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

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Julian Assange Writes A Letter Back To Collective Evolution

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Julian Assange has responded to a letter I sent to him in Belmarsh prison on behalf of Collective Evolution.

  • Reflect On:

    Can we see that the case of Julian Assange is a microcosm of humanity's struggle to retain and expand its inherent freedoms?

We are in a particularly important time in human history. After millennia of being told what to do by unimaginably powerful rulers as though we were young children clinging to parental authority (and we were, for the most part), the majority of humanity (i.e. those not in the highest echelons of the ruling class) are being offered a choice: take control of our destiny or continue to consent to our ever-increasing enslavement.

The signs are out there for all to see–all those, that is, who have the slightest desire to look beyond the naive and childish perception that continues to be promulgated by mainstream media. You won’t hear about it on CNN, but a global totalitarian surveillance state is being built up right in front of our eyes, and our collective response to it has been, let’s be honest, a bit tepid.

Just as one example, we see strong evidence that dearly beloved Google and Facebook are not the products of rags-to-riches stories of young geniuses, but rather were possibly long conceived and carefully implemented by those who have ruled the planet from the start, complete with cover stories of ‘fortuitous entrepreneurship’ that we fell for at first but now are unraveling because of greater public scrutiny and brave whistleblower testimony. With Facebook (formerly DARPA’s ‘Lifelog’) showing that they are in the business of harvesting rather than protecting private data, and Google buying up AI assets like DeepMind in order to facilitate the installation of a global surveillance system, it is becoming clear that they were always key cogs in a generational plan aimed at total control over the planet. Other aspects like 5G, vaccines and Big Pharma in general, GMOs, private Central Banks and fiat currency, the Vatican, Human Trafficking and Pedophilia and many other components of our current society can ultimately be seen as having a place in this complex, dark web of deceit.

What chance do we really have? Well, we have truth on our side. That is more powerful than anything. But in today’s environment, we have to fight tooth and nail for its protection and proliferation.

Julian Assange

In this regard, there is probably no single figure that is as emblematic of our current struggle as Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Remember that Wikilieaks is an international non-profit organisation that has been publishing news leaks and classified media provided by anonymous sources since 2006, many of which directly reveal the deception, fraud, corruption and serious crimes of the ruling class. It is within this context that we must understand the threats to Assange’s safety and freedom since 2010, and the reasonable assumption that it is those whose reputations and criminal enterprises were most threatened by Wikileaks’ activities that have tried to characterize him as a criminal and have been making the push for Assange’s indictment, extradition and ultimately incarceration in order to quash the publishing of this kind of information. Here is a timeline of his battle, most of which covers the period of time he was holed up at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London (June 2012–April 2019) :

  • August 2010 – The Swedish Prosecutor’s Office first issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange. It says there are two separate allegations – one of rape and one of molestation. Mr Assange says the claims are “without basis”
  • December 2010 – Mr Assange is arrested in London and bailed at the second attempt
  • May 2012 – The UK’s Supreme Court rules he should be extradited to Sweden to face questioning over the allegations
  • June 2012 – Mr Assange enters the Ecuadorean embassy in London
  • August 2012 – Ecuador grants asylum to Mr Assange, saying there are fears his human rights might be violated if he is extradited
  • August 2015 – Swedish prosecutors drop their investigation into two allegations – one of sexual molestation and one of unlawful coercion because they have run out of time to question him. But he still faces the more serious accusation of rape
  • October 2015 – Metropolitan Police announces that officers will no longer be stationed outside the Ecuadorean embassy
  • February 2016 – A UN panel rules that Mr Assange has been “arbitrarily detained” by UK and Swedish authorities since 2010
  • May 2017 – Sweden’s director of public prosecutions announces that the rape investigation into Mr Assange is being dropped
  • July 2018 – The UK and Ecuador confirm they are holding ongoing talks over the fate of Mr Assange
  • October 2018 – Mr Assange is given a set of house rules by the Ecuadorean embassy
  • October 2018 – It’s revealed he is to launch legal action against the government of Ecuador – accusing it of violating his “fundamental rights and freedoms”
  • December 2018 – Mr Assange’s lawyer rejects an agreement announced by Ecuador’s president to see him leave the Ecuadorean embassy
  • February 2019 – Australia grants Mr Assange a new passport amid fears Ecuador may bring his asylum to an end
  • April 2019 – The Metropolitan Police detain him for “failing to surrender to the court” over a warrant issued in 2012
  • May 2019- Sweden reopens sexual assault investigation and US files 17 new charges against Mr Assange

