Global COVID Summit Declaration IV


A Joint Statement, representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists to End the National Emergency, Restore Scientific Integrity, and Address Crimes Against Humanity

Robert W Malone MD, MS22 hr ago1,516104

The time is now. As most readers of this substack are now well aware, this is not just about COVID. The constitution hangs in the balance. Please help us to get these messages spread far and wide. The 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists in our organization, who are not financially conflicted and remain committed to the Hippocratic Oath, are doing our part. Now we ask that you help us to help you. We need your help.

https://globalcovidsummit.org/news/declaration-iv-restore-scientific-integrity

Alternative link


Global COVID Summit, Declaration IV

A Joint Statement, representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists 

To Restore Scientific Integrity

17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists Declare that the State of Medical Emergency must be lifted, Scientific integrity restored, and crimes against humanity addressed.


17,000 physicians and medical scientists declare that the state of medical emergency must be lifted, scientific integrity restored, and crimes against humanity addressed.

We, the physicians and medical scientists of the world, united through our loyalty to the Hippocratic Oath, recognize that the disastrous COVID-19 public health policies imposed on doctors and our patients are the culmination of a corrupt medical alliance of pharmaceutical, insurance, and healthcare institutions, along with the financial trusts which control them. They have infiltrated our medical system at every level, and are protected and supported by a parallel alliance of big tech, media, academics and government agencies who profited from this orchestrated catastrophe.

This corrupt alliance has compromised the integrity of our most prestigious medical societies to which we belong, generating an illusion of scientific consensus by substituting truth with propaganda. This alliance continues to advance unscientific claims by censoring data, and intimidating and firing doctors and scientists for simply publishing actual clinical results or treating their patients with proven, life-saving medicine. These catastrophic decisions came at the expense of the innocent, who are forced to suffer health damage and death caused by intentionally withholding critical and time-sensitive treatments, or as a result of coerced genetic therapy injections, which are neither safe nor effective.

The medical community has denied patients the fundamental human right to provide true informed consent for the experimental COVID-19 injections. Our patients are also blocked from obtaining the information necessary to understand risks and benefits of vaccines, and their alternatives, due to widespread censorship and propaganda spread by governments, public health officials and media. Patients continue to be subjected to forced lock-downs which harm their health, careers and children’s education, and damage social and family bonds critical to civil society. This is not a coincidence. In the book entitled “COVID-19: The Great Reset”, leadership of this alliance has clearly stated their intention is to leverage COVID-19 as an “opportunity” to reset our entire global society, culture, political structures, and economy.

Our 17,000 Global COVID Summit physicians and medical scientists represent a much larger, enlightened global medical community who refuse to be compromised, and are united and willing to risk the wrath of the corrupt medical alliance to defend the health of their patients.

The mission of the Global COVID Summit is to end this orchestrated crisis, which has been illegitimately imposed on the world, and to formally declare that the actions of this corrupt alliance constitute nothing less than crimes against humanity.

We must restore the people’s trust in medicine, which begins with free and open dialogue between physicians and medical scientists. We must restore medical rights and patient autonomy. This includes the foundational principle of the sacred doctor-patient relationship. The social need for this is decades overdue, and therefore, we the physicians of the world are compelled to take action.

After two years of scientific research, millions of patients treated, hundreds of clinical trials performed and scientific data shared, we have demonstrated and documented our success in understanding and combating COVID-19. In considering the risks versus benefits of major policy decisions, our Global COVID Summit of 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from all over the world have reached consensus on the following foundational principles:

  1. We declare and the data confirm that the COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end.
  2. We declare doctors should not be blocked from providing life-saving medical treatment.
  3. We declare the state of national emergency, which facilitates corruption and extends the pandemic, should be immediately terminated.
  4. We declare medical privacy should never again be violated, and all travel and social restrictions must cease.
  5. We declare masks are not and have never been effective protection against an airborne respiratory virus in the community setting.
  6. We declare funding and research must be established for vaccination damage, death and suffering.
  7. We declare no opportunity should be denied, including education, career, military service or medical treatment, over unwillingness to take an injection.
  8. We declare that first amendment violations and medical censorship by government, technology and media companies should cease, and the Bill of Rights be upheld.
  9. We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.
  10. We declare government and medical agencies must be held accountable.

