Don’t black lives matter if those “vaccines” take them?

How propaganda hides the genocidal impact of the COVID-19 “vaccination” program

Part 1

A “coincidental” death in India

What happens when a propaganda blitz goes wrong, and proves (or seems to prove) the very truth it was devised to blow away? Let’s see. 

On Thursday, April 15, Vivek, the beloved Indian actor and comedian, was declared a “health ambassador” by Tamil Nadu’s Health Secretary, J. Radhakrishan, who enlisted Vivek’s “star power” (as The Hindu reported) to encourage “differently abled persons, athletes, shopkeepers and persons who have undergone organ transplantation” to get their COVID-19 “vaccinations.” Vivek dramatized the “safety” of those jabs by getting one himself: 

Tragically, that propaganda missile, launched on Thursday, crashed and burned on Friday, when Vivek suffered cardiac arrest, “fell unconscious at his house in Chennai,” and was hospitalized in critical condition. He died, at 59, on Saturday (a passing largely unreported in the Western press). 

Vivek’s hospitalization prompted a barrage of articles denying that his COVID jab had anything to do with it. “Actor Vivekh’s heart attack severe, not related to COVID-19 vaccination: Hospital” (New Indian Express). “Actor Vivek’s cardiac arrest not linked with COVID-19 vaccine, says TV Health Sec’y” (News Minute and Yahoo! News). Saturday’s obituaries kept it up, although more quietly, the exculpation buried in their later paragraphs—as at the end of this report from MSN: 

“On Thursday, Vivek received his first dose of Covid-19 vaccination at Omandurar government hospital,” reports said.

However, the hospital as well as Tami Nadu’s health secretary J Radhakrishnan told a press conference that the    Covid-19 vaccine was unlikely to be the cause of the cardiac arrest.  

10 more “coincidental” deaths in the United States

Now, it may be true that Vivek’s fatal heart attack was unrelated to his COVID-19 jab the day before. The team who tried to save him said, reportedly, that they discovered a 100% blockage in his LAD (left anterior descending artery), and performed an emergency angioplasty. So the timing of his public jab and sudden death could well have been just horribly coincidental—or maybe not, since Vivek’s post-jab death is not the only one that’s made some news (or not).

Drene Keyes

On January 30, Drene Keyes, a 58-year-old minister at the Church of Abraham in Gloucester, Virginia, and a grandmother of six, got her first Pfizer shot, in hopes it would protect her from COVID-19: “Keyes had diabetes, sleep apnea, and was obese,” reported WKTR-TV in Norfolk. “Her job made her eligible for the first dose.” Keyes felt ill right after the injection: “Something is not right. Something’s not right,” she said as she left the clinic, then started vomiting, unable to breathe. Soon after, she was rushed to VCU Tappahanock Hospital, where they tried to purge the fluid from her lungs, due (the doctors told her daughter) to a flash pulmonary edema, caused by anaphylaxis—which, within just a few hours of her injection, killed her. 

The TV station’s coverage of Keyes’ death included some poignant comments by her daughter, Lisa Jones: “My mom was wanting to protect herself, but it did not turn out that way.” 

Jones believes more research needs to be done, especially for those with underlying health issues.

“Why are we allowing people with underlying conditions  to be guinea pigs for a vaccine that is still in clinical trials and emergency use?” Jones questioned. 

She is hoping this serves as a warning for people to see their doctors and be pre-screened prior to being vaccinated.

“The pain my family feels from this unexpected loss  should not be repeated for others,” said Jones.

That local story, with its tacit focus on the welfare of its viewers, was notably unlike the rendering by NBC News—boilerplate so Pharma-friendly that Pfizer could have written it (and maybe did): “Virginia woman dies shortly after Covid vaccination, though no link has been found,” claimed the headline, followed by this repetitious lede:

A Virginia minister died shortly after she received a coronavirus vaccination, authorities said Friday, though there was no indication the vaccine was at fault. 

After identifying the departed, and noting where she had been given the shot that did not kill her, shortly after which she died, NBC’s reporters tell us once again that, according to “officials,” that shot had not killed her:

Officials said they did not know the cause of death, or any underlying conditions Keyes might have had that could have contributed to her death, and said there was no evidence it was tied to the vaccination.

After a paragraph reporting that Keyes was rushed to the hospital, we’re told yet again that that injection, just a few hours after which she died, bore no relation to her death: 

While an official cause of death was not immediately determined, Keyes did not die from any allergic reaction connected to the vaccine, according to state Health Commissioner M. Norman Oliver. 

“We can confirm that the death occurred within hours of having received the vaccine, but that is not evidence of it being related. We are currently investigating and do not yet know the cause of death.”  

NBC then bolstered that assurance of a state investigation with a statement from the CDC, which, having offered its condolences (“Our thoughts are with the family during this heartbreaking time”), noted its shared interest in determining what killed Drene Keyes: “CDC continues to closely monitor the safety of all vaccines, and we are actively working with Virginia officials to fully investigate the situation.” 

But there was no investigation, with or without the CDC, despite the family’s insistence on an autopsy; nor would officials say why they refused to do one. “The state eventually [somehow] determined Keyes, a minister, died of complications from COVID-19—Oliver wasn’t sure if Keyes knew she had it—and hypertensive cardiovascular disease,” reported the Virginia Mercury on March 12, noting also that, according to a private autopsy ordered by Keyes’ family, Keyes did not have COVID-19.  

Karen Hudson-Samuels

Ten days after Keyes’ sudden death, on February 9, Karen Hudson-Samuels, a media historian, and former anchor, producer and news director at WGPR-TV, the nation’s first black-owned and -operated TV station, was found dead, by her husband, in their home, one day after her first COVID-19 “vaccination.” Unlike Vivek, Hudson-Samuels had not publicized her jab; but the “Detroit media icon” was so famous and beloved in that city, and her death, at 68, so unexpected, and so soon after her jab, that it made many headlines starkly contradicting the official line that those “vaccines” are completely “safe.” The story was reported all throughout the Detroit media, and, elsewhere, on Fox News, and by the New York Post and Daily Mail. (The news was not reported by the New York Times, or any other major liberal outlet.)

Kimberly Credit

The day after Hudson-Samuels died, Dr. Kimberly Credit, the first female pastor of Mount Zion Baptist Church, in Boonton, New Jersey (and founder of a podcast called The Preaching Lab), publicly received her first injection of the Moderna “vaccine,” as a way to tell the rest of her community, “Go thou and do likewise.” “As a leader,” she wrote on Facebook, “I want to lead by example[,] especially for Pastors and the African American community.”

Got my first vaccine dose today. Thank you to Pastor Joe Carter for his leadership in pulling Black Clergy together and for allowing me to pray live for our news outlets. Thank you New York Times and Channel 2 News for interviewing me. #DoTheResearch #BeInformed #OurTrustInGod #WeNeedEveryoneVaccinatedToEndThis 

Though she made no public mention of it, Dr. Credit was presumably injected for the second time 28 days later, on March 10. Throughout the interim, and afterward, she posted nothing about feeling ill, not even after surgery. On Easter Sunday morning, April 4, at her church pulpit, she told the congregation, passingly, that she was short of breath. Afterward she posted the details of her next day’s podcast (on “Preaching in a Pandemic”), with this prefatory sentence: “Listen … let me say this before I get a good and needed nap in.” 

