Connect with us

Alternative News

Gates Foundation Funded “Fact-Checker” (POLITIFACT) Censors GreenMedInfo on Facebook for Reposting Accurate Vaccine Meme

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Yet another independent media outlet is attacked for sharing content that questions vaccines. The means used to attack outlets like this are always unfounded in truth and emotionally driven.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is Greenmedinfo, and other media outlets being censored, demonetized, shut down and punished for sharing factual information? Why can't people decide what's real and what's not? Why do they have to let the government do it for them?

Because Politifact is in partnership with Facebook as a so-called “non-partisan,” 3rd party, fact-checker, they flagged our (Greenmedinfo) page as promoting “false news” and informed us, on April 22nd, that “Your Page has reduced distribution and other restrictions because of repeated sharing of false news.” Since then, our page no longer comes up when you search for pages with the keyword “GreenMedInfo,” and we have noticed a steep decline in our reach which on an average week would exceed 1 million.

advertisement - learn more

Due to our long held commitment to publishing truthful, evidence-based information on the underreported, unintended adverse effects of conventional medical interventions like vaccination, we have been subject to a wide range of attempts to discredit, defame, and censor us, over the years. For instance, all the way back in 2013, UNICEF published a report titled “Tracking anti-vaccination sentiment in Eastern European social media networks,” where GreenMedInfo.com, along with other prominent natural health websites, was cited as spreading vaccine “misinformation,” despite the fact that we simply aggregate, disseminate and provide open access to peer-reviewed research on vaccine adverse effects and safety concerns extracted directly from the US National Library of Medicine

Lately, the censorship has been scaling up to disturbing levels. In December of last year, Pinterest deleted our account for posting information questioning vaccine safety and promoting research on evidence-based natural medicine. Ironically, they claimed we were endangering the health of their users by posting alternative information, even though Pinterest regularly allows minors to access pornographic and violent contentboth of which have well-established significant deleterious psycho-emotional and physical effects in adults, much less children.

So, how does Facebook determine who is of suitable integrity and impartiality to become a 3rd party fact-checker?

They use certification provided by the “non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network to help identify and review false news.” Guess who created the organization that calls itself the International Fact-Checking Network? Poynter.  Check it out yourself here: https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/

advertisement - learn more

Yes, you read that correctly. Poynter, the owner of Politifact — the presumably impartial brand and judge of what is “false” or “true” news — certified itself as trustworthy and impartial.

It does not reflect well on Facebook that it allowed Poynter to certify itself as worthy to police the world’s news feeds in order to mete out algorithmic punishment to those whose views it does not agree with. Thanks to a Veritas exposé, we know how Facebook’s censorship strategy of”boiling works behind the scenes: 

How this machiavellian scheme has gone virtually unnoticed until now is hard to understand. But we hope that our example will help others understand the shadowy agendas at play between Poynter, Politifact, Facebook, and which are hidden in broad daylight for everyone to see.

But the red flags, and organizations involved, don’t stop there. Poytner’s fact-checking operation was funded by a $380,000 grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation — an organization notoriously dismissive of the downside of mass vaccination programs, which includes injuries and deaths the government has paid over $4 billion dollars in compensation towards through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund inaugurated by an act of Congress in 1986.

But are they correct about the meme we posted? Is it really “fake news”?

 

And does a mere posting of a meme, whose authorship is unknown but certainly was not produced by GreenMedInfo or its contributors, justify reducing the reach of our entire page, which over 525,000 people around the world have voluntarily and organically opted into receiving information from over the past decade?

Embarrassing as it is for the Politifact editorial team, whose entire premise is that they can be trusted to be fact-based, they didn’t report on our name correctly, calling us Greeninfo.com:

“Now, another anti-vaccine claim has surfaced on Facebook on a page called Greeninfo.com, which describes itself as an “alternative and holistic health service.”

They condemned the post as follows:

The post reads:

“Think combined doses of vaccines have been tested? They haven’t. Not once. EVER. Our children deserve better.”

The post, which provides no details or evidence, has been shared over 600 times since April 15 and was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)

Let’s cut to the chase:

The claim is false – all vaccines are tested for years before and after being made available to the public, including “combined doses.”

How did they prove this statement?

They reached out to a single individual, Daniel Salmon, who is the director of the Institute for Vaccine Safety at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who presumably can verify by his word alone the veracity of the claim. He simply countered in email: “This is not a true statement,” and pointed to a December 2008 documentfrom the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The document nowhere references the existence of a true placebo-controlled vaccine safety study, where saline instead of another adjuvanted vaccine was used; nor does the document discuss the fact that the present-day vaccination schedule involves giving dozens of vaccine antigens to children by age 6, where none of the vaccines have been studied together for safety; much less in juxtaposition to a control group who received a true placebo (saline).