Airlines Playing Russian Roulette with Passengers’ Lives


Armstrong Economics Blog/Vaccine Re-Posted May 11, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Airlines are playing Russian roulette with passengers’ lives after numerous pilots experienced heart attacks, which is believed to be a direct result of the vaccine mandate.

American Airlines Captain Robert Snow was flying an Airbus 231 carrying 200 passengers. An otherwise healthy Snow experienced a sudden heart attack six minutes after landing. Snow said he dreamed of teaching his daughter to fly one day but will likely never fly again.

The US Freedom Flyers are a group of volunteers within the transportation sector fighting to end vaccine mandates. They are warning the government that a tragedy could be on the horizon due to the FAA initially mandating vaccines under Biden’s guidance. The group would like all vaccinated pilots to receive medical clearance through EKGs and MRIs to rule out blood clotting issues. Once a pilot loses their FAA medical clearance, their career is over.

United Airlines even issued a “pilot incapacitation” manual and urged pilots and co-pilots to report incidents. As it stands, pilots are not permitted to fly for 48 hours after receiving the vaccine. However, the side effects could occur much later, and no one is seriously investigating why pilots are falling ill. “It’s as simple as standing up and saying NO! When we join together, we are an unstoppable force,” the US Freedom Flyers said.

Dr. Fauci was asked about the issue last October. “ I’m sure there is a very, very, very, very rare exception, but the long-term effects are really essentially nonexistent,” Fauci claimed. “Getting COVID is far, far worse than getting vaccinated for absolutely certain.”

Market from Volume to Targeted Boosts


TrialSite Staff by Staff at TrialSite | Quality Journalism May. 10, 2022, 9:00 a.m.

After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.

In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.

Vaccine producers such as Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen), AstraZeneca, and others understand that unless there are continued government mandates effectively priming the pump of demand, those individuals with a preference for COVID-19 immunization have already gone ahead with the procedure.

What’s left is a market for boosters and what could become some sort of annual shot available for targeted populations. Of course, in some markets, young children are still a target for COVID-19 vaccines.  Regardless, companies now operate in a quite different environment now, than they did in the period of late 2020 through 2021: a period driven by massive government spending, heavy industry influence on the regulatory process, risk-sharing, and the like to a more traditional competitive marketplace.

The Last Market: Young Children

While the children’s markets in places like America are still relevant, awaiting approval, what’s becoming apparent will be the emphasis on booster shots. In the world’s most lucrative drug market, America, Pfizer, and Moderna will more than likely persist as market leaders vying for the parental demands of children as public health agencies such as the CDC continue to emphasize that the risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine favor by a long-shot vaccination. The point of view is that there are no risk-free choices and that it’s better to be safe than sorry with the very youngest members of society. 

To date, the CDC recommends the Pfizer vaccine for both the 5-11 age and 12 to 17 cohort while not recommending Moderna. Under 4 is the last market segment the vaccine makers vie for, and if the FDA authorizes, then Pfizer would own that market. A potential battle emerges over this cohort (aged 4-11) as a growing movement concerned for the safety associated with the vaccines, especially the mRNA-based products, gains momentum to question the mass vaccination on this young population. Critics argue that the original premise for mandates and the like was to control community transmission.  Given substantial waning vaccine effectiveness combined with mutating variants, critics suggest the risks of serious infection and death are too low, and the safety issues are higher than the government is letting on. 

Demand for Vaccines Wane

But demand for vaccines is flat in much of the world. In America, there is little uptick in vaccination as the “fully vaccinated” defined as receiving the two jabs of either Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna or one jab from Janssen equals 66.8% of the population while about 30.7% of the population opted for a booster dose.