If we look at what has happened since Mr. Assange was forced out of the Ecuadorian embassy in April, it becomes clear that he had every reason to suspect that powerful forces were just waiting to get their hands on him, and would use every ounce of force available to them to intimidate Assange and any others who would follow in his footsteps.

advertisement - learn more

If you thought that perhaps he is being treated fairly, consider this: on the mere charges that Julian Assange did not obey the conditions of his bail in 2012 (doing so only because he legitimately feared for his safety and believed he would not be treated in a just manner), he spent most of his 50-week sentence in isolation, with no access to the internet or any news of what is happening in the outside world. He was allowed only 2 social visits per month, and according to those who have visited him, like his brother, his emaciated body and spirit are signs that he is being systematically weakened physically and emotionally in prison conditions that are worse than for terrorists. In addition to this, Assange has now been held beyond the September 22nd end of his sentence because of District Judge Vanessa Baraitser’s “substantial” belief that Assange could “abscond again.”

This is the state of affairs in which my letter found him.

Writing To Julian Assange

I happened to come across a website that said that it is possible to send letters to Julian Assange in prison. The website printed a few letters that people had received, and specified that the following address had to be used including his prisoner number and date of birth:

Mr Julian Assange
Prisoner #: A9379AY
DOB: 03/07/1971
HMP Belmarsh
Cell 23 Healthcare
Western Way
London SE28 0EB
UK

It also stipulated that your own return address has to be written on the back of the envelope. So I decided to go ahead and follow those instructions in sending him this letter:

A month later, while I was away in New Zealand conducting an important interview (which will be presented on CETV shortly), I received this reply from Julian Assange:

While I had hoped to get some information that Mr. Assange may have wanted to get out into the public, I now realize that, first of all, any information that he wrote that could be potentially damaging to the authority would probably not get out beyond the prison walls. And secondly, I came to realize what Julian Assange is trying to do with the limited means that he has at his disposal: he is attempting to galvanize a movement around freedom of speech and safety for those who attempt to exercise that freedom for the benefit of humanity.

In other words, there is nothing more for Julian Assange to say that will ameliorate this situation, aside from exhorting all individuals who believe that free speech needs to be fought for and preserved to become active in the struggle. This can currently center around voicing our support for his freedom from further incarceration and forced extradition. Flooding Belmarsh prison with letters is one way to send a message, and is an exercise that I would certainly recommend that would only take 10 minutes of your time. Being part of movements that are starting up online or in your communities is another way. I don’t know enough about these “FreeAssange” and “ProtectAssange” movements to endorse any particular one but I would invite those interested to seek them out online while using their proper discernment.

Is It Really Julian Assange Responding?

I’ve been asked by a couple of people as to whether this letter is really from Julian Assange. My response to that is, why wouldn’t it be? Is it reasonable to suspect that the Deep State lurking, intercepting these letters, and then responding in such a benign way?

I would imagine someone would have done some handwriting analysis/comparison by now, and that some of his family who have visited him would be dissuading people from sending letters if they were not getting through to him. I am including the front and back of the envelope here in case it helps the internet sleuths determine this letter’s authenticity for themselves.