This glaring problem is discussed among mainstream medical sites and authorities as well. For instance, MEDPAGE TODAY’s KevinMD.com has an article written by Chad Hayes, MD, titled “The vaccine study you’ll never see,” wherein he admits:

“No, we don’t have a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing our vaccine schedule to placebo.”

Wouldn’t MEDPAGE and KevinMD also be labeled as false news according to the standard applied to our page, for again, simply reposting a meme?

When it comes to the CDC, presumably a trustworthy source because it is believed to be “evidence-based,” their page on Vaccine Safety Concerns for Multiple Vaccines provides little assurance because their statements have no scientific citations. This is a classical example of the CDC’s cult of authority, where they use “science by proclamation” or “eminence-based medicine” to promote their agenda, instead of referencing actual research like we do at GreenMedInfo.com:

Getting multiple vaccines at the same time has been shown to be safe.

Scientific data show that getting several vaccines at the same time does not cause any chronic health problems. A number of studies have been done to look at the effects of giving various combinations of vaccines, and when every new vaccine is licensed, it has been tested along with the vaccines already recommended for a particular aged child. The recommended vaccines have been shown to be as effective in combination as they are individually.  Sometimes, certain combinations of vaccines given together can cause fever, and occasionally febrile seizures; these are temporary and do not cause any lasting damage. Based on this information, both the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend getting all routine childhood vaccines on time.

Disturbingly, the CDC acknowledges on the same page as the excerpt above:

“A child who receives all the recommended vaccines in the 2018 childhood immunization schedule may be exposed to up to 320 antigens through vaccination by the age of 2.”

This reminds us of the absurdly irresponsible statement of Dr. Paul Offit, who while admitting that vaccination is a violent act, considers it safe for an infant to receive 10,000 vaccines at once (revised from a previous statement where he said an infant could receive 100,000 vaccines at one time). Offit’s faith in the safety of vaccines represents a deep conflict of interest, considering he is the patent holder for a highly profitable rotavirus vaccine which has profound safety issues, in that it has potentially infected millions of children with serreptitious, disease-producing retroviruses.

The reality is that no study has ever been performed on the interaction and potential synergistic toxicity of the admnistration of 320 antigens through vaccination by the age of 2. This was conclusively affirmed by a presentation given by Del Bigtree, where at minute 58:40 he references a 2013 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the safety of the entire immunization schedule, citing the following passage:

“No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes … between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children … [Furthermore,] studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted.”

Many other key safety concerns with vaccines emerged from that report, with a series of them summarized by NVIC here:

  • “Few studies have comprehensively assessed the association between the entire immunization schedule or variations in the overall schedule and categories of health outcomes, and no study has directly examined health outcomes and stakeholder concerns in precisely the way that the committee was charged to address its statement of task;” (S-4)
  • “No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes that some stakeholders questioned between entirely unimmunized populations and fully immunized children. Experts who addressed the committee pointed not to a body of evidence that had been overlooked but rather to the fact that existing research has not been designed to test the entire immunization schedule;” (S4-5)
  • “The committee believes that although the available evidence is reassuring, studies designed to examine the long term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted; (S-5)
  • “Most vaccine-related research focuses on the outcomes of single immunizations or combinations of vaccines administered at a single visit. Although each new vaccine is evaluated in the context of the overall immunization schedule that existed at the time of review of that vaccine, elements of the schedule are not evaluated once it is adjusted to accommodate a new vaccine. Thus, key elements of the entire schedule – the number, frequency, timing, order and age at administration of vaccines – have not been systematically examined in research studies;” (S8-9)
  • “The committee encountered….uncertainty over whether the scientific literature has addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The committee could not tell whether its list was complete or whether a more comprehensive system of surveillance might have been able to identify other outcomes of potential significance to vaccine safety. In addition, the conditions of concern to some stakeholders, such as immunologic, neurologic, and developmental problems, are illnesses and conditions for which etiologies, in general, are not well understood.” (S-9)
  • “The committee found that evidence assessing outcomes in subpopulations of children who may be potentially susceptible to adverse reactions to vaccines (such as children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies or children born prematurely) was limited and is characterized by uncertainly about the definition of populations of interest and definitions of exposures or outcomes.” (S-9)
  • “To consider whether and how to study the safety and health outcomes of the entire childhood immunization schedule, the field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule (the “exposure”) and clearer definitions of health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in rigorous research that will ensure validity and generalizability;” (S-9)
  • “Public testimony to the committee described the speculation that children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies and premature infants might be additional 2 subpopulations at increased risk for adverse effects from immunizations. The 2012 IOM report Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality supports the fact that individuals with certain characteristics (such as acquired or genetic immunodeficiency) are more likely to suffer adverse effects from particular immunizations, such as MMR and the varicella vaccine;” (4-6)
  • “Children with certain predispositions are more likely to suffer adverse events from vaccines than those without that risk factor, such as children with immunodeficiencies that are at increased risk for developing invasive disease from a live virus vaccine. The committee recognizes that while the CDC has identified persons with symptoms or conditions that should not be vaccinated, some stakeholders question if that list is complete. Potentially susceptible populations may have an inherited or genetic susceptibility to adverse reactions and further research in this area is ongoing.” (4-9)
  • “Relatively few studies have directly assessed the immunization schedule. Although health professionals have a great deal of information about individual vaccines, they have must less information about the effects of immunization with multiple vaccines at a single visit or the timing of the immunizations. Providers are encouraged to explain to parents how each new vaccine is extensively tested when it is approved for inclusion in the recommended immunization schedule. However, when providers are asked if the entire immunization schedule has been tested to determine if it is the best possible schedule, meaning that it offers the most benefits and the fewest risks, they have very few data on which to base their response;” (4-10)
  • “Although the committee identified several studies that reviewed the outcomes of studies of cumulative immunizations, adjuvants and preservatives, the committee generally found a paucity of information, scientific or otherwise, that addressed the risk of adverse events in association with the complete recommended immunization schedule, even though an extensive literature base on individual vaccines and combination immunizations exists;” (4- 10)
  • “Research examining the association between the cumulative number of vaccines received and the timing of vaccination and asthma, atopy and allergy has been limited; but the findings from the research that has been conducted are reassuring.” (5-7) – 14 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee.
  • “The literature that the committee found to examine the relationship between the overall immunization schedule and autoimmunity was limited.” (5-9) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The evidence of an association between autism and the overall immunization schedule is limited both in quantity and in quality and does not suggest a causal association. “ (5-11) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The evidence regarding an association between the overall immunization schedule and other neurodevelopmental disorders [learning disorders, communication disorders, developmental disorders, intellectual disability, attention deficit disorder, disruptive behavior disorders, tics and Tourette’s syndrome] is limited in quantity and of limited usefulness because of its focus on a preservative no longer used in the United States.” (S-13) – 5 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee; 3
  • “The literature associating the overall immunization schedule with seizures, febrile seizures, and epilepsy is limited and inconclusive.” (5-15) – 4 studies were identified and reviewed by the IOM committee;
  • “The committee reviewed six papers on the immunization of premature infants published since 2002…..Because small numbers of infants were monitored for short periods of time, it is challenging to draw conclusions from this review.” (5-15)
  • “The committee’s review confirmed that research on immunization safety has mostly developed around studies examining potential associations between individual vaccines and single outcomes. Few studies have attempted more global assessment of entire sequence of immunizations or variations in the overall immunization schedule and categories of health outcomes, and none has squarely examined the issue of health outcomes and stakeholder concerns in quite the way that the committee was asked to do its statement of task. None has compared entirely unimmunized populations with those fully immunized for the health outcomes of concern to stakeholders.” (S-15)
  • “Queries of experts who addressed the committee in open session did not point toward a body of evidence that had been overlooked but, rather, pointed toward the fact that the research conducted to date has generally not been conceived with the overall immunization schedule in mind. The available evidence is reassuring but it is also fragmented and inconclusive on many issues.” (S-16)
  • “A challenge to the committee in its review of the scientific literature was uncertainty whether studies published in the scientific literature have addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The field needs valid and accepted metrics of the entire schedule (the “exposure”) and clearer definitions of the health outcomes linked to stakeholder concerns (the “outcomes”) in research that is sufficiently funded to ensure the collection of a large quantity of high-quality data;” (S-16)
  • “The committee concluded that parents and health care professionals would benefit from more comprehensive and detailed information with which to address parental concerns about the safety of the immunization schedule; (7-2)
  • “The concept of the immunization “schedule” is not well developed in the scientific literature. Most vaccine research focuses on the health outcomes associated with single immunizations or combinations of vaccines administered at a single visit. Even though each new vaccine is evaluated in the context of the overall immunization schedule that existed at the time of the review, individual elements of the schedule are not evaluated once it is adjusted to accommodate a new vaccine. Key elements of the immunization schedule – for example, the number, frequency, timing, order, and age at the time of administration of vaccines – have not been systematically examined in research studies;” (7-3)
  • “The committee encountered during the review of the scientific literature…uncertainty over whether the scientific literature has addressed all health outcomes and safety concerns. The committee could not determine whether its list of health outcomes was complete or whether a more comprehensive system of surveillance might identify other outcomes of potential safety significance. In addition, the conditions of concern to some stakeholders, such as immunological, neurological and developmental problems, are illnesses and conditions for 4 which the etiology, in general, is not well understood. Further research on these conditions may clarify their etiologies;” (7-3)
  • “The committee found that evidence from assessments of health outcomes in potentially susceptible populations of children who may have an increased risk of adverse reactions to vaccines (such as children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies or children born prematurely) was limited and is characterized by uncertainty about the definition of populations of interest and definitions of exposures and outcomes. Most children who experience an adverse reaction to immunization have a preexisting susceptibility. Some predispositions may be detectable prior to vaccination; others, at least with current technology and practice, are not;” (7-3)