Meanwhile, TrialSite, on several occasions, has chronicled a global glut of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, especially in places like India, the world’s second-highest populated country. In places like Australia, where the death rate associated with COVID-19 has absolutely skyrocketed despite high immunization rates, the public health agencies and politicians continue to promote booster doses as the answer. TrialSite reported recently that Australian politicians in an election season essentially pretend that times are back to normal despite record numbers of cases, near-record hospitalizations, and double the deaths in the first months of 2022 than all of 2020 and 2021 combined.

Some Possible Explanations

Reuters’ Michael Erman and Manas Mishra write that vaccine producers such as Novavax and CureVac, the German mRNA-vaccine maker in partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, seek to target this booster market. Novavax still awaits FDA authorization despite the fact that much of the developed world, from Europe to Canada and Japan to the WHO, have authorized the use of the Novavax vaccine.

Meanwhile, the outlook for Janssen and AstraZeneca (Oxford) is that bright, report the Reuters journalists. According to Hartaj Singh, an analyst from Oppenheimer & Co., “It becomes a very competitive game with companies battling it out with pricing and for market share, even for vaccines that are considered to be the best, like Pfizer and Moderna.”

Interestingly, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla went on the record in an interview recently that those adults that have opted to receive a COVID-19 vaccine are not likely to start accepting shots now in a recognition that the mega push for vaccine administration has come and gone.

Moderna has pegged the unfolding market as the annual shot market, targeting the following:

  • Adults 50 and above
  • People with comorbidities or other risks
  • High-risk occupations (e.g., healthcare, etc.)

According to the estimates of Stephane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, this emerging annual shot market totals 1.7 billion, representing 21% of the global population. The mRNA-based vaccines are more expensive and cumbersome to distribute and store, hence a sizeable chunk of that estimated target may opt for other vaccines such as the two recently touted by vaccine insiders at WHO including a plant-based vaccine from Canada and one from China. 

More than likely Western Europe and America will represent central markets for sales for Pfizer and Moderna who will move toward more competitive, targeted responsive strategies as large government pre-purchases are probably going to be far less. Moreover, TrialSite suggests what were cozy relationships between industry and government agencies will become less so as the various governments’ responses to the pandemic will be a hot topic, especially in democracies in current election cycles.

Key Question: A flu shot model or something else?

The Reuters writers posed an important question in the recent piece: will the likes of Pfizer and Moderna starting this fall market a tailored, redesigned vaccine targeted relevant variants of concern (e.g., Omicron, BA.2, etc.)?

Both Moderna and Pfizer executives are on the record that they are developing Omicron-targeted vaccines.

This becomes an important topic as even the mainstream media starts to become slightly critical of the pandemic response, including mRNA-based vaccine makers that never modified the vaccine product once. The vaccine authorized and approved in the United States was developed based on the original Wuhan variant of SARS-CoV-2 which didn’t seem to make it in circulation to America nor most of the world.

Revenues Decline (but still unprecedented)

2023 sales numbers, while still staggering as compared to historical precedent in the pharmaceutical industry, are nonetheless, on the decline. Reuters reports $17 billion projected for Pfizer-BioNTech (down nearly half from $34 billion) and $10 billion for Moderna as compared to $23 billion in 2022. Sales will continue to drop because enormous fortunes were generated in the winner-take-all pandemic market.

TrialSite suggests the COVID-19 pandemic response must be seriously evaluated due to levels of bias, political interference, and potentially corruption at an unprecedented level. Should the political conditions change in the United States for example, leading to serious inquiries, the pandemic winners may incur unexpected costs.

After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.

In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response. TrialSite Staff by Staff at TrialSite | Quality Journalism

May. 10, 2022, 9:00 a.m.

After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.

In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.

Vaccine producers such as Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen), AstraZeneca, and others understand that unless there are continued government mandates effectively priming the pump of demand, those individuals with a preference for COVID-19 immunization have already gone ahead with the procedure.