Then, on April 5, minutes before that podcast: “Suddenly, without warning, Rev. Dr. Kimberly Credit entered eternal rest,” as her obituary puts it. Her death, at 44, went unreported, except here and there online, where admirers shared their shock at her untimely passing. (“It’s hard for me to believe this,” wrote Ann Brock on her blog, The Old Black Church. “This was one anointed woman of God.”)  The only outlets that took note of Dr. Credit’s evidently fatal “vaccinations” were COVID-dissident sites like Daily Exposé, in the UK: “Young Pastor DIES After Taking, and Promoting, Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine.” 

(Although, in her Facebook post on Feb. 10, she thanks the New York Times and CBS affiliate WLNY-TV  for covering her first injection, there seems to be no mention of it in their archives.)

So, if Vivek’s post-jab death was a “coincidence,” are his and those three others just “coincidental,” too? If so, the gods of Chance have certainly been working overtime in 2021, since those three aren’t the only such fatalities; though noting them requires that we step back and take a longer view of just how “safe” those “vaccines” really are.

Midwin Charles

On March 1, Midwin Charles, the dazzling Brooklyn defense attorney who often popped up as a legal analyst on CNN and MSNBC, told her multitude of Twitter followers that she’d just got the first of her two Pfizer jabs (“qualified because of my asthma”) “at a FEMA center,” where the “[p]rocess was organized, efficient, and everyone is kind and in a good mood. Let’s do this!” Charles also urged the jab on her own mother, who finally gave in after “weeks of convincing,” according to another of the lawyer’s many online posts, which hint that the effects of the “vaccine” were not as pleasant as her visit to that well-run FEMA center. 

There was, at first, “a little soreness at vaccine injection site,” and then, a few days later, “mild fatigue” and some “shortness of breath.” Thereafter, Charles posted nothing on her health, until March 19: “HEY GUYS!” she wrote on Instagram. “HAPPY HOUR TONIGHT IS CANCELED. I’M NOT FEELING WELL. SEE YOU NEXT FRIDAY.” A few weeks later, on April 7, Charles died, at 47. Her family did not disclose the cause of death, nor has any media outlet reported it.

While there were, strangely, few obituaries in the corporate press (the New York Times did not report it), online there was an outpouring of grief from Charles’ friends and colleagues: “Midwin, you were a brilliant spirit and beautiful soul. You were such a blessing,” posted MSNBC’s Joy Reid. “I’m just stunned, and have been since I learned of this today.” The likely cause of Charles’ death went tactfully unmentioned then, nor has it come up  since, not there or anywhere throughout the media, whether corporate or left/liberal. The Sun and Daily Mail each ran a big obituary piece playing up the seeming mystery of Charles’ death.  The likelihood that she was killed by her “efficient” Pfizer “vaccination” was noted only by LifeSite News, a Catholic website, on April 9, with a headline as pitiless as it is accurate: “TV personality who boasted of being vaccinated, pressuring her mom to do the same, dies after receiving jabs.”

Joshimar Henry

One of the first Chicagoans to get Dose #1 of Pfizer’s COVID-19 “vaccine” on December 15—an event covered live, and breathlessly reported, on MSNBC—was Dr. Joshimar Henry, who marked his second shot, on Jan. 6, on Facebook, where, like Vivek and Midwin Charles, he used his own experience to counter what he called “the hesitancy of many” to get jabbed: “Initially I was also hesitant but was reassured with some research and clarifying my doubt through reading.” He’d just had the shot, and, “like many of his colleagues” at Norwegian American Hospital, was just fine; so everybody else should do it, too: “I do believe that the benefits of this vaccine certainly outweigh the risks given its low side effect profile.”

That assurance was as premature as it was dangerous. The very fit and handsome Dr. Henry died, at 27, not quite three months later, on April 3, his obituary mentioning no cause of death. 

Gerren Taylor

On the day that Dr. Henry died, Gerren Taylor (née Ashley Taylor Gerren) got the Johnson & Johnson jab on April 3, in Los Angeles, with no public to-do about it, though she was a celebrity, like Midwin Charles. Hired by LA Models, at the tender age of 12, to strut the runways as their youngest-ever property, then dumped at 14, because, the agency told her, her body had grown “too big”—a shock that pushed her into a depression, and an eating disorder—Taylor rebounded with a starring role in “Baldwin Hills,” the BET reality TV show that aired from 2007 to 2009, showcasing the love lives of the teen-aged kids of Baldwin Hills’ rich-and-famous black residents. Taylor’s stardom enabled her to speak out from her bruising experience of rejection by the agency, urging girls not to strive, impossibly, to emulate the “body image” rampantly projected by the media. She went on to great success as an entrepreneur, with Myoko’s Closet, a children’s clothing company named after her daughter. 

On April 12, eight days after her injection, Taylor, 30, died in her sleep—”from unknown causes,” reported Essence

“Her cause of death is as yet unknown,” the New York Post reported. “However, Essence reported that it may have been related to the reality TV show star’s battle with the autoimmune disease lupus as she was reportedly on dialysis at the time of her death.” The same story ran in The Sun and Daily Mail (the Post’s British counterparts), also attributed to 

Essence—which now makes no mention of dialysis. That Taylor’s death “may [well] have been related to” her recent jab went unreported by the media, while it was noted by her friends, on “social media”: “I told you not to get that vxxxxxe ash f***,” one wrote bitterly on Instagram. “She said she took the mRNA jab; that’s either Pfizer or Moderna,” wrote another friend, Natasha James, on Facebook. (Taylor is survived by Myoko, her 7-year-old daughter.)

NaTalia Johnson

Two weeks after Taylor’s death, on April 24, NaTalia Johnson, a former prima ballerina living now in Sacramento, updated her Facebook profile to tell her online friends that she had been injected (without noting which “vaccine” was used), and, as the upbeat text around her photo indicates, to urge others to get “vaccinated,” too:

The native Texan (born in Lubbock) had retired to Sacramento in 2013, to serve as artistic director of the Natalia Johnson Conservatory of Ballet. Her story is remarkable. Having beat scoliosis (by wearing a back brace 23 hours a day, her one free hour devoted to ballet), then graduating from Lubbock High School with honors, Johnson set off for New York, with a scholarship to study dance at Juilliard, but through a chance encounter ended up at the Dance Theater of Harlem, starting an illustrious career that had her performing with the Urban Ballet Theater, Ballet Noir, Renaissance Ballet, Collage Dance Collective, and, in her hometown, Ballet Lubbock. Twice honored as an International Ballet All-Star, Johnson studied at the Alvin Ailey Dance Theater, taught master classes at schools and theaters nationwide, and also taught and choreographed New York City’s public schools. Upon retiring from the stage, Johnson moved to Sacramento, opening her own conservatory there, while teaching in an elementary school, and also helping her sister, Candida, to graduate over 800 young women from the Girls Self-Esteem Program Academy, by mentoring them in “poise, grace, dignity and self-respect.” 