But at the end of the day, is it essential to the cause that Julian Assange is penning these letters? Do any of you reading this not believe that freedom of speech and freedom of information have long been under attack, and that the only way that the powerful forces who would censor and destroy evidence of their own high crimes and misdemeanours will be upended is if we stand together as a collective of conscious individuals and uphold the freedoms that are our birthright?

Let’s be clear: the alleged ‘crime’ that is really at play here is the same one that was immortalized in the movie ‘The Post,’ where newspapers were vindicated by the Supreme Court after publishing the Pentagon Papers, classified documents that were embarrassing to the U. S. government regarding the 20 year involvement of the United States government in the Vietnam War. It’s important that we keep clear sight of the fact that, despite what the now-hypocritical mainstream press are implying about Julian Assange and the ‘sensitive’ information he has published, he has done absolutely nothing wrong, and his and anyone else’s right to publish any material that has been given to them needs to be preserved.

The Takeaway

We did not come into this world at this important moment in history to sit on the sidelines while our fundamental rights and freedoms hang in the balance. Even though I personally had a bit of trepidation that writing this article in the transparent fashion I did is a bit risky, I feel it is my small way of standing up for the freedom of speech and information. As Benjamin Franklin said, ‘Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

America’s Largest Milk Producer Files For Bankruptcy – Cow’s Milk Is Inhumane & Unhealthy

Published

on

Image by Erich Westendarp from Pixabay

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Dean foods, the largest milk producer in the United States has filed for bankruptcy.

  • Reflect On:

    Independent media and activists around the world do have the ability to make change, and this is one of many examples. The world is waking up, even in the face of massive censorship of information. We are more powerful than we know.

Dean Foods, the largest milk company in the United States has recently filed for bankruptcy. The reason? Because Americans, and people all of the world for that matter, are not drinking as much cow’s milk as they used to. Brands that seem to be growing and having success are the ones who are now offering dairy free options.  Oat milk, for example, saw U.S. sales rise 636% to more than $52 million over the past year, according to Nielsen data. Sales of cow’s milk dropped 2.4% in that same time frame.

Chief Executive Officer, Eric Beringause stated: “We continue to be impacted by a challenging operating environment marked by continuing declines in consumer milk consumption.” He’s right, the demand for cow’s milk has dropped nearly 50 percent since 1975.

So, why are people doing this? Well, it’s happening for a number of reasons. First of all, the industry is full of animal cruelty. Cow’s are forcefully impregnated so they can produce milk, and their babies are taken from them for beef so the milk can be drained from the cow so humans can drink it. This causes tremendous heartache. Cows are living in poor conditions where they constantly suffer both emotionally and physically. Furthermore, they can often be abused by workers, but the conditions they live in on factory farms is already seen as abusive to many.

Not only are we starting to become aware that our milk-drinking habit is one of the most cruel industries that exists on Earth,  we are realizing waking up to the fact that 80 percent of the Amazon rainforest destruction is the result of grazing animals for meat and dairy production. It’s one of the main sources of environmental degradation and pollution on our planet. It is destroying our Earth, and the waste is polluting our environment and waterways at an alarming rate. 90 percent of soy used, which is also creating massive amounts of deforestation, is used for animal feed, not humans. So, animal product consumption is clearly the biggest factor when it comes to deforestation and environmental degradation, yet there doesn’t seem to be enough emphasis put on it like there is for C02. Why?

When it comes to the health aspects, I remember being in shock when I came to the realization that we were the only animal on the planet who drank the milk of another animal. Furthermore, we are the only species on the planet that drinks milk after weaning.