Given the IOM report’s findings that there has not been a single study conducted to prove the safety of the entire schedulethe meme we posted stands as factually true, and those who have used it as a justification for censorsing and defaming us are clearly acting from political motivations reflective of the interests of their primary funders, such as the Gates Foundation.

CALL TO ACTION 

It’s time to let us know you are listening, and reading this article. Our social media footprint has undergone massive censorship, and as we hope you have seen, this expose’ explains what’s behind it. Please share/like/comment on this article to help us compensate for what may be our soon-to-be exit from social media in general. Deplatforming is happening to the best of us. But there is a solution. Make sure you are signed up to our newsletter: http://bit.ly/2kjN4HH.

Support Independent Media – Join or Donate to GreenMedInfo

Join thousands of supporting newsletter fans who have become actively supporting members and take advantage of powerful features and upgraded content, including e-courses, e-books, and a research library of thousands of documents.

Learn More + Become A Member
or
Make A One Time Donation


Sayer Ji is founder of Greenmedinfo.com, a reviewer at the International Journal of Human Nutrition and Functional Medicine, Co-founder and CEO of Systome Biomed, Vice Chairman of the Board of the National Health Federation, Steering Committee Member of the Global Non-GMO Foundation.


Link to original article

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Missing 411 – Examining Unexplained Disappearances In The Wilderness of North America

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Missing 411: The Hunted is a film that explores the strange disappearances that are happening all over the North American wilderness. Investigations into these disappearances have yielded some very strange and almost paranormal findings.

  • Reflect On:

    With so many missing persons cases, especially in National Parks, why doesn't the National Parks Service initiate a proper investigation? Why is there so much secrecy, hesitation and unacknowledgement surrounding this topic?

I bet you didn’t know that there is an unexplained phenomenon linked to how people are going missing in National parks in the United States. This phenomenon is actually quite common, and there are countless missing cases where absolutely no trace of the person has been found. In other cases, people’s belongings were eerily found weeks after search parties completed their work, in tidy as if people literally melted off the face of the earth – all found in areas that had been completely searched.

Yes, it’s popular National parks that are notorious for these disappearances, but despite the fact that many people have gone missing, the National Parks Service does not keep a record of missing persons.

A number of people have investigated this phenomenon, and perhaps the most prominent is David Paulides, a retired officer from the San Jose, CA, Police Department. Since retirement, he has spent the majority of his time researching missing person cases, and writing about them through several published books. Recently, he as released a film called Missing 411: The Hunted, which dives deeper into this wildly fascinating subject using specific examples and cases that they examine.

The Government Involved In Missing Persons?

Paulides does not speculate much about these missing persons, but one disturbing thought he shares is the idea that the government, or some faction of government agencies, may be hiding information regarding these people. They are denying and failing to properly acknowledge the fact that there is something truly strange and disturbing happening which is mysterious on its own.

You would think that given how often this type of thing occurs, there would be some type of public disclosure and awareness campaign.

Paulides’ interest in this topic actually came from conversations he had with off-duty park rangers. That’s how he found out that there was a plethora of disappearances in National parks without any sort of explanation. In the film, he also hints to the fact that the National Parks Service doesn’t put in enough effort with regards to investigating this type of thing.

advertisement - learn more

Let’s be clear, it’s not just disappearances without a trace happening, but rather some have occurred under very weird circumstances. In the film, you see examples of park rangers showing Paulides things recurring discoveries of neatly placed clothes of those who went missing – in areas that had already been searched.

“The ranger described to me, if you were standing straight up and you just had your pants on and you melted directly into your pants… that’s what it looked like to him. The pants were laying on the ground in a very neat pile,” Paulides said.

Paulides has investigated cases not only involving adults, but also many young children vanishing instantaneously from their guardians’ sides in a short period of time, which makes them seem undeniably paranormal.

One of the places I’ve investigated myself where people have also had strange experiences regarding missing persons is a place called Brown Mountain, North Carolina. There are a number of similar overlaps to what is explored in Missing 411.