On May 7, 13 days after her injection, Johnson came home from work at 9:30 p.m., telling Candida that she felt horribly “tired”—she was crying because of it—and sick enough to see the doctor, but decided she would go next day. The sisters put on a movie starring Michael B. Jordan, and had fun watching it together, NaTalia lying on the bed; then, suddenly, “she sat up with a shocked look on her face, and held out her arms to me,” recalled Candida, who felt her sister’s body “tightening up,” then going limp. She and a neighbor struggled to revive her, using CPR, until the EMTs arrived, and also tried for half an hour, to no avail: Natalia Johnson was gone, at 37—due either to “a stroke, brain aneurysm or a heart attack,” surmised Candida (who didn’t mention the injection, nor did any of the press coverage of NaTalia’s death).

Simone Scott

On May 1, a week before NaTalia Johnson’s death in Sacramento, Simone Scott, a freshman at Northwestern University, in Evanston, Illinois (just north of Chicago), received her second dose of the Moderna serum, hoping it would not affect her as the first one did. That shot, on April 3, had laid her low for several days of what felt like a bad flu, followed by a lingering fatigue; so it was a relief for her, her mother and stepfather back in Mason, Ohio, and her dad in Washington, D.C., that her second shot had no immediate side effects. Now “fully vaccinated,” Simone headed into her last month of spring semester classes with the same acuity, determination and strict discipline that she had shown in all her efforts since fifth grade, when she decided to become a journalist, with an expertise in law. To that end, she was double-majoring in broadcast journalism and political science/pre-law, working toward two bachelor’s degrees, with her sights set on Harvard Law School for her J.D.  

The feeling of relief after her second shot did not last long. On May 9, when she came home on a surprise visit for Mother’s Day, Simone seemed tired, and told her mother, Valerie Kraimer, that she’d been having nosebleeds. Back in Evanston on May 12, she made an appointment for a virtual check-up with a doctor who told her she was suffering from allergies. On May 13, she woke up with a low fever, and went to the student infirmary, where she tested negative for COVID-19, flu and other viruses; and though her heartbeat was irregular, they let her go, telling her to go to the ER if things got worse. On May 14, she came back with a sore throat, and was given a prescription for an anti-viral drug. 

On Sunday, May 16, Simone could not get up, or eat. “Dad, I feel so dizzy,” she texted Kevin Scott. “I cannot get out of bed.” Her mother packed a bag, and started the long drive to Evanston; Kevin Scott called the Northwestern campus police, asking them to check up on his daughter at her dorm. (He had to talk them into it.) When they finally did, they found she couldn’t walk, and called an ambulance. On the way to North Shore Hospital, Simone went into cardiac arrest, requiring CPR, which barely saved her, as her heart was no longer functioning; so they rushed her into surgery, to insert a balloon pump in the failing organ. It didn’t work, so, next day, they placed her on a heart-lung bypass called an ECMO. That didn’t work either.

The doctors diagnosed it as a case of severe myocarditis—inflammation of the heart, thinking that some virus had attacked it. By May 20, they decided that a heart transplant might be the only way for Simone to survive, so she was moved to Northwestern Memorial Hospital, where, on May 23, doctors carried out the transplant. Although the new heart soon began 

to beat as hoped, so it seemed that she   might make it, her lungs had been badly damaged, and   infected by the immunosuppressive drugs she needed for  the transplant to succeed. She hung on, intubated, for a little over three weeks, and died at 11:19 a.m. on June 11, at the age of 19. 

Ayesha K. Faines

Throughout the weeks that Gerren Taylor, NaTalia Johnson and Simone Scott lived after their injections, Ayesha K. Faines regaled her online followers with proud updates on her status as a “fully vaccinated” African-American, having got her second Pfizer jab at some point in mid-March. A former TV journalist in Jacksonville and New York City, the Yale-educated Faines was now nationally famous as a panelist on “The Grapevine,” a YouTube-based talk show featuring up to a dozen black millennials, hashing over topics such as Critical Race Theory, black/Latino relations, (white) racism as a mental illness, Bruno Mars as cultural appropriator and “the colonization of black beauty.”

On that last subject Faines was an especially compelling speaker, not just on “The Grapevine” but in all of her endeavors both online and (pre-COVID) as a public speaker. “A brave new voice for feminine power,” as her LinkedIn profile describes her, the dauntingly articulate (and visually arresting) Faines was the founder of Women Love Power, a company devised “to help women develop their authentic power,” and, as a columnist for Zora Magazine, “routinely explore[d] the intersection of love and power.” “Sought after for her expertise in mythology, race, and gender politics,” Faines was also a prolific poster on Instagram and (especially) Twitter, where she not only exulted in her own injections, but also voiced contempt for black Americans who were refusing to get jabbed.  

While that majority regard the COVID-19 “vaccination” drive as yet another oblique white attempt to kill them off (about which more below), Faines saw the shots not as inimical, in any way, to African-Americans, but as wholly reconcilable with blackness: “Just know that I’m melanated and vaccinated,” she tweeted playfully on March 30. Focused, as she was, on “feminine power,” Faines must have especially disliked the captivity of lockdown, and felt especially liberated by her second shot in early April, which meant she now was free to do her exercises (she was a competitive salsa dancer) outside home: “I’ve been practicing at home during quarantine [sic], but praise God I’m vaccinated and going back to the studio in the beginning of may!” she tweeted on April 10. 

Unlike the majority of African-Americans, Faines saw the “vaccines” not as some covert poison used by whites to lower black numbers—a view she candidly disdained, in this tweet on March 5: 

“‘The percentage of [Blacks] who don’t want to take the vaccine right now are reluctant because of misinformation or no information’ and not necessarily because of concerns of [sic] historical racial bias in medicine.

Thus Faines quoted Cornell Belcher, a pollster whose new study of black “vaccine-hesitancy,” conducted for the National Urban League, now showed (he said) that black people distrusted the injection program not because of their long history of  grotesque abuse by the American medical establishment (Tuskegee is the least of it), but because they’re either “misinformed” or ignorant—and, therefore, in urgent need of being properly “informed” ASAP, presumably by, say, the National Urban League, with generous funding by, say, Pfizer, and/or the Gates Foundation (both of them, as it happens, generous donors to the National Urban League), so that all those uninjected will now finally see the light, and get the jab. 