What’s left is a market for boosters and what could become some sort of annual shot available for targeted populations. Of course, in some markets, young children are still a target for COVID-19 vaccines.  Regardless, companies now operate in a quite different environment now, than they did in the period of late 2020 through 2021: a period driven by massive government spending, heavy industry influence on the regulatory process, risk-sharing, and the like to a more traditional competitive marketplace.

The Last Market: Young Children

While the children’s markets in places like America are still relevant, awaiting approval, what’s becoming apparent will be the emphasis on booster shots. In the world’s most lucrative drug market, America, Pfizer, and Moderna will more than likely persist as market leaders vying for the parental demands of children as public health agencies such as the CDC continue to emphasize that the risk-benefit analysis of the COVID-19 vaccine favor by a long-shot vaccination. The point of view is that there are no risk-free choices and that it’s better to be safe than sorry with the very youngest members of society. 

To date, the CDC recommends the Pfizer vaccine for both the 5-11 age and 12 to 17 cohort while not recommending Moderna. Under 4 is the last market segment the vaccine makers vie for, and if the FDA authorizes, then Pfizer would own that market. A potential battle emerges over this cohort (aged 4-11) as a growing movement concerned for the safety associated with the vaccines, especially the mRNA-based products, gains momentum to question the mass vaccination on this young population. Critics argue that the original premise for mandates and the like was to control community transmission.  Given substantial waning vaccine effectiveness combined with mutating variants, critics suggest the risks of serious infection and death are too low, and the safety issues are higher than the government is letting on. 

Demand for Vaccines Wane

But demand for vaccines is flat in much of the world. In America, there is little uptick in vaccination as the “fully vaccinated” defined as receiving the two jabs of either Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna or one jab from Janssen equals 66.8% of the population while about 30.7% of the population opted for a booster dose.

Meanwhile, TrialSite, on several occasions, has chronicled a global glut of COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, especially in places like India, the world’s second-highest populated country. In places like Australia, where the death rate associated with COVID-19 has absolutely skyrocketed despite high immunization rates, the public health agencies and politicians continue to promote booster doses as the answer. TrialSite reported recently that Australian politicians in an election season essentially pretend that times are back to normal despite record numbers of cases, near-record hospitalizations, and double the deaths in the first months of 2022 than all of 2020 and 2021 combined.

Some Possible Explanations

Reuters’ Michael Erman and Manas Mishra write that vaccine producers such as Novavax and CureVac, the German mRNA-vaccine maker in partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, seek to target this booster market. Novavax still awaits FDA authorization despite the fact that much of the developed world, from Europe to Canada and Japan to the WHO, have authorized the use of the Novavax vaccine.

Meanwhile, the outlook for Janssen and AstraZeneca (Oxford) is that bright, report the Reuters journalists. According to Hartaj Singh, an analyst from Oppenheimer & Co., “It becomes a very competitive game with companies battling it out with pricing and for market share, even for vaccines that are considered to be the best, like Pfizer and Moderna.”

Interestingly, Pfizer’s CEO Albert Bourla went on the record in an interview recently that those adults that have opted to receive a COVID-19 vaccine are not likely to start accepting shots now in a recognition that the mega push for vaccine administration has come and gone.

Moderna has pegged the unfolding market as the annual shot market, targeting the following:

  • Adults 50 and above
  • People with comorbidities or other risks
  • High-risk occupations (e.g., healthcare, etc.)

According to the estimates of Stephane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, this emerging annual shot market totals 1.7 billion, representing 21% of the global population. The mRNA-based vaccines are more expensive and cumbersome to distribute and store, hence a sizeable chunk of that estimated target may opt for other vaccines such as the two recently touted by vaccine insiders at WHO including a plant-based vaccine from Canada and one from China. 

More than likely Western Europe and America will represent central markets for sales for Pfizer and Moderna who will move toward more competitive, targeted responsive strategies as large government pre-purchases are probably going to be far less. Moreover, TrialSite suggests what were cozy relationships between industry and government agencies will become less so as the various governments’ responses to the pandemic will be a hot topic, especially in democracies in current election cycles.