There are multiple studies showing that drinking milk from a cow leads to an increased mortality rate and actually makes bones more prone to fracturing, not less. One example would be this giant study from researchers at Uppsala University in Sweden. How ironic is this given the fact that milk has always been marketed to humans as necessary from strong bone health?  Calcium is available in high quantities in a number of planet, how come we weren’t marketed with that?

advertisement - learn more

One thing milk protein does is trigger metabolic acidosis. This happens when the body produces too much acid and becomes very acidic, which can be caused by multiple things, including the absorption of casein found in animal protein. Casein makes up almost 90 percent of the protein in a cow’s milk. When the body experiences this type of acidosis, it actually forces the body to compensate by leaching calcium from the bones to help neutralize the increased acidity. This became known to me through the work of Dr. Colin Campbell, an American biochemist who specializes in the effect of nutrition on long term health. He is the Jacob Gould Schurman Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University. Scholars like Campbell are vital to the world, because they are among the few who actually examine and study nutrition and health, something that our modern day medical industry completely ignores. You can watch a video of him explaining, here.

Dr. Campbell also discovered that animal protein (casein) can accelerate and “turn on” cancer, while plant based protein has the opposite effect. You can read more about that and which him explain in this article.

If we look at all other animals who don’t consume the milk of another animal or after weaning, it is because they do not have the enzymes to break down the sugar found in milk. We are no different, and this explains why in some ethnic populations around the world, lactose intolerance is present in 90 percent of the population. A staggering 70 percent of the world’s population has some degree of lactose intolerance.

Humans actually never had this enzyme, and to digest the sugar in cow’s milk, we had to develop the LTC gene, which was acquired by mutation. This is the lactase gene, which allows us to process lactose as adults. Clearly, we are not doing what is natural and in accordance with our bodies. I first came across this information from Katherine S. Pollard, a PhD at the University of California, San Francisco, in this lecture.

That being said, some people might have evolved and developed on cows milk just fine, which is why this information may not apply to everybody but overall, it definitely appears we are doing something unnatural.

More doctors are waking up, The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) recently submitted a citizen petition with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to change labeling on cheese to include a cancer warning.

The petition states:

High-fat dairy products, such as cheese, are associated with an increased risk for breast cancer. Components in dairy such as insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) and other growth hormones may be among the reasons for the increased risk for cancer.

To ensure that Americans understand the potential significant risks, and resulting long-term costs, of consuming dairy cheese products, the FDA should ensure that the notice above is prominently placed on product packaging and labeling for all dairy cheese products.

The list goes on and on, what’s presented in this article is simply a tidbit with regards to why big milk is going out of business. People are waking up.

When it comes to health and cruelty, it’s not just dairy, it’s also meat-eating as well. It’s very in-humane, not all that healthy, and is also destroying our planet.

You can read this article for more information about that: Another Study Suggests That Human Beings Are Not Designed To Eat Meat

The Takeaway

It’s great to see the dairy industry forcing to transition, although there is still a long way to go, it’s quite clear through the efforts of various forms of activism around the world that more people are becoming more empathetic, compassionate, and caring about our treatment of animals and the planet. These are qualities our world certainly needs more of. In conjunction with  the massive amount of animal cruelty that’s being exposed, awareness with regards to the health and environmental consequences of consuming dairy are also skyrocketing.

We are more powerful than we know, and at any time, if we come together, we can change the game big time.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

One of Stanford’s Most Successful Remote Viewers Shares What He ‘Saw’ About The Origins of Humanity

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Joseph Mcmoneagle, one of the most successful Army-trained remote viewers, peered into the past to look into the possible origins of human history. He saw that we were created by intelligent beings in what he called a 'laboratory.'

  • Reflect On:

    Why is the mainstream story of human history still limited to Darwin's Theory of Evolution? Why have so many discoveries, like giants, and life on other planets, been completely concealed and brushed off as a conspiracy theory?

The true origins of human history remain a mystery, but that’s not what mainstream academia would have us believe. Since Darwin, human evolution and ‘the survival of the fittest’ has been pushed on the population as some sort of scientific truth, despite the fact that it remains a theory with multiple loopholes and ‘missing links.’ If you question it, in some circumstances, you are almost considered a nut.