Having tweeted Belcher’s claim as if it were a valid observation, Faines charged that all too many African-Americans were “vaccine-hesitant” not because of the atrocious history of black suffering at the (white) hands of US doctors, but because they had been duped by Donald Trump and other white Republicans:   

Not to mention the same cadre that downplayed COVID, like TRUMP and Desantis, were among the FIRST to get the vaccine. That’s the game. — Sow seeds of doubt. Discourage marginalized groups from being vaccinated so that wealthy whites have an abundant supply

I wish it were appropriate to disentangle the illogic of that tweet, to demonstrate how much more dangerous it is to hold that view of those “vaccines” than to be healthily suspicious of them. I wish it were appropriate, because it would be if Ayesha Faines herself did not soon inadvertently, and tragically, disprove what she and Belcher wrote about the ignorance and/or delusion of that black majority. 

Having been knocked flat by her first jab in mid-March (“The first Pfizer shot had me down for the count,” she tweeted on April 3), Faines bounced right back to her packed schedule, keeping at it right through April, May and most of June. On June 28, she posted 25 tweets, and her last Facebook post at 10:45 p.m. that night. Those comprised her final words online. She died four days later, at 35, on July 2.

Faines’ sudden death received much online coverage, with no cause given. A few days later, her family released a statement, reported first by Zora, the magazine that ran Faines’ columns, and then by News4Jax, the Jacksonville news outlet for which she’d worked as traffic anchor, as well as BET and a few other sites online: “Ayesha K. Faines was born with asthma and multiple severe food allergies. On June 29, 2021, Ayesha suffered a fatal anaphylactic reaction from an unknown allergen.”

There was no mention of Faines’ “vaccination” in the coverage of her death, nor, with some very few exceptions, did any of her multitude of online mourners mention it. Only the COVID Blog and Sandra Rose—both COVID-dissident websites—noted her injections as the likely cause of death. If she did die of anaphylactic shock, it was more likely due to Faines’ two Pfizer shots than to anything she ate, since such fatal food allergies are now far more unusual than such severe allergic reactions among those  jabbed with the mRNA “vaccines”—a side effect that, back in January, the CDC assured us was extremely rare, which we may take as meaning that it isn’t all that rare; and more recent data from Japan and Israel suggest that it is not so uncommon after all.   

Maurice Shepperson 

Five days after Ayesha Faines died in New Jersey, Maurice Reginald Shepperson (who went by “Reggie”) drove himself to the ER of Henderson Hospital in Las Vegas, wracked with pain all over, unable to breathe or focus—in such bad shape that he skidded off the hospital parking lot onto the sidewalk. The 36-year-old flight attendant (a Southwest Airlines employee) had fallen ill soon after returning from a trip to Hawaii, with his mother, Dawn. Both had tested negative for COVID-19, several times. Shepperson quarantined as soon as he felt sick (Dawn left his meals outside his door), then tested positive, and just kept getting worse.

They had him in the ICU for over four weeks, much of the time on a ventilator. Every day, Dawn talked to him on FaceTime, praying with him every hour, on the hour. (“He would talk when he could,” she said. “He would give me a thumbs-up when he could.”) On Tuesday, Aug. 10, the hospital called Dawn to let her know that Reggie had passed on. 

Although we don’t know exactly when he was injected, the fact that Shepperson was “fully vaccinated” led the news in dozens of pieces published nation- and world-wide, many of them with the exact same headline: “Fully vaccinated Southwest flight attendant dies of COVID-19.” The implication of that headline, and many others near-identical, is (of course) that this was “news” becauseit was an oddity, like “Man Bites Dog”—a point spelled out in several of the articles: “Severe infections of COVID-19 among those who are vaccinated are extremely rare,” declared the New York Post, “even as the highly contagious Delta variant has spread across the United States.” 

The latest figures posted on the CDC’s website showed that just 8,054—or 0.005 percent—of the 166 million Americans who’ve been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 had suffered serious breakthrough infections causing hospitalization or death as of Aug. 9.

Thus the “fully vaccinated” Reggie Shepperson’s untimely death was misreported, as (a) “extremely rare” (which it most certainly was not), and, therefore, (b) as an untimely death not caused by his “vaccination”—which, as we have seen, is how those other nine untimely deaths of black Americans were also variously misreported; and they are not the only ones, as we shall see.

We will begin Part 2 of this essay by revisiting the question that I posed at the beginning: “What happens when a propaganda blitz misfires, and proves (or seems to prove) the very truth it was devised to blow away?” We will start to answer that key question by reviewing all the ways in which “our free press” ensured that We the People not see the significance of those ten deaths—i.e., what those “vaccines” are obviously doing to us all, and by design.


On my Substack (finally!), and my talk today (Sunday) at the protest in Foley Square

Our Substack is now up and running, thanks to Jimmy Han; so please subscribe, at As you’ll see, how much you pay for it is up to you; and, as promised, we’ll comp those who have emailed me requesting it.

Since Substack does not offer any digest option, I’m trying to figure out how I will use it; I think I’ll keep on sending some stuff out via this list-serve—single articles that I think others ought to see, with little or no commentary by myself—while using Substack for the more substantial pieces of my own. I’m always mindful of those NFU subscribers who don’t want their inboxes filling with my daily missives, so this informal approach may be a viable solution.

Let me know if you have any questions. Meanwhile, I remind you that I’ll be speaking at the protest in Foley Square today, concerning the fascistic imprisonment of all those dragged off to federal prison, where they languish on no charges, and in torturous conditions, for participation in, or some vaguer connection to, the “insurrection” on January 6th.

Those of you in NYC should be there if you can. (It starts at noon.) For those who can’t, I’m told that the event will be live-streamed via this link (don’t ask me why):

(I think it also will be live-streamed via the Pete Santilli Show, so you should check that website if the one above turns out to be dysfunctional.)


We can learn a thing or two about smear propaganda from my email correspondence with Mark Dery

Here (download below) is my entire email correspondence with Mark Dery, from his initial overture in February through his last few days of fact-checking “The Professor of Paranoia,” his hit-piece for the Chronicle of Higher Education. These emails, and the videos of my two Zoom conversations with the author, comprise the raw materials from which he plucked whatever bits he could deploy to illustrate the hatchet-job that he’d already written in his head before approaching me, and that he then sat down and dashed off for the Chronicle.

As I noted in my preface to his article, which I sent out on May 12, I think that every such attack (they’re all alike) should be regarded as a “teaching moment”; and I see this one as particularly rich, since we have so much documentary material, that we can see not only how hit-pieces are constructed, but—far more important—the peculiar nature of the minds that write them (they’re all alike). As my epistolary back-and-forth with Dery should make clear to careful (and disinterested) readers—especially those who’ve read his hit-piece in the Chronicle—such minds are full of anger, zealously protective of received opinion, and, in that service, at once nimble (skilled at insult, mockery and sophistry) and yet awesomely dense, as hard as granite (a metaphor especially apt in Dery’s case, as we shall see). In short, the minds that churn out such attacks on dissidents—whether on assignment, or out of personal resentment (Dery claims to have come up with the idea, and pitched the Chronicle)—are, above all, closed, completely, and forevermore.

Dery’s hit-piece is so perfect an example of its genre that I intend to annotate it, as I might have my students do, so as to demonstrate exactly what that genre is, and how it works. Here I only want to preface my epistolary back-and-forth with Dery (a very interesting exchange throughout) by noting some key moments.