Key Question: A flu shot model or something else?

The Reuters writers posed an important question in the recent piece: will the likes of Pfizer and Moderna starting this fall market a tailored, redesigned vaccine targeted relevant variants of concern (e.g., Omicron, BA.2, etc.)?

Both Moderna and Pfizer executives are on the record that they are developing Omicron-targeted vaccines.

This becomes an important topic as even the mainstream media starts to become slightly critical of the pandemic response, including mRNA-based vaccine makers that never modified the vaccine product once. The vaccine authorized and approved in the United States was developed based on the original Wuhan variant of SARS-CoV-2 which didn’t seem to make it in circulation to America nor most of the world.

Revenues Decline (but still unprecedented)

2023 sales numbers, while still staggering as compared to historical precedent in the pharmaceutical industry, are nonetheless, on the decline. Reuters reports $17 billion projected for Pfizer-BioNTech (down nearly half from $34 billion) and $10 billion for Moderna as compared to $23 billion in 2022. Sales will continue to drop because enormous fortunes were generated in the winner-take-all pandemic market.

TrialSite suggests the COVID-19 pandemic response must be seriously evaluated due to levels of bias, political interference, and potentially corruption at an unprecedented level. Should the political conditions change in the United States for example, leading to serious inquiries, the pandemic winners may incur unexpected costs.

After 16 months of major COVID-19 immunization initiatives worldwide, government appetite for COVID-19 vaccine products appears to morph into a more focused, market-based, targeted booster series, a change that vaccine producers are now adjusting to accommodate. With a confluence of forces, from COVID-19 vaccine gluts to increasing numbers of producers to leeriness of waning effectiveness due to highly transmissible variants, the market drivers, heavily driven by government, give way to an unfolding new reality.

In the United States, like in many other nations, including those aligned with the World Health Organization (WHO), centered responses to COVID-19 emphasized production and distribution of a maximum number of vaccines with targets of achieving at least 70% vaccination. That effort, again coordinated to some degree by groups such as WHO, led to the inoculation of about 4.68 billion people (according to Our World in Data) worldwide, or neatly 60% of humanity, representing an unprecedented pandemic response.

Biden’s America, Supreme Court Justices Threatened by Democrat Activists, Fences Installed to Prevent Insurrection, White House Silent


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 5, 2022 | Sundance

This is the state of our union.  These are the real Domestic Violent Extremists (DVE’s).

Democrat activists have listed the names and home addresses of conservative Supreme Court justices in an effort to organize violence against the court.  A taller perimeter fence was installed around the Supreme Court building last night to stop any violent efforts by democrat activists, and personal security measures have been increased for the justices.

(Daily Mail) – An activist group called ‘Ruth Sent Us’ has published the supposed addresses of Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thmas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts and are planning a ‘walk-by’ of their homes next Wednesday, May 11.

‘Our 6-3 extremist Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that hurt women, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ and immigrant rights,’ the group’s website reads. ‘We must rise up to force accountability using a diversity of tactics.’ (read more)

Unfortunately, and in keeping with all prior support precedent for Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, Antifa and other violent groups, the installed president and radical administration officials have aligned themselves with the violent confrontation.  The White House has refused to speak out against the intimidation effort and/or condemn the violence.

This is the state of our union with Democrats attacking the institutions of government.

The security officials for Justice Alito cancelled plans for him to participate in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals judicial conference starting on Thursday, as the associate justice is tasked with reviewing emergency appeals from the 5th Circuit. It is unclear if Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas, who were slated to get remarks at a similar conference for the 11th Circuit on Thursday and Friday, will still appear.

Rand Paul Questions DHS Secretary About Disinformation, Mayorkas Accidentally Gives Game Away “Should I Sit Back and Take That?”