You can watch Missing 411: The Hunted here. Or check out the trailer below.

Check out the trailer for Missing 411: The Hunted

Watch the film here.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

U.S. Government Has Debris/Material From UFOs Says High Ranking Government Official

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Luis Elizondo, a former high ranking Department of Defence official and part of the TTSA academy recently confirmed that the US government has in their possession material from a UFO craft.

  • Reflect On:

    Those new to this may be surprised, but for researchers in this field it's not. We have enough evidence suggesting that some of these craft are extraterrestrial, so how much does the 'government know,' what about the ET beings? Who knows what?

For those who have been into the UFOlogy subject for a very long time, all of the disclosure of UFOs within mainstream media should come as no surprise. This type of presentation from mainstream media is a complete 180 degree flip flop from years past, where what we saw mostly was shaming and ridiculing of the subject. Despite the fact that “everything” seems to be in a “process of investigation both in the United States and in Spain, as well as the rest of the world” (General Carlos Castro Cavero, 1979, source), in the past, what we saw was “an official campaign of ridicule and secrecy,” as Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter told the New York Times decades ago. (source)

So, why all of the serious mainstream attention all of a sudden? Could there be some sort of deception planned? We must always think critically about any topic that the mainstream chooses to cover, and how they cover it. We must do so because, since the inception of Operation Mockingbird, a US government program headed by the CIA to control the perception of the masses through mainstream media, multiple award-winning mainstream media journalists have come out and ‘blown the whistle,’ claiming that these outlets are still mouthpieces for intelligence agencies, governments, corporations, and elitist groups. You can see some examples and read more about that here. We’ve been spoon-fed lies for years, so why would it be any different with the topic of UFOs?

The point I’d like to hammer home, however, is that we are dealing with a very real phenomenon. And that is made evident by the amount of witness testimonies, video and photo proof, concealment of information, and ridicule from media that we’ve seen for decades. Just like 9/11 was real, and just like war is real, the explanations behind these events in history always seem to be manipulated for some sort of ulterior motive. That’s important to keep in mind here. Are they going to try and spin a very real phenomenon into some sort of threat?

When it comes to this topic, it leaves no aspect of humanity untouched. From science to technology and much more, everything changes when the masses are confronted with the realization that we are not alone, and that we have been visited. There are many who, what, where, why and when’s to be answered, and these answers, I assure you, will not come from mainstream media. But right now, it seems we are in the age of disclosure, as the media is finally acknowledging that these things are real.

Not only are they real, but as Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell once said, “yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.” You can view a clip of him saying that here.

Having been a UFO researcher for a very long time, coming across information suggesting that crash retrieval programs are real is nothing new. But to have something like this leak out into the mainstream is quite significant, and this happened recently on Fox News when Louis Elizondo was interviewed by Tucker Carlson. Elizondo is a career intelligence officer whose experience includes working with the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense, the National Counterintelligence Executive, and the Director of National Intelligence.

advertisement - learn more

He was also the director of the Pentagon’s AATIP program, which stands for the Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. This program was recently disclosed by the Pentagon as a program to study UFOs. I can tell you, it’s not the only program related to UFOs, and these programs could be taking in trillions of dollars. But AATIP was the program that was disclosed and blasted out by mainstream media not long ago.

On May 31st, Carlson asked him: “Do you believe, based on your decade of serving in the US government on this question, that the US government has in its possession any material from one of these aircrafts?

Elizondo replied: “I do. Yes.”

Carlson then asked: “You think the US government has debris from a UFO in its possession right now?”

Elizondo replied: “Unfortunately, Tucker, I really have to be careful of my NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement), I really can’t go into a lot more detail than that.”

Again, I am sharing this because it’s going mainstream. I’ve written about extraterrestrial technology before.

You can view a clip of this exchange from Fox News here.

A Little More Information About Supposed UFO technology

The most recent information making its way around the UFO community comes in the form of a recently leaked document, which includes notes taken by legendary scientist Dr. Eric Davis during a meeting he had with Admiral Thomas Ray Wilson, former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, regarding extraterrestrial space crafts. This meeting concerned a discussion Wilson had with Apollo 14 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell, which Mitchell publicly confirmed a few years ago. This is interesting because this leaked document just came out a few months ago.

You can view those documents and read more about that story, and see that clip of Edgar Mitchell confirming the meeting, here. It’s a really good one illustrating how this topic goes well beyond the government.