This continues to happen in many different fields of knowledge; when you question beliefs that have been ingrained for so long you get a harsh response, and in some cases, you’re liable to be fined, put in jail or at the very least you receive tremendous amounts of hate and censorship.  What we don’t hear about is the fact that there are several hundred scientists, if not several thousand, who have spoken up against the scientific validity of the theory of evolution.  I recently wrote an article about more than 500 scientists coming together to reject Darwin’s theory of evolution and explain why it’s not really valid at all.

Our DNA Originated Somewhere Else

Even one of the founding fathers of DNA, Francis Crick, believed that human DNA must have originated from somewhere else in the galaxy, whereby “organisms were deliberately transmitted to earth by intelligent beings on another planet.” You can read more about that here. I also recently wrote about a paper that was published by 33 scientists in the Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology Journal suggesting that the flourishing life during the Cambrian era (Cambrian Explosion) originated from the stars.

“With the rapidly increasing number of exoplanets that have been discovered in the habitable zones of long-lived red dwarf stars (Gillon et al., 2016), the prospects for genetic exchanges between life-bearing Earth-like planets cannot be ignored. ” (The study)

There is a great little blurb from Cosmos Magazine, one of the few outlets who is talking about the study.

Serious inquiry into the origins of human history are not encouraged in the mainstream. Yet as we dig a little on what’s being done, there is a lot to find out, with new theories and discoveries that seem to be popping up every single year.  Modern day education is hardly keeping up with this, and in fact continues to promulgate old theories and notions that have long been disproven. As a result, nobody beyond ardent self-motivated researchers are learning about new developments or have any knowledge of these viewpoints.

advertisement - learn more

Opening Our Minds

The suppression of the discoveries of giant humanoid skeletons falls directly into this category, though the secrecy that wraps up the Smithsonian is a topic for another article. Suffice it to say that successful cover-ups of information are possible in part due to the phenomenon of ‘cognitive dissonance’, which speaks to the extreme discomfort that a piece of information that disrupts the worldview you grew up with can have on you. Many of us have and do experience this, including myself. In today’s day and age, it’s important to practice overcoming the discomfort to keep an open mind.

Consider entertaining new ideas without necessarily accepting them, just give them a chance to swirl in your mind a bit. With new information constantly emerging at a rapid pace in all fields, an open mind is what serves us best. If we stay closed and refuse to even look at or acknowledge evidence that contradicts what we believe, we will never advance towards actual truth, and simply be caught up in an agnostic state while never really getting to the bottom of the questions that are naturally on our mind.

The StarGate Program

The StarGate program was co-founded by Russell Targ (watch his banned TED talk about ESP here), Hal Puthoff, who is now a member of the ‘To The Stars Academy’ with Tom Delonge, and other notable names who have worked on Deep Black Budget programs within the U.S. government. They are currently spearheading an effort to let the American public know that UFOs are real and that there is sufficient evidence to suggest that, as Louis Elizondo says, “we are not alone, whatever that means.”

The StarGate program investigated parapsychological phenomenon like remote viewing, telepathy, telekinesis, and clairvoyance. The program yielded high statistically significant results and was used multiple times for intelligence gathering purposes. A lot of interesting information came out of the literature that was declassified in 1995 after the program ran for more than two decades.

It was a complete mystery why the program was shut down: remote viewing, for example, which is the ability to describe the physical characteristics at a given location irrespective of distance, was found to be repeatable, even more than findings in the hard sciences, with a success rate of over 80 percent. Remote viewing was how the rings around Jupiter were actually discovered by Ingo Swann before NASA was able to measure them. You can read more about that here.

To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the [remote viewing] phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise. . . . The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions.” (source)

The Breadth Of Remote Viewing

There are examples in the literature, from remote viewers looking at classified Russian technology during the cold-war era, locating a lost spy plane in Africa and the prediction of future events. Yes, along with remote viewing comes the ability to view into the past, and view into the future. Obviously, this gets tricky, especially if we look at quantum physics, which works in tandem with parapsychology. In quantum physics, experiments have also shown how what happened in the past can change the future, and what happens in the future can change the past, on a quantum scale. You can read more about that here.