Posted originally on the conservative house on May 4, 2022 | Sundance

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul questioned DHS Secretary Mayorkas about what constitutes disinformation and what will the DHS Disinformation Bureau do about it?  {Direct Rumble Link}

After multiple back and forth dodges by the DHS Secretary, at 06:40 Mayorkas slips a little and gives an example using the COVID vaccination program. After giving the example of a hypothetical claim of the vaccine containing fentanyl, Mayorkas asks “should I sit back and accept that,” meaning do nothing about it.

Right there Mayorkas gives away the intent and purpose of the Ministry of Truth.  Identify disinformation, then communicate with the networked partnership of social media companies, and then target whoever made the claim.  The government then controls the speech.  The government then becomes the arbiter of what is true and/or false.  The problem as Rand Paul is drilling down, is that ultimately government will approve speech.  WATCH:

There is no such thing as “disinformation.”  There is information the government approves of, and information that is averse to the interest of government.  That’s the bottom line and the end of this regulatory slippery slope discussion.

Example: Ask the DHS Disinformation Governance Board if a fetus is a baby human?

Joe Biden, “This MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history”


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 4, 2022 

The democrat narrative for 2022 is from the exact same playbook used against the Tea Party in 2011/2012.  Weaponizing the J6 committee to frame the construct this year, democrats are back to the playbook of calling their opposition “extremists.”

After resounding MAGA candidates won all the contested primary elections yesterday, Joe Biden takes to the microphones today and says:

…”this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history.”

WATCH (prompted):

[Transcript of Remarks]

2000 Mules – Another Banned Movie?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted May 4, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Liawatha Big Mad


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 4, 2022 | Sundance 

Senator Liawatha is big mad because she might not be able to kill babies any longer. WATCH:

.

There is something very disturbing about people who cannot control their physical, mental or emotional state.  Expressing rage because the abortion issue could potentially be reversed back to the states for rules and restrictions on the murder of babies reflects a particular instability.

Musk Goes Full Galt, Challenges Woke Activists Who Pressure Corporations with Sunlight


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 3, 2022 | Sundance 

CTH has been watching carefully for several weeks; looking, reading and observing the expressed priorities of Elon Musk in an effort to evaluate his free speech intents and purposes.  After careful and cautious consideration, I can now say Elon Musk is the closest thing to John Galt in our lifetime.

Today, Mr. Musk drew attention to one of the central cancers. Musk is highlighting the strategy leftists use to target corporations, demand they withdraw advertising dollars, and force them into compliance against any unapproved platform designated by the woke mob.

[CNN Story Here – MMfA Letter Here – Elon Musk Tweet Link Here]

David Brock’s Media Matters for America (MMFA) has organized an activist campaign against companies who advertise on Twitter. [SEE LETTER HERE]  Their intent is to assemble all of the radical activist groups, directly target any company who would advertise on Twitter and by extension force woke compliance by the social media platform Musk is purchasing.

The letter urges advertisers to make their next ad deals with Twitter contingent on changes to platform policy under Mr Musk.  However, Musk is pushing back against the effort by asking, “who funds these organizations that want to control your access to information? Let’s investigate.” He then goes on to tweet, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

(CNN) – Some of the nation’s biggest brands including Coca-Cola (CCEP), Disney (DIS) and Kraft (KHC) are facing calls to boycott Twitter if the company’s soon-to-be owner, billionaire Elon Musk, rolls back content moderation policies limiting hate speech and election misinformation.

In a letter sent to brands Tuesday ahead of the 2022 NewFronts digital advertising conference, more than two dozen civil society groups said marketers should secure commitments from Twitter to retain its most critical policies, including on civic integrity and hateful conduct, and threaten to withdraw funding if Twitter does not comply.

“As top advertisers on Twitter (TWTR), your brand risks association with a platform amplifying hate, extremism, health misinformation, and conspiracy theorists,” the letter said, adding: “Your ad dollars can either fund Musk’s vanity project or hold him to account.” (read more)

Musk has advocated for increased transparency on the mechanisms and algorithms within the Twitter platform, in order to gain public trust.  Everyone knows that Twitter management manipulates the platform based on ideology.  Even the original creator of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, has admitted the political preferences within the company are directly connected to the control mechanisms that have been built within it.

One of the key tell-tale sentences in the MMFA led letter is this:

“Consider the implications of full-scale public visibility into Twitter’s algorithm”..

The left-wing organizations and activist groups are worried about what public disclosure of the Twitter censorship and control mechanisms might mean. As a result of their fear, their strategy is to ask advertising corporations to pressure Elon Musk into keeping the background engineering hidden from review.  There is no incentive for Musk to do that as a private company, except this type of blackmail effort.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.  MMfA and their allies fear a free, open and uncontrolled information platform; and they fear that people will discover just how much has been done to tilt the discussion in their favor by controlling and silencing their opposition.

I can appreciate that Musk is taking the issues of free communication seriously. He is dealing with challenges of incredible consequence, he yet he carries on that battle with a light spirit and does not take himself seriously.  That is a remarkably valuable skillset.

If the full purchase deal can be finalized, Musk will take the company private. However, Musk has also reportedly shared that after a few years of private ownership, he would be willing to make the company a public offering again. Per the Wall Street Journal, “Mr. Musk said he plans to stage an initial public offering of Twitter in as little as three years of buying it, according to people familiar with the matter. The deal is expected to close later this year, subject to conditions including the approval of Twitter shareholders and regulators, the company has said.

[READ THE LETTER HERE]

Sunday Talks, Samantha Power Notes Scarce Food Presents Opportunity to Enhance Larger Goals of Climate Change and Other Weird Stuff


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 1, 2022 | sundance 

If you are not familiar with Cass Sunstein’s wife, Samantha Power, I would suggest spending some time on any search feature of the internet.  Power is the archetype ideological traveler within the academic peer group of the Obama team.  Former U.N. Ambassador Power is the person who takes the ideological theory [example Responsibility to Protect (R2P)], and then constructs the mechanisms and network to turn theory into applicable policy.

Samantha put down the filtered Brazilian rainwater coffee this morning and gave a few interviews, that are rather telling of what is going on in the background of the Biden administration.  Discussing Ukraine {Direct Rumble Link} Power let it slip that the absence of industrial fertilizer is a good thing because in the spirit of “never letting a crisis go to waste,” the transition of food growing to more “sustainable farming” through organic fertilizer is a key transition for the bigger picture issue of Climate Change.  WATCH:

Samantha is the prototype backpack, academic, Birkenstock traveler who all model U.N. types view as the person to emulate.  She’s a sustainable algae  cake eater, who bridges the space between the Kennedy Center ballroom crowd and the cross-legged, sitting on the grass, NYU commons activists.

A very dangerous mind, with no practical skills beyond very dangerous ideological theory.

The 2011/2012 crisis in Libya represents an outcome of Power’s R2P theory applied.  Create equitable freedom for the animals by killing the Zookeeper and removing the cages.  The tree dwelling primates are fine, at first, until the big cats run out of deer to eat.  The only way to prevent primate slaughter is to supplement and satiate the cats with alternative meat.  The primates are now forever dependent on foreign intervention for survival…. and yet the free range believing ideologues take no responsibility for the natural mess and absence of ruminants.

Samantha Power, now in charge of USAID (U.S. Aid and International Development) and a host of Non-Governmental Agencies (NGO’s) who rely on USAID, turns her meddling focus from the middle-east toward the crisis in Ukraine.

Notice how she says weird shit like, [02:53] “what we do Margaret, is to work though our implementing partners. So, er, we have, um, folks who are indirectly on the ground, but who are receiving U.S. taxpayer resources in order to provide everything from flak jackets and helmets, again to those safehouses etc.”

How does a person become “indirectly on the ground” in Ukraine, in order to receive funds?

Oh wait, that’s what we need the U.S. government information, disinformation and language approval bureau to figure out before we can start to talk about it…. or something.  Seriously, watch this interview carefully and spot the bureaucratic globbledyspeech.  WATCH:

.