Dr. Davis is a very well-known scientist and quite the legend. For many years, he was a member of the National Institute for Discovery Sciences (owned by Robert Bigelow) and was the Chief Science Officer of EarthTech Int’l, Inc. and the Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin, Texas. He is now the Owner/Chief Executive/Chief Scientist of Warp Drive Metrics, which consults and contracts for the Department of Defense. He is also an Adjunct Professor in the Early Universe, Cosmology and Strings Group at the Center for Astrophysics, Space Physics & Engineering Research at Baylor University in Waco, TX.

The leaked notes from Davis expose the fact that the U.S. Government has in its possession UFO technology that was not made by humans, but by extraterrestrial beings from another planet.

Davis also recently made remarks on the comments made by Elizondo in his interview with Tucker Carlson, stating that,

“Luis Elizondo’s very brief answer to Tucker Carlson’s question about whether the US government is in possession of recovered crashed and landed UFO technology hardware is 1,000 % accurate. My national security NDAs prevent me from adding any further comment on this.”

The source for this quote comes from a very well-known researcher in the field, James Iandoli, who reached out to Davis after his comments on Fox and posted the response on his twitter account.

When talking about the crash retrieval of UFOs, I always like to quote former Canadian Defence Minister, Paul Hellyer, when he said that the protocol is to “shoot first and ask questions after.”

It’s not just the U.S. government either, this is probably something multiple nations have within their possession.

Dr. David Clarke is an investigative journalist, reader and lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University in England. He was also the curator for The National Archives UFO project from 2008–13, and regularly comments in national and international media on UFOs.

These documents reveal how the RAF expressed great interest in finding UFOs to help come up with new and innovative ways to become their enemies during the Cold War. Apparently, they were gathering evidence that other nations had collected this technology.

You can read more about that story here.

A classic example would be the CIA keeping tabs on developments in Germany, as explained in this document, which looked into “a German news paper” that “recently published an interview with George Klein, famous engineer and aircraft expert, describing the experimental construction of ‘flying saucers’ carried out by him from 1941 to 1945.” 

Here’s another document that goes on to mention an experiment described by Klein:

The “flying saucer” reached an altitude of 12,400 meters within 3 minutes and a speed of 2,200 kilometers per hour. Klein emphasized that in accordance with German plans, the speed of these “saucers” would reach 4,000 kilometers per hour. One difficulty, according to Klein, was the problem of obtaining the materials to be used for the construction of the “saucers,” but even this had been solved by German engineers toward the end of 1945, and construction on the objects was scheduled to begin, Klein added.

You can read more about that here.

There are too many examples, it’s not just limited to the Roswell incident. Here’s an article I wrote recently about another story regarding a crashed extraterrestrial craft that exists within the lore of UFOlogy:

Before Roswell: The 1941 Cape Girardeau, Missouri UFO Crash With Extraterrestrial Bodies

The truth is literally out there.

The Takeaway

UFO and extraterrestrial visitation isn’t a bad thing, as it does not seem to be ‘deceptive.’ It is, however, a very real reality. The only plausible possibility for any ‘deception’ to occur would be with regards to the official explanation of ‘them,’ why they are here and if they represent some sort of threat or not. The fact that multiple powerful people and the governments they seem to puppeteer have been trying desperately to keep a lid on this information for a very long time is a hint to that.

How much do governments, and those who sit above them, really know about UFOs and extraterrestrials, anyways?

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

The Hidden Reason The ‘Russia Collusion’ Investigation Ever Got Started

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    While many have come to conclude that Donald Trump did not collude with Russia, there may be a deeper and darker explanation as to why the Russia Collusion probe started other than powerful people having a strong dislike for Donald Trump.

  • Reflect On:

    Can we see the "Russia Collusion" probe as a form of "projection" of the crimes that the accusers themselves had a hand in committing?

If the investigation into whether or not Donald Trump colluded with Russia and the ensuing ‘special counsel’ headed by Robert Mueller is starting to look to you like little more than a smoke screen, you are not alone. If FBI agent Peter Strzok’s text message that ‘there’s no big there there’ seems prophetically self-incriminating, you are on the right track. And if Attorney General William Barr’s appointment of US attorney John Durham to investigate how the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election began has you anticipating that maybe, finally, the floodgates of truth are about to open wide, I would not be one to bet against you.

Nothing is guaranteed in the political arena, of course. Certainly not in terms of the public being told the truth of what is really going on in the chambers of power. Nor should we be looking to our elected leaders or their appointees for our ultimate salvation. However, for those with an ear to the ground and a sense of the rising dramatic tension in political theatre, it seems that there is nothing else left but for the truth behind the weakening veils of deception to start gushing out.

There is now an abundance of riches when it comes to evidence that there is a shadow government, a Deep State, that has long wielded the power behind the U.S. Government, and has operated in its own self-interest to the detriment of the American people and their liberties. The notion that the entire ‘Russia Collusion’ narrative was founded on the desire of this shadow government to hide its own activities from the public, and project its own crimes onto innocent people, will start to make more and more sense to an ever-widening audience in the coming months.

