our current medical industry concerned with health and wellness, or profit? Why don't they promote substances they cannot profit off of that seem to work for a number of illness better than prescription drugs? What's going on here?
“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”
– Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and Former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (source)
It’s quite well known that interest in “alternative medicine” is growing, and has been growing for quite a long time. This doesn’t seem to be a trend that’s going to stop. Every single year, month and day it’s clear that its popularity will continue to increase exponentially. I put the word alternative because prior to modern day medicine, it wasn’t cosidered alternative, it was simply considered medicine, just like organic food wasn’t considered organic, it was just normal food.
The Documentary Series
This type of medicine is something we were at Collective Evolution are incredibly passionate about, which is why we’ve been creating awareness about it for ten years now. This is why we are also excited about a new 9-part documentary series called Proven: Healing Breakthroughs Backed By Science.
A heightened interest in this topic is happening for multiple reasons, one of them is the fact that healthcare providers are losing confidence in pharmaceutical grade medicine. Many doctors and scientists are feeling uncomfortable with the idea of prescribing certain medicines, and many publications have come out for a number of years showing that some of them can be harmful and inadequate. There are many of examples to choose from, from prescription drugs all the way to some vaccines. Perhaps the latest being the statements made by Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project, explaining how healthcare providers are now concerned about vaccine safety. You can read more about that here.
Another reason is because there are thousands of studies now showing that many “alternative” medicines and therapies (that your doctor doesn’t know about or isn’t allowed to recommend) are far superior for many of the chronic health conditions we suffer from.
This is exactly what the docu-series goes into and provides evidence for.
It’s also happening due to the amount of corruption and fraud that’s been exposed within our federal health regulatory agencies, and again, there are many examples to choose from. One of the best would be the SPIDER papers. A group called the CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research, or CDC SPIDER, put a list of complaints in a letter to the CDC Chief of Staff and provided a copy of the letter to the public watchdog organization U.S. Right to Know (USRTK). They raised concerns “about the current state of ethics at our agency. It appears that our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests. It seems that our mission and Congressional intent for our agency is being circumvented by some of our leaders. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception. Some senior management officials at CDC are clearly aware and even condone these behavior.
The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs. This is what makes drugs so different from anything else in life… Virtually everything we know about drugs is what the companies have chosen to tell us and our doctors… the reason patients trust their medicine is that they extrapolate the trust they have in their doctors into the medicines they prescribe. The patients don’t realize that, although their doctors may know a lot about diseases and human physiology and psychology, they know very, very little about drugs that’ve been carefully concocted and dressed up by the drug industry. – Dr. Peter Gotzsche, co-founder of the Cochrane Collaboration (source)
Last but not least, the biggest reason why many people are gravitating towards this type of medicine is simply because it’s working for them. There is extreme legitimacy, in some cases, when it comes to alternative treatment. Again, this is exactly why more and more people every single year gravitate towards these options.
Was Trump Right? New Study Shows Success With Use Of Chlorine Dioxide On COVID-19
- The Facts:
A recent preliminary study in Ecuador has looked at the use of chlorine dioxide as a treatment for COVID-19. Thus far, after oral and intravenous treatment, patients have recovered in only 4 days.
- Reflect On:
Is this yet another cheap and effective treatment we should be looking at producing instead of expensive and controversial vaccine development?
US President Trump recently became the laughing stock of mainstream media for suggesting that disinfectant should be injected into people to fight against the virus. While the media may have blown the context of his statements out of proportion, a recently published preliminary study shows he may have actually been right.
A clinical trial, involving more than 100 patients suffering from COVID-19, who were given chlorine dioxide, both orally and/or intravenously, showed that patients were cured within 4 days, so says biophysicist Andreas Kalcker. The trial was carried out by the Asociacion Ecuatoriana de Medicos Expertos en Medicina Integrativa, overseen by a medical group of clinicians in Ecuador.
These noteworthy results deserve much more research, but like other alternative treatments, you might guess that this information will be censored in the coming days.