There were multiple people working within the Remote Viewing Program, which was conducted at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) in conjunction with multiple intelligence agencies, and one of them was Joseph Mcmoneagle. Many of these people, after decades in the program, continued on with their research and experimentation long after the program was declassified. Joseph was one of the most successful Army-trained remote viewers, and one of the original members of project Stargate. He was actually awarded the Legion of Merit for “producing crucial and vital intelligence unavailable from any other source” to the intelligence community.

The Origins Of Humanity

In 1983, McMoneagle worked with Robert A. Monroe, founder of the Monroe Institute in Faber, Virginia, which provided basic out-of-body orientation for many of the military remote viewers. There, he conducted a session seeking to discover the origin of humanity. As the late great author and researcher Jim Marrs points out in his best selling book Our Occulted History points out:

During the 129-minute session, he described a shoreline on what appeared to him to be a primitive Earth. He later estimated a time of about thirty million to fifty million years after the time of the dinosaurs. Cavorting on this shoreline was a large family of protohumans-hairy animals about four feet in height, walking upright and possessing eyes exhibiting a spark of intelligence despite a somewhat smaller cranial capacity. Two things surprised McMoneagle in this session. These creatures appeared to be aware of his psychic presence, and they did not originate at that location.

McMoneagle described his experience in his 1998 book, The Ultimate Time Machine:

This particular species of animal is put…specifically in that barrier place…called the meeting of the land and the sea…I also get the impression that they’re…ah…they were put there. They mysteriously appeared. They are not descended from an earlier species, they were put there (by a) seed ship…no, that’s not right. Keep wanting to say ship, but it’s not a ship. I keep seeing a…myself…I keep seeing…oh, hell, for lack of a better word, let’s call it a laboratory, where they are actually inventing these creatures. They are actually constructing animals from genes. Why would they be doing that? Can we do this yet…here and now? Like cutting up genes and then pasting them back together. You know, sort of like splicing plants…or grafting them, one to another…Interesting, it’s like they are building eggs by injecting stuff into them with a mixture of DNA or gene parts of pieces.

He described these creatures as delicate-looking aquiline-featured humanoids, unclothed, in possession of a prehensile tail and large “doe-like” eyes. They seemed to be using some sort of light that McMoneagle had a hard time describing, but eventually described it as a “grow light.”

Marrs got the impression that it was like someone tending to a garden, and planting seeds, but “there isn’t any concern about the seeds after they are planted…It’s simply like…well…put these seeds here and on to better and bigger business. No concern about backtracking and checking on the condition of the seeds. They can live or die, survive or perish.” The session ended with him moving closer in time and perceiving these beings growing in size and ability, eventually becoming herding humans.

The surveillance of and interference with humanity is documented in the lore of almost all civilizations that have roamed the planet. Although some have called this mere ‘interpretation,’ it reminds me of people referring to the confirmation of spiritual and metaphysical realms as a result of quantum physics. It is simply labelled as an interpretation due to the fact that it upsets so many belief systems and long-held preconceived ideas.

The Takeaway

The story of human history has a lot of holes. From the UFO extraterrestrial phenomena to the discovery of strange skeletal remains, to the rejection of Darwinism all the way to the existence of intelligence ancient civilizations like Atlantis, and others that thrived possibly millions of years ago, we are like, as author Graham Hancock coined, a species with amnesia. But perhaps we are starting to remember. Perhaps our only two explanations are incorrect, or perhaps they’re both correct, combined with other factors. The point is, what we’ve been told is not true, and the recognition of that fact will lead us on the path towards true discovery, and away from the concealment and manipulation of information and truth.

I’m not saying this is how humans are created, perhaps it is just some sort of glimpse into something much bigger that took place billions of years ago?

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

It is the world's first and only conscious media network streaming mind-expanding interviews, news broadcasts, and conscious shows.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media videos, that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Censorship is hiding us from you.

Get breaking conscious news articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!