Whistleblower Dennis Montgomery

In a May 12th article by Mary Fanning and Alan Jones of theAmericanReport.org entitled “Comey Launched Trump Russia Investigation Day After General Exposed ‘The Hammer‘,” we learn about inventor and software designer Dennis Montgomery, a CIA/DOD/DHS/NSA/FBI contractor-turned-whistleblower.

Writer’s Note: As soon as I had written the line above I clicked on the link to the American Report article as I wanted to review it and select some quotes from it. Below is a screenshot of the message I received:

advertisement - learn more

This sort of thing can no longer be considered ‘coincidence’. These technical glitches can only happen so many times before we are able to presume that this is evidence of intentional sabotage to prevent people from knowing the truth. In his radio show Operation Freedom, Dave Janda warned about this very thing–that the deep investigative articles on this site might soon be shut down by this ‘can’t provide a secure connection’ message.

If we add this to the well-known censorship, demonetization and outright removal of accounts on mainstream social media sites like Facebook, Youtube and Twitter, we see that the battle to suppress the truth and keep people from awakening is raging right now. Hopefully this is starting to become obvious to everyone.

I will try to construct my article on the basis of the notes I have already gathered, and with the hope that the link to the American Report will be restored when you are reading this.

First, Dennis Montgomery is a software design genius who was tasked with overseeing the creation of a new super-surveillance system that would employ new and growing opportunities provided by the latest technologies large and small, including devices used by everyday citizens like smartphones. When he was asked to create it, Montgomery was told that it was only to be used for foreign surveillance, not to be weaponized for domestic surveillance against the American people.

The ‘Hammer’

The system created by Montgomery was secretly referred to as ‘The Hammer.’ Montgomery eventually discovered that his surveillance system was being used against the American people. And so on August 19th, 2015, Montgomery turned whistleblower and alerted FBI Director James Comey’s office in 2015 that President Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan and Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper had turned the super-surveillance system that Montgomery designed for foreign surveillance into a domestic surveillance system. Montgomery asserts that Obama, Brennan, and Clapper used ‘The Hammer’ in a diabolically intrusive manner in order to spy on the American people and collect massive amounts of surveillance data for “leverage” and “blackmail.”

Montgomery turned over physical evidence in the form of 47 computer hard drives containing 600 million pages of documents to FBI General Counsel James Baker, who represented the office of FBI Director Comey. Montgomery maintains that the data on the hard drives prove the existence of THE HAMMER and prove that Brennan and Clapper engaged in illegal domestic surveillance, despite the existence of safeguards that were already in place.

The FBI provided Montgomery with a detailed receipt for the 47 hard drives, including handwritten descriptions of each and every hard drive, pictured below.

During a 2017 radio interview with his attorney Larry Klayman, Montgomery explained the extent of this program, including specific reference to how much spying had been done on Donald Trump even before he ran for president:

I was a CIA contractor both under John Brennan and under James Clapper and these individuals were running domestic surveillance programs in the United States collecting information on Americans… they collected everything they could find. Bank accounts, phone numbers, chats, emails, and they collected a massive amount of it under the Obama administration.

I provided to the FBI seventeen businesses of Donald Trump, including the Trump Tower, the Trump leasing programs, all of these different programs, and including Trump himself and the various family members that had been wiretapped under these programs. There has been a wiretap on Trump for years.

Montgomery claims that Brennan and Clapper used the super-surveillance system Montgomery designed to spy on Article III federal judges, including the onetime head of the FISA court Judge Reggie Walton, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and Chief Justice of U.S. Supreme Court John Roberts. In their article, Fanning and Jones speculate about a particularly crucial flip-flop decision Roberts made and the likelihood ‘The Hammer’ was involved:

Montgomery’s revelations about his super-surveillance system THE HAMMER call into question Chief Justice Robert’s strange and inexplicable 2012 decision that stood in direct opposition to his own stated legal argument. At the eleventh hour, Roberts flipped and supported the individual mandate for President Obama’s highly unpopular Affordable Care Act.

FBI Director Jim Comey took Montgomery’s evidence and buried it.

Montgomery Sues Comey And FBI

On June 6, 2017, Montgomery and his lawyer Larry Klayman sued the FBI and its former director, James Comey, for the agency’s allegedly having “buried an investigation” into Montgomery’s claims. A press release from Klayman dated June 20, 2017 announced that he asked the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in the case and reads, in part:

Today, Larry Klayman, the founder of both Judicial Watch and now Freedom Watch, and a former federal prosecutor, announced that he and his client whistleblower Dennis Montgomery have moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in their lawsuit against former FBI Director James Comey, the FBI itself, and the NSA and CIA, among other defendants. The underlying lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Freedom Watch is styled Montgomery and Klayman v. Comey et. al, Civil Action Number 1:17-cv-01074 (RJL).