Chlorine dioxide, an incredibly cheap and easy to produce solution, has been widely used for many purposes including disinfecting bottled drinking water. Most humans have come into contact with CLO2 as a result of its common uses.
You can learn more about CLO2 and this new study in the video below from Andreas Kalcker.
Chlorine Dioxide Is A Registered ‘Excellent’ Bactericide, Fungicides and Anti-Microbial Agent
Chlorine dioxide is registered with the EPA (Registration No. 74986-1), as it is considered an ‘excellent’ bactericide, fungicide and antimicrobial agent. It is also interesting to note it has passed the EPA’s stringent DIS/TISS guidelines for use as a disinfectant and as a food-contact surface sanitizer.
It also being used to clean transport, a bus company in Sacremento shared that they using chlorine dioxide to disinfect its seats of Coronavirus.
Are people dying needlessly of COVID-19 while on ventilators? This is a question many people have been asking given the amount of people who have been dying after being o ventilators for an extended period of time.
According to Mike Adams of Natural News:
Ecuador has been hit particularly hard by the coronavirus, and the current “standard of care” promoted by Western medicine — largely based on the use of ventilators — has been killing the vast majority of critical patients while utterly failing to address the real root of the problem.
Covid-19 isn’t an Acute Respiratory Disease (ARD), it turns out. Rather, it often presents as an inflammation and blood clotting condition (see The Lancet research, below) which causes the blood to be unable to carry oxygen, resulting in patient hypoxia and eventual asphyxiation.
This is why intravenous chlorine dioxide — which immediately delivers a high dose of oxygen to blood cells — is believed to work so effectively against covid-19. It reportedly restores the oxygen-carrying capacity of hemoglobin and clears the clotting in the lungs, all while destroying pathogens.
Chlorine Dioxide Patents
This information may not be commonly known, but there are many patents involving the use of Chlorine dioxide. These two are very interesting:
Disclosed is an injection containing chlorine dioxide in therapeutic applications such as in-vivo stem cell regeneration, anti-tumor and anti-aging
This one is about treatment for treating respritory viruses. Disinfection, sterilisation or deodorisation of air using gaseous or vaporous substances, e.g. ozone
Mainstream media has stated that oral use of chlorine dioxide is ‘dangerous,’ but is that entirely accurate? Depending on the dose used, as with any potential medicine, it can be completely safe and effective as discussed in Kalcker’s video above. If you’d like to do more research for yourself on the subject, including exploring the safety of ingestion, please check out these scientific papers.
WHO’s CLO2 Drinking Water Studies
The World Health Organisation promotes that chlorine dioxide is a safe, non toxic, water disinfectant. You might like to read about the findings of chlorine dioxide showing no toxic effects to kidneys, and that it does not have evidence it has mutagenic or carcinogenic effects. Some of the studies on animals were carried out for 2 years, and three months on humans. This was the conclusion:
Studies in healthy adult male volunteers lasting up to 12 weeks showed no clear treatment related effects on blood, urine analysis or physical examination at doses of sodium chlorite (Chlorine Dioxide) and sodium chlorate estimated to be in the region of 0.036 mg/kg bw per day, expressed as chlorite or chlorate. The authors concluded that the absence of detrimental physiological responses within the limits of the study demonstrated the relative safety of oral ingestion of chlorine dioxide, chlorate and chlorite (Lubbers, Chauhan & Bianchine, 1981, 1982; Lubbers & Bianchine, 1984; Lubbers et al., 1984a,b).
Read the WHO’s own paper here.
When we see results like we see with CLO2, should it not be standard practice to explore these possibilities with open hearts ad open minds to see if we can come up with a fast solution to global challenges? Why is there little coverage of information like this? Why is so much effort spent casting doubt and debunking solutions like this without proper testing? Why is the focus always on expensive, profitable and potentially unsafe vaccines?
Wireless Industry Admits That No Safety Testing Has Been Conducted For 5G Technology
- The Facts:
Below is a clip of Senator Richard Blumenthal during a hearing that took place last year, questioning wireless industry representatives about the safety of 5G technology.
- Reflect On:
Why doesn't the industry conduct studies along with independent scientists to see if 5G technology is safe? Do they care? Do they know something we don't? Is it even scientifically possible for 5G to be considered safe? Why not just find out?
Important notice to our readers. A global online summit featuring the leading doctors, scientists and activists in the field is set to take place about 5G technology, the health concerns and what you can do about it. It’s completely free to sign up and watch. If you want to reserve your spot, you can sign up HERE to watch it. Once you sign up you’ll be taken to a link where you can download our free E-Book on 5G. It covers what 5G is and an abundance of peer-reviewed research is cited for anybody in your life or in your family who actually questions if there are really any legitimate concerns.
In December 2018, US. Senator Richard Blumenthal and U.S. Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr seeking answers regarding potential health risks posed by new 5G wireless technology. At a hearing, that took place last year, Blumenthal criticized Carr for failing to provide answers, and instead, just echoing, “the general statements of the FDA.” Blumenthal also decried the FDA’s statements as “pretty unsatisfactory.” The PDF of Carr’s complete response is available here.
During an exchange with wireless industry representatives who were also in attendance, Blumenthal asked them whether they have supported research on the safety of 5G technology and potential links between radio-frequency and cancer, and the industry representatives conceded they have not.
The point is that the industry has not conducted any safety testing of these technologies and is currently rolling them out. This also echoes many studies that have been published that are raising concerns. For example A study published in 2019 in Frontiers in Public Health is one of many that raises concerns about 5G technology. It points out that “novel 5G technology is being rolled out in several densely populated cities, although potential chronic health or environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed.” It goes on to emphasize that the range and magnitude of potential impacts of 5G technologies are under-researched, although important biological outcomes have been reported with millimeter wavelength exposure. These include oxidative stress and altered gene expression, effects on skin and systemic effects such as on immune function. In vivo studies reporting resonance with human sweat ducts, acceleration of bacterial and viral replication, and other endpoints indicate the potential for novel as well as more commonly recognized biological impacts from this range of frequencies, and highlight the need for research before population-wide continuous exposures.”
It’s one of many that outlines how, “In some countries, notably the US, scientific evidence of the potential hazards of RFR has been largely dismissed. Findings of carcinogenicity, infertility and cell damage occurring at daily exposure levels—within current limits—indicate that existing exposure standards are not sufficiently protective of public health. Evidence of carcinogenicity alone, such as that from the NTP study, should be sufficient to recognize that current exposure limits are inadequate.”
Not only does the industry need to conduct studies, but studies should also be conducted independently. So far, the studies that have been published make it quite clear that there are biological effects of this type of technology.
Ask yourself, how can this type of technology be rolled out and approved without any safety testing? What’s going on here? Why are the cries for safety testing my the citizenry, scientists and doctors constantly ignored? What does this say about our world and our supposed democracy? Why do some mainstream media outlets ridicule the idea that this type of technology can be dangerous? How can hundreds of scientists and doctors be considered conspiracy theorists for raising concerns? How can thousands of scientific peer-reviewed studies that raise concerns about this type of technology continue to go ignored by the industry?
A Global Online Summit on 5G Technology Is Set To Take Place
These questions, along with the health concerns of 5G technology and what we can do about it, will be the topic of a global online summit that’s set to take place the first week of June. The summit will feature multiple doctors, scientists and activists in the field. It’s going to be very informational, very informative, and it’s going to be completely free.
If you want to reserve your spot, you can sign up HERE to watch it.
Once you sign up you’ll be taken to a link where you can download our free E-Book on 5G. It covers what 5G is and an abundance of peer-reviewed research is cited for anybody in your life or in your family who actually questions if there are really any legitimate concerns.
High Levels of Damage Have Been Discovered In Trees Near Cell Phone Towers
One strong theme among the citizenry of the world that receives no mainstream media attention is the issue of cell...
Masks: Are There Benefits or Just a Comfort Prop? Let the Facts Speak
Initially I respected the call by my local Governor in Connecticut to protect our fellow citizens. Deep down I thought...