> On April 26 (p. 4), I wrote that Dery’s questions thus far had evinced “a certain veneration for professional expertise,” as defined by “the profession”—and, therefore, by the media, which either ridicules or blacks out all dissenting views or arguments, and all contrary data. Dery’s obeisances to that consensus, including his solemn nod at “peer review,” suggest (I was implying, as politely as I could) that he knows nothing of (or maybe doesn’t care about) the absolute corruption of the academic sciences, medicine included, by the largesse doled out by Dr. Fauci, Big Pharma and the Gates Foundation (just as the media has been corrupted by those billions). That corruption, I observed, obligates us to pay close attention to the scientific dissidents:

That those experts don’t get quoted in the NYTimes, or on NPR, or any other such outlet, and that such experts even find themselves under attack, makes them that much more credible, as far as I’m concerned, because they make convincing arguments, and have nothing to gain from going against the grain.

As for peer review, I included five links to various articles on the widespread corruption of that process in particular, and also noted that peer review is often skewed by groupthink:

So, inasmuch as peer review tends to reflect received opinion— which is just as influential among academics as it is outside the “ivory tower” (if not even more influential)—I see no reason to regard it as sacrosanct.

I hope we can pursue this line of argument, because it has a lot to do with what has happened to me here.

As Dery’s unquestioning respect for “the consensus” is the crux of all his emails, all his questions via Zoom, and the hit-piece that he quickly pounded out thereafter, what may be most significant about that moment in our correspondence is that he never did address the points raised in my email, though he wrote that he would do so “at the thoughtful length [my email] deserves when I can clear away the underbrush in my workday.”

> On April 29 (p. 6), Dery got from me, but didn’t use, some startling information that, being a journalist, he might have used, if he were not fixated on my putative “trajectory” into madness. “In one of her tweets,” he wrote, the student who smeared me on Twitter “claims that you sent her an email insisting that she ‘must acknowledge “both sides” of the “mask effectiveness debate” or I’m essentially allowing myself to be manipulated by the mainstream media.'” He inserted a screen shot of that tweet, and asked, “Is her account of your email exchange factually correct?” “No,” I wrote back. “The only email exchange I ever had with her took place in mid-September, when she asked to join the class; so I never ‘told’ her anything.”

The next day, Dery, apparently incredulous, revisited the question, with a faintly bullying “request for clarity” suggestive of a deposition.

[Y]ou’re saying Jackson’s claim, in the tweet I sent a screenshot of, is unequivocally false, a complete fabrication? You’ll forgive me for pursuing the question, but I want to be absolutely certain that you’re saying she fabricated that claim out of whole cloth: the email she claims to have received does not exist.

“As to Julia Jackson’s tweet, the answer is, unfortunately, yes,” I wrote (again). “It is a total fabrication. I’ll shortly send you the entire email correspondence between her and myself,” which I then did.

Any honest journalist reporting on what Dery calls “the NYU imbroglio” would surely highlight his discovery that the student whose ferocious tweets began it all is something of a fabulist, and, therefore, that the defamatory pile-on prompted by her claims is worth revisiting—as a story, somewhat like The Children’s Hour, or The Crucible, of collective persecution sparked by the imaginings of a delusional young woman. While any honest journalist would spotlight that discovery, and maybe lead with it, Dery doesn’t even mention it, because his purpose was to pile on, too; and so he couldn’t let his readers know what he’d found out about that student’s tweets.

> On May 2, I tried, again, to get Dery to address the (as academics like to say) problematic basis of what he calls “the consensus”; and, again, he wouldn’t do it—but, this time, he ducked the issue not by failing to reply, as in our exchange on April 26, but, more dramatically, by flipping out, for no apparent reason.

In our exchange about the Holocaust, and those few heroic souls who struggled to alert the world, first to what was brewing in Hitler’s Germany, and then to the Holocaust itself—a struggle that I see as all too similar to the efforts of dissenting scientists and doctors now, against the COVID-19 “vaccination” program, while Dery, “fully vaccinated,” sees any such comparison as lunacy—I revisited the Great Divide between his reverential view of “the consensus,” and my readiness to question it, and read, or watch, the work of those who do:

I realize that our contention really comes down to your faith in what you take to be “the general consensus” of “the medical establishment,” as expressed throughout the media, which (“consensus”) I see as illusory, based not on the opinion of disinterested physicians but the program of some mighty corporations and the state and global agencies attached to them. The doctors speaking out against that program, and those quietly evading it, are not just a few “outliers,” but actually comprise a large resistance all around the world; but you dismiss them, basically because you haven’t read about it in the Times—just as, in the early 1940’s, you would not have read about the Holocaust.

Dery’s reply (p. 15):

This is the merest straw-manning, Mark. I’m happy to continue our correspondence in the service of my article, as long as I’m clacking away at it, but caricaturing me as some gape-mouthed rube gulled by the men in white coats and credulously subservient to the Gray Lady is unworthy of you—and not worth my time. If you find our correspondence stimulating, be more civil.

Shocked by that reaction, I replied:

Good Lord, I said nothing of the kind, and never would. I have the same respect for you now as I did back in the day; I merely raised the question as to whether you would have found the Times just as authoritative then as you do now. How that casts you as “some gape-mouthed rube,” etc., I don’t see.

But if I somehow enabled you to take it that way, I apologize.

“Understood; accepted,” he replied—and that was it.

I’ve read those paragraphs several times, and still can see no incivility in what I wrote, nor any “straw-manning,” or “caricaturing” of him at all. So either I had hit too close to home, which really pissed him off, or it was just a show of pique, so he could duck the question once again. In either case, there too Dery showed himself intent on keeping his mind closed.

> He made that fixed intention clear—startlingly clear—in our last email exchange before the posting of his article.

On May 5, I read, in Global Research, of the Salk Institute’s new study, finding that the spike proteins in the COVID-19 “vaccines” are themselves highly dangerous, potentially ravaging the vascular system (a finding that has been confirmed by other studies). I decided I should forward it to Dery, for two reasons.

First, I thought (naively) that, if he were still tweaking his piece, the unimpeachable prestige of the Salk Institute might, perhaps, move him to modify the jeering tone that I (rightly) expected him to take throughout his article. What I had in mind specifically was his long question, toward the end of our second Zoom encounter, about two others who, as he put it euphemistically, have “evolved epistemologically”: Naomi Wolf and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—a comparison that made me proud; but, of course, in Mark Dery’s universe, those two are cracked like me, once-fine minds who’ve wandered off (stage right) into the tallest weeds, where we sit barking at the moon.

There are others, like yourself, who have evolved epistemologically, and seem to be conducting an analysis based on an epistemological undergirding that differs from your past world-view. That’s as neutrally as I can put it.

Others who fall into that category are, most notably, Naomi Wolf and RFK, Jr. And so Naomi Wolf, best-known as a feminist, and now I guess you would term her a “vaccine safety advocate.” She seems to share some of your skepticism about the messaging [?] surrounding lockdowns and masking. Certainly RFK, Jr. went from being an environmental activist to being the public face of, again, what you would call, “vaccine safety advocacy.”

Again, all three of you have taken cuffs and kicks from your former colleagues, from those fellow travelers, former left or progressives or liberal phalanx, call it what you will, academic colleagues [sic].

Dery was more focused on vaccines throughout our second back-and-forth (laying into Andrew Wakefield, about whom he knew nothing, and the documentary VAXXED, which he clearly hadn’t seen, and never will). His riff about me, Bobby and Naomi as a (dangerous) trio of formerly-“progressive” kooks was the culmination of that vaccine-centric line of questioning, making clear—or, rather, even clearer—what Dery had in mind; and so (again) I thought that the Salk Institute’s new study might just make some difference in his final draft, if it was not too late.

But I would have sent it to him even if I knew it was too late, because I thought he ought to see it—just as I think everybody ought to know what the real science has discovered, is discovering every day, about those very dangerous “vaccines,” and whatever pathogen has caused COVID-19, as well as the effectiveness of lockdowns, masking, “social distancing,” and such key remedies as hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin and Vitamin D: all of which have either been disastrously misrepresented, or no less disastrously blacked out, by “the consensus” that Mark Dery thinks must be protected from the likes of me. In any case, though he certainly was not my favorite person at that moment, I still felt morally obliged to pass that information on to him, as he and his were fully vaccinated, as he rather loftily informed me in his email of May 2, in response to mine containing links to the new warnings by Dr. Michael Yeadon, Prof. Sukharit Bhakdi and Dr. Sherri Tenpenny:

Thank you for your concern about me and my family. We’ve all been vaccinated without incident, as has everyone we know, and are much relieved to have our odds of surviving the virus’s implacable “extermination drive” through the global population significantly improved.

And so, in hopes that he might slightly modify his pending hatchet-job, and—more important—not allow himself or his loved ones to be injected yet again, I sent him this email on May 5:

You’ve probably put your piece to bed by now, so news of this study, from the highly reputable Salk Institute, is probably too late to factor into your overall take on my position re: the COVID-19 “vaccines.”

If not, and if you have somehow cast me, Naomi Wolf and Bobby K. as the Three Stooges of “conspiracy theory,” perhaps that study will persuade you otherwise. Or if it is too late, I really hope you’ll read it FYI, as it is terribly important, and people must be made aware of it. Those who haven’t had the shots should read the study before getting them, while those who have had their two shots should think it over carefully before getting a third “booster” shot, which Dr. Fauci has suggested will be necessary.

In any case, be well.

His reply:
– The piece is on my editor’s desk and being edited.

– Which means I may have more queries, though strictly of a fact-checking nature. Let me know if you’re unwilling to answer them. They’ll be brief and, again, strictly to do with matters of fact.

– Thanks for the study. My piece is carved in stone, as is my position on vaccines, but I may give it a glance (purely out of curiosity), when I’ve put this piece to bed, my schedule permitting [emphasis added].

His “position on vaccines” is “carved in stone”? I don’t see how any journalist—especially one who claims respect for science—can have a view on nearly anything that’s “carved in stone.” What’s “carved in stone” would be, of course, the Ten Commandments (and graveyard epitaphs); and, speaking metaphorically, the Hippocratic Oath, the Golden Rule, the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Nuremberg Code. Nor should even those be off the table for discussion, as we need to question them, so as to better understand them, and then re-affirm them, in the face of an unprecedented global drive to throw them out, and make sure that the children of today grow up not able to remember them, or never having even heard of them, “the consensus” by then having long since stopped invoking them.

In its endless propagation of the COVID cult, with its crackpot aim of jabbing everyone alive (except the cult’s own leadership) with those “vaccines” that Dery thinks confer immunity, and do no harm, that drive has recently been manifest in Pres. Biden’s dazed assertion, of the Constitution, that “no amendment is absolute” (referring to the Second, but, of course, applicable to all the others, too); Prince Harry’s claim, at the VaxLive fundraising concert on May 2, that the First Amendment is “bonkers”; Chelsea Clinton’s call—at a Vatican conference “dedicated to dialogue”—for a total ban, worldwide, on posting anything that might somehow encourage “vaccine hesitancy” (“I personally very strongly believe there has to be more intensive and intentional and coordinated global regulation of the content on social media platforms”); and, in his own small way, Mark Dery, wondering, in the pages of the Chronicle of Higher Education, “what steps” the “academic authorities” might take to “rein in a professor” who has been “accused” (apparently by anyone) of “flouting the epistemological standards of his discipline”—as he claims I have done (no one at NYU has made that accusation), by defending what he calls “misleading claims,” and embracing what he calls “fringe beliefs,” instead of emulating his deliberate ignorance of any data, scientific finding, firsthand testimony, argument or news that somehow contradicts the Big Lies spread by expert propaganda—for that‘s what “the consensus” really is.

Right after Dery’s affirmation of his willful ignorance concerning those “vaccines,” he reaffirmed it, in replying to a second email that I’d quickly sent him, including links to three more studies—in Cell Reports Medicine, Immunologic Research and Nature— noting other ways in which those “vaccines” may damage human tissue. I received those links from Dr. Meryl Nass, a biowarfare epidemiologist who posted them on her invaluable blog (, and whose post I sent to Dery.

His reply:
No more of these dispatches, if you don’t mind. I’m always curious to hear your unique take on matters of moment, if and when you write an extended essay (such as the masking one) or whatever catches your attention. But I have zero interest in anything Nass has to say, and, more to the point, am too busy to revisit a question I regard as settled.

Thus Mark Dery, free-lance writer, was magnanimous enough to take a moment from His very busy schedule, and let me know, from His imperial divan, or His scriptorium, perhaps, that, while He always finds amusement in my “unique take on matters of moment,” He has no use for “Nass,” or, therefore, any scientific study she may recommend—or, for that matter, any scientific studies that would needlessly, and tediously, raise, again, the “question” as to whether those “vaccines” are as “safe and effective” as He knows they are, Dr. Fauci, and the New York Times, and so on, having told Him so, whereby that “question” has, of course, been “settled,” so his “position” on it has been “carved in stone.”

Dery’s self-perpetuating ignorance, and (let us call it) liberal self-importance, would be funny, if they were unique to him; for, if they were, yet he somehow managed to attack me in the Chronicle of Higher Education, I could suggest, facetiously, that he be sent a t-shirt with Dr. Fauci’s hobgoblin face imprinted on it, over the statement, “I’m with Stupid”; or that someone should hit him on the head with a copy of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, then leave it with him, in hopes that he might read it (if he has the time).

But there is nothing funny about Dery’s ignorance, and arrogance, and patent eagerness to see NYU (where he did not get tenure years ago) fire me for encouraging my students to examine all sides of important issues carefully, so as to determine whether certain propaganda claims are true, and make up their own minds, without letting “the consensus” do their “thinking” for them—or, rather, without letting “the consensus” free them from the onerous necessity of thinking for themselves, as Mark Dery, and the Chronicle of Higher Education, and all the other thought-policing instruments and organs of the bio-fascist order want them not to do—just as the plantation owners of the antebellum South wanted no one teaching their slaves how to read. It is because Mark Dery’s servile mentality—his proud incuriosity, intolerance of dissent, and impulse to shut down all inquiry into possible high crimes through mere insult and ridicule—is not unique to him, but typical of the professional classes in these ever-darkening times, that we may neither laugh it off, nor fail to call it out for what it is, and what it’s helping to bring on.

So that is my two cents about this correspondence. My next—and last—response to Dery’s hatchet-job will be my annotated version of “The Professor of Paranoia,” as it’s so exquisitely deceptive and malicious an attack—and has so much deliberately left out—that it requires a thorough gloss (which will, I hope, be as enjoyable for you to read as it has been for me to write).


Videos and transcripts of two Zoom conversations


NIH admits funding gain-of-function COVID experiments, and “failed to report” it

NIH Admits Funding Gain-Of-Function COVID Experiments; Gives EcoHealth Five Days To Report Data

by Tyler Durden
Oct. 21, 2021

A top NIH official admitted in a Wednesday letter that the US-funded so-called “gain-of-function” research in Wuhan, China – and that the US nonprofit which conducted it, EcoHealth Alliance – led by the controversial Peter Daszak, “failed to report” that they had created a chimeric bat coronavirus which could infect humans.

In a letter addressed to Rep. James Comer (R-KY), NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence A. Tabak cites a “limited experiment” to determine whether “spike proteins from naturally occurring bat coronaviruses circulating in China were capable of binding to the human ACE2 receptor in a mouse model.” According to the letter, humanized mice infected with the modified bat virus “became sicker” than those exposed to an unmodified version of the same bat coronavirus.

Click on the link for the rest.


One-third of hiring managers toss out resumes without “vaccination” status

More accomplices.

From Anders Fahey:

Greetings Friends,

As many of you know I recently resigned from my job (where I have been employed for 7 year) as a result of my company adding a covid vax mandate as a condition of employment.

I just wanted to pass along this article as I think we should all be aware of this insidious new trick some companies have adopted to filter out “unclean” applicants like myself.

The response to the job applications I’ve submitted thus far has been *crickets*, and although there are many contributing factors as to why that may be, I’m starting to suspect my refusal to add a vax status line to my resume is one of them.

If so, yikes 😳



Dutch undertaker tells what he has seen in bodies of the “vaccinated” dead

The original Dutch as Englished by Google Translate:

Bleeding, very small bleeding in a deceased person. I come across them more and more often and notice that my work to be performed is shifting as a result and I have to get more and more out of the closet to make these deceased presentable. We call them petechiae. Small point-shaped hemorrhages that have entered our vascular system, so that they can no longer be suppressed. Over the past six months I suddenly come across deceased weekly with this unpleasant discoloration in the face, shoulders and upper arms. The deceased is purple/blue on the face (not printable) and blue/black on the neck and shoulders. The oxygen-poor blood I take from this deceased (to replace with chemicals with dye) is viscous dark blue to black (no exaggeration). Are there colleagues who recognize this and can tell me what causes this? I think I have enough experience to recognize that we encountered this less often before (for me from 4 per year, to 2 per week). Please ask in a PM Update 10-10-2021 My question above is intended to be neutral with the aim of being able to perform my work better. Through all kinds of channels I am told that even on Twitter (not used by me) reactions are posted, which are not intended to help me and thus the relatives. A response is fine, but please focus on my question and not on speculation. Someone who knows me knows (certainly after reading my book) how serious I am in my profession, I would like to keep this name [secret]. Thank you!


Four parasites found in vials of Pfizer and Moderna “vaccines” (and both companies have been SILENT on the matter, and so has “our free press”)

From Lila York:

Trypanosoma Cruzi—-Parasites-Found-in-COVID-19-Vaccines:1
Now we know why they are banning ivermectin.


The smear campaign against Prof. David Miller, at/by the University of Bristol, is only one example of an all-pervasive rot

Propaganda, Character Assassination & the Campaign Against Prof David Miller

Dr Piers Robinson

On October 1st 2021, the University of Bristol decided to buckle in the face of a near 3 year-long pro-Israel lobby campaign and fire Professor David Miller.

I have worked with David for many years now, co-published work on the theory of propaganda, researched and written about the UK FCO propaganda operation (ongoing) that has sought to overthrow the Syrian government, and developed the fledgling Organisation for Propaganda Studies.

David was, is, and will continue to be, a major intellectual force with respect to our understanding of propaganda, and his integrity, particularly in relation to the Israel-Palestine issue, is now cemented in history. He became a voice for the Palestinians, highlighting the ways in which propaganda has worked in order to simultaneously suppress public understanding of the nefarious actions of the Israeli government against them and erase awareness of their plight.

Inevitably and predictably he became an essential target for the pro-Israel lobby and the implementation of a remarkably sustained and aggressive campaign designed to falsely smear him as ‘anti-Semitic’ and have him fired.

I also have a relationship with the University of Bristol. I studied for my MSc in International Relations back in 1996-97 (funded by the Economic and Social Research Council [ESRC]) and continued in 1997 to undertake a PhD (also ESRC funded) under the supervision of Professor Eric Herring. I left at the end of the 2nd year of the PhD to take up my first full-time academic post at the University of Liverpool, School of Politics and Communication Studies. My PhD was awarded in 2000 from the University of Bristol.

Smear campaigns and character assassination are a core feature of contemporary propaganda and our ‘democratic’ landscape. There is even an academic Handbook on the tactic, titled The Routledge Handbook of Character Assassination and Reputation Management, whilst US investigative journalist Sharyl Atkinson has provided a powerful account detailing how legitimate political views are stifled through nefarious attempts to destroy reputations.

I have witnessed this tactic first hand through my experience researching propaganda and the war on Syria.

For the ‘thought crime’ of questioning and researching UK government-linked ‘influence operations’ in that war, in particular the controversy over the OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) and the alleged chemical weapon attack in Douma 2018, myself and other colleagues (including David), have been subjected to aggressive and continuous smearing some of which is documented here.

Even when OPCW whistleblower scientists emerged and corroborated what we had been saying, those attacking us have simply continued with accusations of our being ‘conspiracy theorists’, ‘war crime deniers’ and agents of ‘disinformation’. That smear campaign also now incorporates OPCW whistleblowers with attempts to blacken their reputations.

What we see today is not completely new and David’s experience is not an isolated one.

In an earlier era, scientists such as Professor Steven Jones were smeared and pushed from their positions when raising perfectly objective, evidence-based and rational questions regarding 9/11. Chemist and laboratory director Kevin Ryan was fired for blowing the whistle on his own company which had obfuscated evidence related to the building collapses that occurred on 9/11.

To this day, and as Dr David Hughes has recently detailed in an academic journal, mainstream academia continues to self-censor and avoid substantial analysis of 9/11.

Today, with Covid-19, we now appear to be seeing an unprecedented level of attacks on academics who have raised what are, again, perfectly objective, evidence-based and rational questions regarding the efficacy of lockdowns and the drive toward coerced/mandated injections.

High profile and leading academics such as Sunetra Gupta (University of Oxford) and even Professor Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology used in the current Covid-19 injection, have had to battle concerted drives to discredit them, with, for example, Gupta being accused of being a ‘conspiracy theorist’.

Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, an early critic of lockdown, has been accused of anti-Semitism in what appears to be a wildly ill-founded and crude attempt to discredit his expertise.

Click on the link for the rest.


New Zealand is committing suicide: A doctor writes “in stupefied disbelief” at what the government is doing to “fight COVID”

From Dr. Emanuel E. Garcia:
To: Prime Minister Ardern

As a physician and New Zealand citizen, I am writing in stupefied disbelief at the enormously damaging COVID policies you and your government have pursued and are continuing to pursue.  I will disregard the hubris of your contention that your Ministry of Health is the ‘single source of truth’ about COVID matters, but will instead focus on several facts.

1.  the elimination of a respiratory coronavirus is not possible — as you are now grudgingly admitting
2.  relying on ‘vaccines’ such as the Pfizer mRNA injection — agents that neither prevent infection nor transmission and that have resulted in enormous numbers of deaths and adverse events worldwide — is foolhardy
3. neglecting to encourage and pursue preventative measures and EARLY TREATMENT of COVID is incomprehensible

One would think that during what has been billed as the most lethal pandemic in human history the energies and enthusiasm and intelligence of Medicine and health policy would be directed towards prevention and treatment.  Highly effective and evolving protocols are already in use in other parts of the world (see

How can you explain the suppression and ignorance of such treatment?  How can you explain policies that are geared towards blackmailing the populace into accepting inoculations when in fact efficacious treatments are available?  How can you explain the vast ignorance of primary health practitioners about early treatment?  This omission is, in my considered opinion, nothing less than criminal.

New Zealand now finds itself in disarray. Disastrous lockdowns, the imposition of mask-wearing and distancing, none of which is based in science, are destroying human commerce and human freedom, and are conditioning us to expect the disappearance of human intimacy, love and joy in favour of endless fear and anxiety.

I sincerely hope you will reflect upon your decisions and look towards those true experts such as Dr. Peter McCullough and others for guidance out of this horrifying mess.


Emanuel E. Garcia, MD
Eastbourne, New Zealand

19 October 2021


First Amendment under fierce attack as DoJ goes after parents protesting mask mandates, CRT

Dear Mark Crispin,

The most egregious attack on the First Amendment has come from the U.S. Department of Justice, which is now turning the forces of government, including the FBI, against parents who are protesting and engaging with school boards across the nation.

You know. These are the parents who are fed up with things like forced mask mandates for their children and the teaching of critical race theory.

What the DoJ just did is inconceivable but it happened, and you can read about it in our latest blog post: Department of Justice Slams First Amendment, Claims Parents Are Engaged In “Domestic Terrorism And Hate Crimes”.

We must take courage and then take action in every local community to shatter this tyrannical attempt to destroy the First Amendment.

As you stock up on the CFFS brochures, Action Cards and “no mask” lanyards, please engage with all local parents in your area and give them this material. Support them. Encourage them. Educate them. Stand with them.

Go To CFFS Store
Note: All of our brochures are shrink-wrapped 25 to a pack and are written exclusively for CFFS by board-certified neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock.
The “No Mask” card includes a printed lanyard for you to wear whenever you are out. They are made of sturdy plastic and printed on both sides.

For Liberty,
Patrick Wood
Citizens for Free Speech · PO Box 52247, Mesa, AZ 85208, United States

You can also keep up with Patrick Wood on Twitter or Facebook.
Created with NationBuilder, software for leaders.


“Health effects of cellphone/cell tower radiation: Implications for 5G” (FREE WEBINAR, Nov. 3, 12-1 PM PST)

Hi Mark,

This webinar is free and Joel Moskowitz is an excellent speaker on this timely topic plus it starts at a time that is timezone friendly for eastcoast timezones and beyond!

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Joel M. Moskowitz PhD <>
To: list
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021, 05:05:01 PM PDT
Subject: Free Webinar: “Health Effects of Cellphone & Cell Tower Radiation: Implications for 5G” (Nov. 3, 12-1 PM Pacific Time)
Health Effects of Cellphone & Cell Tower Radiation: Implications for 5G
Speaker: Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD
Center for Occupational and Environmental Health Webinar
November 3, 2021
12 – 1 PM Pacific Time | 2 – 3 PM Central Time | 3 – 4 PM Eastern Time

The Center for Occupational and Environmental Health (COEH) is one of 18 regional Education and Research Centers, funded by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The ERC supports traineeships at three UC campuses, UC Berkeley, UC Davis and UCSF.

About the webinar:
97% of U.S. adults own a cellphone of some kind. The vast majority, 85%, own a smartphone. This presentation will summarize research on biologic and health effects from exposure to radio frequency radiation emitted by cell phones and cell towers. Learners will also discuss the implications of this research for 5G, the fifth generation of cellular technology.

Learning objectives:
At the completion of this activity, the learner will be able to:
– Describe what wireless or radio frequency (RF) radiation is, including 5G, and its relationship to ionizing radiation
– Summarize the biologic and health effects caused by, or associated with, RF radiation exposure
– Explain why current national and international RF radiation exposure limits fail to protect the health of humans and other species

Speaker: Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD
Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, has directed the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley since 1993. Dr. Moskowitz has published research on disease prevention for 40 years. In 2009 he served as the senior author on a hallmark paper reviewing research on mobile phone use and tumor risk published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Last year he updated this meta-analysis in a paper published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. This year he co-authored a paper on electrohypersensitivity published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences.
Since 2013 he has translated and disseminated research on the biologic and health effects of wireless radiation through his website ( In 2017, with legal representation from the UC Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic, he won a lawsuit against the California Department of Public Health for suppressing its own scientists’ cell phone safety guidance for eight years. This resulted in the Department finally publishing cell phone health warnings. He serves as an advisor to Physicians for Safe Technology and to the International EMF Scientist Appeal which was signed by over 250 scientists who published more than 2,000 papers and letters in professional journals on electromagnetic fields and biology or health.

Free Registration

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Twitter:        @berkeleyprc


Two righteous LAPD officers suing city over “vaccine” mandate: Michael MacMahon and Vanessa Saucedo interviewed by Reiner Fuellmich


The whole world is (sometimes) watching: Australian woman brutalized by scrum of cops, for no reason, right near her home; and Avi Yemeni steps in for her

MUST WATCH: Avi Yemini steps in for woman violently arrested in Melbourne

Another shameful moment for Victoria Police caught on camera.

By Avi Yemini

October 18, 2021