The case involves allegations that James Comey, in concert with the other defendants, buried an FBI investigation, caused by whistleblower Dennis Montgomery, a former NSA/CIA contractor, into mass illegal surveillance on not just President Trump, but the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, 156 judges, and even Klayman. Montgomery came forward to Comey years ago with 47 hard drives containing classified information, under grant of immunity, and even was interviewed under oath by FBI agents Walter Giardina and William Barnett. Despite this, the complaint and the motion alleges that Comey buried the investigation and thus obstructed justice, since as recently alleged and revealed by Circa News and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the FBI was engaged in this illegal and unconstitutional surveillance under Comey, allegedly along with the intelligence agencies.

The lawsuit is ongoing.

Birth of the ‘Russia Collusion’

Now if we go back a few months prior to the lawsuit being launched, we can see that some very important information was coming out that may have sparked the ‘Russia Collusion’ investigation into action. On March 4th, 2017, Donald Trump put out the following tweet:

Only two weeks after, on March 17th, 2017, Fanning and Jones completed an investigation and wrote “Whistleblower Tapes: Trump Wiretapped ‘A Zillion Times’ By ‘The Hammer,’ Brennan’s And Clapper’s Secret Computer System” (this link appears to work, for now). On the same day, U.S. Air Force Four Star General Thomas McInerney appeared on Dr. Dave Janda’s “Operation Freedom” that broadcasts from terrestrial radio station WAAM 1600. McInerney read the above article over America’s airwaves, revealing “The Hammer” to the public.

FBI Deputy Assistant Director of the Counterintelligence Division Peter Strzok and his supposed paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, exchanged a cryptic text message only twenty-six minutes after McInerney’s radio appearance, and later another text message that explicitly referenced Dennis Montgomery and Montgomery’s attorney Larry Klayman.

The following morning, Monday, March 20, 2017, FBI Director Jim Comey announced before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that the FBI Counterintelligence Division, where Strzok served as Deputy Assistant Director, was investigating Trump’s connections to the Kremlin, and that the FBI had “no information” to support Trump’s tweet claiming that President Obama wiretapped Trump.

On April 24, 2017, the FISA court let Brennan, Clapper and others amend their statements and ordered the destruction of criminal case records. It should come as no surprise that Brennan and Clapper had their fingerprints all over the promotion and dissemination of the ‘Steele Dossier,’ which was the unverified (and since proven unreliable) piece of evidence that was used as a primary data source for the “Russian Collusion” investigation.

And it is worth noting that only a day after the release of the May 12th Fanning/Jones article on which this article is based, Attorney General William Barr appointed John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, to explore the origins of the Trump Russia collusion investigation.

Where We Are Today

Today, while James Comey and John Brennan are out on mainstream media trying to frame the narrative that there is still evidence of Trump-Russia collusion and that there was no domestic spying program, they probably know the end of their massive coverup is near.

One of the reasons, and perhaps the primary reason that the whole ‘Russia Collusion’ investigation was undertaken, was to try to flood the media airwaves and information being shared with the public to keep attention away from the domestic spying program. There was likely a hope at the launch of the Russia probe that there would be some compelling information, either uncovered or fabricated, that would lead the public at large to suspect the Trump was guilty of collusion or, at minimum, of obstruction of justice. To the detriment of Comey, Clapper, Brennan and their co-conspirators, this did not come to pass.

AG Barr and prosecutor Durham undoubtedly know full well about many of the circumstances around the inception of the Russia collusion probe. However, great care is being taken at present not to provide Deep State forces with any evidence of bias or prejudice.

It appears that the Attorney General is trying to prepare the public to digest and process this information bit by bit so that the public is well informed by the time charges are brought. This will help to mitigate efforts by mainstream media to obfuscate what is really going on.

In our latest episode of ‘The Collective Evolution Show’ on CETV, Joe and I discuss the revelations of inventor/whistleblower Dennis Montgomery and the urgent need for the public to become aware of the full scope and implications of the domestic surveillance system that is in place in the US.

The Takeaway

It is important for the public to become aware of what is really going on in the hidden halls of power, and how the advancement of a domestic surveillance system has us far closer to fictional portrayals of dystopian societies than we might have ever been willing to admit. That being said, there is no reason to shy away from this in fear. The light of our collective awareness, once a critical mass is reached, is strong enough to expose and eventually remove these affronts to our natural liberties.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod