(1) Naomi Wolf's Mistake - omits role of Lenin & Trotsky in Red Terror(2) Isaac Steinberg describes the start of the Red Terror on December 1, 1917(3) Indian strain of Covid-19(4) India to add Sputnik V to AstraZeneca & Bharat Biotech vaccines(5) Vaccine Makers unblind their Trials(6) An Ivermectin prescription for Covid-19, from Brazil(7) America's Frontline Doctors statement on Ivermectin(8) America's Frontline Doctors treatment protocols for Covid-19(9) Dr Christiane Northrup joins the 'Disinformation Dozen'(10) Covid investigative commission is like that for 9/11, Fox guarding the Henhouse(1) Naomi Wolf's Mistake - omits role of Lenin & Trotsky in Red Terror- by Peter Myers, April 28, 2021Whilst Naomi Wolf's alliance with Dr Mercola, to forestall the current descent into tyranny, is welcome, her pitch focuses on threats fropm the Right rather than the Left.George Orwell depicted the Tryanny of the future (our time) as a Left-wing one. He thought it would be Stalinist, but it's Trotskyoid instead. Political Correctness emanates from Trotskyist groups which, whilst not formally in power, form an avant-garde leading the Democrats & Labor on.Thus in Naoimi Wolf's Ten Steps to Tyranny<https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/04/25/naomi-wolf-the-end-of-america.aspx>she highlights Mussolini and Hitler as precedents but fails to mention Lenin and Trotsky. Yet it was the Red Terror which prompted both Mussolini and Hitler to counter it with their own brands.On August 30, 1918, Moisei Uritski, chief of the Petrograd Cheka, was assassinated, and Lenin was wounded in an assassination attempt. In response, "the Cheka unleashed its violence on a wide scale, the so-called Red Terror, which continued until 1920". <https://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/russia/red-terror.htm>The US Consul at Moscow reported to the State Dept in a telegram dated September 3, 1918.,"Since May the so-called Extraordinary Commission against Counter-Revolution has conducted an openly avowed campaign of terror. Thousands of persons have been summarily shot without even the form of trial."<https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1918Russiav01/d625>Later, Stalin used the assassination of Kirov to launch the Purges of the 1930s.Isaac Steinberg was Minister (Commissar) for Justice  in the early Bolshevik Government of 1917-8, during the few months when the Left SRs were part of the Government.. He was not a Bolshevik, but a Left SR (member of the Left Social-Revolutionary Party), which was populist i.e. peasant-oriented, and anarchist (libertarian).Steinberg tried to stem the descent into tyranny which he saw all around him."On February 18, 1918, he released Vladimir Burtsev from prison. In March–April 1918, Steinberg confronted Felix Dzerzhinsky." <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Steinberg>In spring 1918 he saved Prince George Lvov from being executed by the Ural Bolsheviks. He also opposed the Kronstadt Massacre.In 1953 he published a book The Workshop Of The Revolution, in which he documented the Red Terror and his efforts to stop it:<https://www.marxists.org/archive/steinberg/1953/workshop/index.htm>(2) Isaac Steinberg describes the start of the Red Terror on December 1, 1917In Chapter 4, Steinberg describes a meeting of  the Soviet Central Executive Committee held on December 1, 1917, where a motion to arrest opponents without trial (Due Process of Law) was carried. Note that this was well before White resistance had arisen. The arrests led to punishment, i.e. execution. Note the up-front role of Trotsky and Lenin in advocating Terror and summary execution:https://www.marxists.org/archive/steinberg/1953/workshop/ch04.htmQUOTE From the stage up front the meeting was conducted by its self-assured, energetic chairman, the Bolshevik Jacob Swerdlov. Behind him on the rostrum I recognized several men whose faces had become familiar in recent months. One of them, small, broad-shouldered and almost entirely bald, sat unobtrusively in the back, only his eyes blinking slyly. That was Lenin. Next to him sat Trotsky-tall, thin, thick black hair tousled, eyes sharp and intense. The chairman called on me. (I had just arrived in Petrograd from Ufa, a city in the Ural Mountains, where I had been elected a member of the Constituent Assembly.)We were debating a Government-sponsored decree against the Kadets. Everybody knew that the Russian liberal party, the Kadets, which had taken part in the struggle against czarism, had become an outspoken opponent of the October Revolution. They were openly in league with the leaders of the old Russian Army. Therefore, suddenly, on November 28, the Government had issued a harsh decree according to which all leaders of the Kadets were proclaimed "enemies of the people" and were to be arrested at once.We of the Left Social-Revolutionaries saw in this order an expression of political hysteria unjustified by the general situation. An order for summary mass arrests meant-in the agitation and confusion of revolutionary days-that anyone in the country could persecute, arrest and harm Kadets not for crimes specifically charged against them, but simply because they were Kadets. Here is the full text of the order:DECREE CONCERNING THE ARREST OF THE LEADERS OF THE CIVIL WAR AGAINST THE REVOLUTION."Members of the governing body of the Party of the Kadets are to be arrested as enemies of the people and brought to trial before the revolutionary tribunal. Local soviets are duty- bound to keep the party of the Kadets under special surveillance because of its links to the civil war against the revolution. This decree comes into force at once."Petrograd, November 28, 1917 10:30 p.m.The decree was signed by Lenin, Trotsky, Avilov, Menzinsky, Djugashvili-Stalin, Dybenko and others.Therefore on the night of December 1, the Government came to the Soviet parliament for ratification of the decree. The party of the Left Social-Revolutionaries decided, however, to protest both against the dangerous content and the fact that the order had been issued behind the back of the Soviet Executive. Our party, which viewed this as a first step in the direction of irresponsible, legalized terrorism, had instructed me to speak in its behalf at the meeting in the Smolny Institute and to express our views on revolutionary violence and the limits of its application.To the deputies, then, when the chairman called upon me, I said that a victorious revolution had no need to condemn its opponents in summary judgment. We, the victors, were strong enough to apply true justice. If an individual Kadet should be accused of conspiracy against the people, let him personally be brought to open trial, at which time we should have to provide proof and he should have the right to defense. But, I maintained, we could not place an entire group-unspecified anonymous groups of people-outside the pale of human law. We dared not simply and blindly repeat the mistakes of the French Revolution, for after all, we had outgrown it by one hundred and twenty-five years. Withdraw legal protection from the liberals today, and the same is likely to happen to other political groups tomorrow. It is easy to start the terror, but impossible to stop it.It was very obvious: a large part of those assembled listened attentively to these arguments. I remember how Trotsky rose to reply. Stretched to his full height he stood there on the stage, devouring the audience with his eyes. Pride, power, fury, contempt were in those eyes. He seemed personally insulted."There is not the slightest doubt," he intoned icily, "that the party of the Kadets is organizing the counter-revolution. Everyone of its leaders must be made harmless. They complain-and sentimental socialists join them in the complaint-at being thrown into jail! Let them instead be grateful. In past revolutions their kind was dealt with differently. They would have been taken to the Palace Square and there made ... a head shorter!" Trotsky threw out the last phrase with vicious fervor-and waited for the storm of applause. Was he not speaking in the name of the people, and for their glory? But the expected did not occur, and the silence spoke louder than any applause. I had the firm impression that there was a murmur of dissent against his bloodthirsty phrases from these simple people, fresh from the battlefields of the revolution. They neither liked nor trusted the bourgeois Kadets, but they disliked no less the vulgarity of their own leader.Then Trotsky lit into us, who "defended the Kadets.""We stand ready," he thundered, "to march forward together with the comrades of the Left Social-Revolutionaries, but what can we do if every time, at every new step in the struggle, they lag behind? We must keep dragging them to the revolution by a rope ... I am convinced that the proletariat will not be repelled by the measures we are adopting."Uttering the last words like a triumphant clarion call, Trotsky stepped back and sat down in back of the chairman. Lenin nodded with satisfaction. Then he, too, made a short speech in which he brushed aside the moral and legal aspects of the issue. Instead, he pounded away at the political danger of the Kadets:"It is senseless even to discuss the question of legality. The Kadets, brandishing the slogans of democracy, actually instigated the real civil war. Very well then: investigate these our charges against them and see if you can disprove that the Kadet Party constitutes the general staff of the civil war which is already drenching the country in blood. Comrade Steinberg made no attempt to disprove that. . . . Yes, indeed, the great French Revolution never acted as the Left Social-Revolutionaries bid us do: it put the hostile parties outside the law."There were several other speakers, and then the vote. Only representatives of factories and garrisons had the right to vote. The Bolshevik-sponsored decree was carried by 150 against 98 votes. The Bolshevik delegates applauded, and the terroristic conscience of their leaders was calmed.The Left Social-Revolutionaries, however, were not despondent, for on that night they had brought "terror" into open debate for the first time. It was important for Soviet delegates to hear more than one voice of the revolution. It was no less significant that almost one hundred representatives of the people-close to half the delegates-had voted for the voice of their humane conscience.The Bolsheviks slavishly imitated speech and gesture of the French Jacobins, just as the Jacobins in turn had imitated the heroes of ancient Rome. But they forgot that the French Revolution itself was drowned in bloody defeat precisely because of its terrorism.ENDQUOTE(3) Indian strain of Covid-19https://tass.com/society/128380928 APR, 2021Vector center hopes to obtain Indian strain of the novel coronavirus soonThe strain will take about two months to examine, the center told TASSMOSCOW, April 27. /TASS/. The State Scientific Center of Virology and Biotechnology "Vector," located in Novosibirsk, hopes to obtain a sample of the Indian strain of the novel coronavirus soon. The strain will take about two months to examine, the center told TASS."The Vector center is one of the World Health Organization's 26 reference laboratories for COVID-19. We hope to obtain a sample of the Indian strain of the virus from our foreign counterparts soon. Comprehensive examination of the new strain's properties, including the effectiveness of the vaccine against it, will take about two months," the news release runs.Vector believes that theoretically its vaccine EpiVacCorona should be as affective against the Indian strain as it is in relation to the reference strain.At the end of March, India's Health Ministry said a new variety of the coronavirus with mutations E484Q and L452R in the S protein had been identified. The existence of both mutations, which were earlier identified in other variants of the virus around the world, looks particularly alarming. These mutations are found in about 15%-20% samples and are absent from the British, South African and Brazilian strains.(4) India to add Sputnik V to AstraZeneca & Bharat Biotech vaccineshttps://tass.com/world/128346327 APR, 17:42Indian doctors hope to get access to Sputnik V vaccine soon, expert saysThe Drug Controller General of India approved the use of the Russian vaccine on April 12NEW DELHI, April 27. /TASS/. Indian doctors are looking forward to getting access to Russia's Sputnik V vaccine in the near future, Senior Director of the Center for Chest and Respiratory Diseases at New Delhi's Super Specialty Hospital Dr. Sandeep Nayar told TASS on Tuesday."The Sputnik vaccine has a very good study and very good backup, so I'm hoping that we have that vaccine too as early as possible," he pointed out.The Drug Controller General of India approved the use of the Russian vaccine on April 12. Head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund Kirill Dmitriev said on Monday that India would receive the first Sputnik V batch on May 1.India is currently using two coronavirus vaccines - Covishield, developed by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford, and Covaxin made by India's Bharat Biotech.(5) Vaccine Makers unblind their TrialsThe FDA insisted that their chosen vaccines were superior to alternative medicines for Covid, because of their double-blind trials. But now they have unblinded those trials - Peter M.https://williambowles.info/2021/04/21/vaccine-makers-destroy-covid-vaccine-safety-studies/Vaccine Makers Destroy Covid Vaccine Safety StudiesApril 21, 2021By Dr. Joseph MercolaMakers of COVID-19 vaccines are now destroying long-term safety studies by unblinding their trials and giving the control groups the active vaccine, claiming it is "unethical" to withhold an effective vaccine.In so doing, they make it virtually impossible to assess any long-term safety and effectiveness, and the true benefit versus cost.It's ironic, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community is more important than an individual's risk of harm. Yet vaccine manufacturers are saying that participants in the control groups are harmed by not getting the vaccine, and saving the individual is more important than securing the data needed to make public health decisions.Getting the active vaccine comes with risk, not merely benefit. This is particularly true for the novel mRNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines.As of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths. Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. The youngest person to die was 18 years old. *While reports of side effects from COVID-19 gene therapies, including life-threatening effects and deaths, continue to climb at breakneck speed,1 a one-sided narrative of safety and effectiveness permeates mainstream media and medical news.These "vaccines" are so safe and so effective, according to this narrative, that keeping control groups intact for long-term study and comparison of outcomes is now being derided as "unethical," despite the fact that there is absolutely no non-fraudulent data to support their perverse assertions. Truly, what we're watching is the active destruction of basic medical science in a surreal dystopian nightmare.VACCINE MAKERS TO DITCH CONTROL GROUPSConsider this report in JAMA by Rita Rubin, senior writer for JAMA medical news and perspectives, for example.2 According to Rubin, the launch of "two highly efficacious" COVID-19 vaccines has "spurred debate about the ethics, let alone the feasibility, of continuing or launching blinded, placebo-controlled trials …"Rubin recounts how Moderna representatives told a Food and Drug Administration advisory panel that rather than letting thousands of vaccine doses to go to waste, they planned to offer them to trial participants who had received placebo.Pfizer representatives made a similar announcement to the advisory panel. According to a news analysis published in The BMJ,3 the FDA and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are both onboard with this plan, as is the World Health Organization.4In the JAMA report by Rubin, Moncref Slaoui, Ph.D., chief scientific adviser for Operation Warp Speed, is quoted saying he thinks "it's very important that we unblind the trial at once and offer the placebo group vaccines" because trial participants "should be rewarded" for their participation.All of these statements violate the very basics of what a safety trial needs, which is a control group against which you can compare the effects of the drug or vaccine in question over the long term. I find it inconceivable that unblinding is even a consideration at this point, seeing how the core studies have not even concluded yet. The only purpose of this unblinding is to conceal the fraud that these vaccines are safe.None of the COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market are actually licensed. They only have emergency use authorization — which, incidentally, also forbids them from being mandated, although this is being widely and conveniently ignored — as trials are still ongoing.At the earliest, they may be licensed two years from now, at the completion of the follow-up studies.5 This is why those in the military are allowed to refuse it, and refuse they have. Among Marines, the refusal rate is nearly 40%.6So, before the initial studies are even completed, vaccine makers and regulatory agencies are now deciding to forgo long-term safety evaluations altogether by giving placebo recipients the real McCoy, and so-called bioethicists are actually supporting this madness. As reported in The BMJ:7"Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded."HYPOCRISY ABOUNDSIt's ironic in the extreme, because vaccine mandates are being justified on the premise that the benefit to the community supersedes the risk of individual harm. In other words, it's OK if some people are harmed by the vaccine because the overall benefit to society is more important.Yet here they're saying that participants in the control groups are being harmed by not getting the vaccine, so therefore vaccine makers have an obligation to give it to them before the long-term studies are completed. This is the complete opposite argument used for mandatory vaccination.If we are to accept the "greater good" justification for vaccination, then people who agree to participate in a study, and end up getting a placebo, need to roll the dice and potentially sacrifice their health "for the greater good." Here, the greater good is the study itself, the results of which are of crucial importance for public health decisions.Without this data, we will never know whether the vaccines work in the long term and/or what their side effects are. If an individual in the control group gets COVID-19, then that's the price of scientific participation for the greater good of society, just as when a vaccinated person gets harmed, that's considered an acceptable price for creating vaccine-induced herd immunity.Put another way, when it comes to mandating vaccines, harm to the individual is acceptable, but when it comes to doing proper safety studies, all of a sudden, harm to the individual is not acceptable, and protecting the controls is more important than protecting the integrity of the research. The fact that they're this inconsistent in their "ethics" could be viewed as proof positive that public health isn't even a remote concern.SCIENTIFIC ETHICS ARE ERODINGApparently, concern about risk to the individual only matters when vaccine makers have everything to gain. By eliminating control groups, we'll have no way of really proving the harm that these "vaccines" might impart over time, as all participants will be in the same proverbial boat.I remain confident that we'll continue to see many more health problems and deaths develop in time, but without control groups, these trends can more easily be written off as "normal" and/or blamed on something else. As noted by Dr. Steven Goodman, associate dean of clinical and translational research at Stanford University, who is quoted in Rubin's JAMA article:8"By unblinding trial participants, 'you lose a valid comparison group,' Goodman said. 'There will be this sense, and it will be sort of true, that the study is over.' Unlike, say, a highly effective cancer drug, 'the vaccine is not literally a life-and-death issue today and tomorrow' for most trial participants, Goodman said.So, he noted, those running COVID-19 vaccine trials shouldn't feel obligated to unblind participants and vaccinate placebo recipients right away. Doing so implies 'you can just blow up the trial' on the basis of promising preliminary results, establishing 'an ethical model for future trials that we maybe don't want to set,' Goodman said."Indeed, this strategy will set a dangerous precedent that will probably lead to vaccine and drug studies being conducted without control groups in the future, which could spell the end of medical science as we know it. At bare minimum, future variations of the current COVID-19 vaccine trials are likely to be conducted without control groups.TRIAL PARTICIPANTS TOLD NOT TO UNBLIND THEMSELVESGoodman is also quoted in another article,9 this one in MedPage Today, discussing the problems with trial participants unblinding themselves by taking an antibody test:"'There is no good scientific reason for someone to do this,' he told MedPage Today. 'I can understand why they want that information, but it can only serve to diminish the value of the trial. Getting tested is not right unless there is a pressing need for unblinding for health reasons.'"Here, yet another hypocritical irony arises, as the reason they don't want trial participants to unblind themselves is because if they know they got the vaccine, they're statistically more likely to take more risks that might expose them to the virus.This, then, will skew the results and "could make the vaccine look less effective than it is," Dr. Elizabeth McNally of Northwestern University explained to MedPage Today.10 So, whether vaccine scientists agree with unblinding or not, unblinding really only has to do with whether it will skew results in their favor.Trial participants unblinding themselves might make the vaccine appear less effective if they alter their behavior as a consequence, whereas vaccine makers unblinding the entire control group will allow them to hide side effects, even if participants alter their behavior. ...1, 11, 16 The Defender April 9, 20212, 8 JAMA 2021;325(10):918-9213, 5, 7 The BMJ 2020;371:m4954 Nature Medicine March 16, 20216 MSN April 11, 20219, 10 MedPage Today March 11, 2021 (Archived)(6) An Ivermectin prescription for Covid-19, from BrazilFrom: juan galindesSubject: Re: Ivermectin dosageGood morning Peter. The first were a mother and her daughter living in a two story home. As you may check in the prescription attached, dated 04/05/21 (May,04th), a physician diagnosed COVID acting wisely recommending the use of IVERMECTIN and Azitromicin compounded with Vitamins (D and C+Zinc). SUS means Sistema Ünico de Saúde, the brazilian national health care system.There were several brazilian pioneers in the use of Ivermectin i.e. Dr. Albert Dickson:https://www.instagram.com/dralbertdickson/?hl=enHope the information will be helpful.With regards.From: juan galindesSubject: Re: Ivermectin dosageGood morning, Peter is my pleasure to be helpful:C vitamin 1 (one) gram with Zinc, 1 (one) tablet or pill 2 (two) times a day during breakfast and dinner during 10 (ten) days.D Vitamin 7000IU (D3), 1 (one) tablet or pill during a meal during 10 (ten) days.https://www.chemistwarehouse.com.au/buy/84325/ostevit-d-vitamin-d3-7000iu-1-a-week-30-capsulesAzithromycin 500 mg, 1 (one) tablet or pill once a day during 5 (five) dayshttps://www.healthdirect.gov.au/medicines/brand/amt,3528011000036100/zithromaxIvermectin 6 mg, 3 (three) tablets or pills at once (just one day)Percof (sirup), cough suppressant, active substance: Levodropropizine, 10 (ten) ml every 8 hours maximum.https://www.drugs.com/international/levodropropizine.htmlDipirona (metamizole) 1 (one) gram, 1 (one) tablet or pill every 6 (six) hours. Painkiller that may be forbidden in Australia, please check.Please double check regulations, safety and availability in Australia and abroad.(7) America's Frontline Doctors statement on Ivermectinhttps://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/ivermectinWe at AFLDS have known for many months that Ivermectin is a safe and effective treatment for COVID- 19. To preempt unlawful restrictions by the medical and pharmaceutical boards as we witnessed with our endorsement of HCQ, we did not discuss it publicly. While there are more studies showing that HCQ is superior to Ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19, it remains up to your physician to help you make the best decision. ==AFD on Ivermectin As Early Treatment For Covidhttps://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/action-alerts/expanding-use-of-ivermectin-as-early-treatment-forcovidEXPANDING USE OF IVERMECTIN AS EARLY TREATMENT FOR COVIDFebruary 10, 2021An AFLDS Issue Brief for Patients, Policymakers and PhysiciansSTATEMENT OF POSITIONOne of the greatest tragedies as well as most significant errors made by the government in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been the repeated and intentional effort to limit the use of preventative and prophylactic medications to help reduce the impact of the virus. Uneven COVID-19 vaccine distribution and administration, and justifiable vaccine skepticism due to its unprecedented speed, provides additional impetus for employing safe repurposed anti-infective therapies that have been time-tested and are widely available. One such therapy is the antiparasitic drug Ivermectin, a member of the World Health Organization's "Model List of Essential Medicines."America's Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) has been recommending Ivermectin as a safe and effective COVID-19 therapy for many months. We do not suggest that Ivermectin is a cure for COVID-19 or can absolutely prevent an individual from contracting the virus. However, in study after study, Ivermectin has been associated with improved health outcomes in both COVID-symptomatic patients and those using the drug as a preventive therapy. AFLDS supports the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approving Ivermectin and other early treatments for "off-label" or repurposed use to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.We strongly condemn the ongoing attempts by Big Tech as well as elements in the mainstream media and political establishment to limit access to information about Ivermectin's benefits. We support efforts to provide unfiltered and uncensored information to patients and physicians so that Americans can make informed decisions about their healthcare needs.IVERMECTIN'S VIABILITY AS COVID THERAPYMany studies have consistently attested to the viability of Ivermectin's use in treating COVID-infected patients. There is parallel evidence to also recommend the drug's use as a preventative. For example, Dr. Pierre Kory, in testimony before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on December 8, 2020, pointed to positive findings of an October 2020 clinical study in Argentina which tested the effectiveness of Ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. The randomized clinical trial (RCT) found that Ivermectin inhibits replication of SARS-CoV-2, the strain of coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Eight-hundred healthcare workers were administered Ivermectin as a preventative medication and none contracted SARS-CoV-2.Among the additional 400 healthcare workers that were not treated with Ivermectin, 237 individuals, or 58% of the group, were infected with the virus. "These are statistically significant, large magnitude results if you take ivermectin. It is proving to be a wonder drug and it is critical for its use in this disease," Dr. Kory said of the study.Moreover, in the 19 randomized control trials published to date, Ivermectin use resulted in positive effects, including decreased time of virus shedding, length of hospital stays, as well as lower mortality. Among all 37 published studies using Ivermectin either as early treatment or prophylaxis, 100% reported positive results, with prophylaxis showing 90% improvement in the experimental groups. "Prophylaxis" refers to taking a regular regimen of medication before becoming sick.Even in a recent limited study published in The Lancet, researchers found "a reduction in the self-reported anosmia/hyposmia and a (non-statistically significant) tendency to lower viral loads and lower IgG titers which presumably reflect milder disease" and "The positive signal found in this pilot together with emerging evidence from animal models and other clinical trials warrants the conduction of larger trials using ivermectin for the early treatment of COVID-19."MEDICAL CANCEL CULTURE THREATENS HEALTH OUTCOMES FOR MILLIONSAFLDS is troubled by the collusion between public and private interests from the scientific-tech-medical establishment to censor information concerning the viability of Ivermectin as a safe and effective COVID treatment. This medical cancel culture, in which politically influential segments of our society silence their critics using legally dubious means, erodes basic trust in our institutions and deprives everyday citizens of the information they need to form decisions about public questions.A recent decision on the part of YouTube to remove two videos of expert testimony before the US Senate is part of a disturbing trend in which Big Tech firms act as commissars to suppress information they alone interpret as harmful to the public interest. This is wrong, and AFLDS condemns in the strongest terms censorship of Ivermectin and other early-treatment information. Facebook has just rolled out new policy terms for its users related to the pandemic and experimental COVID vaccines, stating that "We will begin enforcing this policy immediately, with a particular focus on Pages, groups and accounts that violate these rules, and we'll continue to expand our enforcement over the coming weeks. Groups, Pages and accounts on Facebook and Instagram that repeatedly share these debunked claims may be removed altogether." These actions and others reducing access to timely medical information ought to immediately be reversed.CONCLUSIONAFLDS supports making Ivermectin available to a greater share of patients and physicians as an early treatment and/or prophylaxis. We urge the FDA, CDC, and policymakers to approve the drug nationwide for use against COVID-19. We also advocate additional study of the drug's efficacy for other patient cohorts, especially through RCTs, in order to test its long-term indication for hospitalized and other severely infected individuals.Given its overwhelming potential as an anti-viral therapy, information about Ivermectin – as well as data about other early-treatment candidates such as hydroxychloroquine – must remain freely accessible by the public without fear of government censorship and media reprisals. America's Frontline Doctors is dedicated to the open exchange of independent, health-related information so that patients are free to make their own treatment decisions. ==https://ivmmeta.com/Ivermectin for COVID-19: real-time meta analysis of 52 studiesCovid Analysis, Nov 26, 2020 (Version 64, Apr 26, 2021)@CovidAnalysiso98% of the 52 studies to date report positive effects (25 statistically significant in isolation). Random effects meta-analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows an 81% reduction, RR 0.19 [0.09-0.39], and prophylactic use shows 85% improvement, RR 0.15 [0.09-0.25]. Mortality results show 76% lower mortality, RR 0.24 [0.14-0.42] for all treatment delays, and 84% lower, RR 0.16 [0.04-0.63] for early treatment.o96% of the 27 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated 64% improvement, RR 0.36 [0.24-0.52].oThe probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 52 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 85 trillion (p = 0.000000000000012).oHeterogeneity arises from many factors including treatment delay, patient population, the effect measured, distribution of SARS-CoV-2 variants, ivermectin dosage, and other treatment details. There is high heterogeneity across all studies, however for ivermectin the consistency of positive results is remarkable. Heterogeneity is low when looking at specific cases, for example early treatment mortality.oAll data to reproduce this paper and the sources are in the appendix. See [Bryant, Hill, Kory, Lawrie, Nardelli] for other meta analyses, all with similar results confirming effectiveness.(8) America's Frontline Doctors treatment protocols for Covid-19https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.org/hcq/treatment-protocolsThe treatment protocols listed below outline methods for treating COVID-19. For more specific questions about your unique situation, please consult a physician.Prophylactic HCQ ProtocolDr. Simone Gold info@aflds.comThis is not medical advice. Every situation is unique, and every person must check with his or her own physician, especially if you are taking any other medication.Hydroxychloroquine 400 mg. twice a day on the first day + elemental zinc 50 mg. daily thenHydroxychloroquine 400 mg. weekly + zinc 50 mg. dailyHydroxychloroquine tablets in the USA are 200 mg. Two can be taken together at the same time or separated by hours-days, as long as a person takes 400 mg. weekly. Currently there are studies underway to see if 200 mg weekly is sufficient.This protocol is used across the world. For example, see the country of India in the White Paper (reference 19). In this example, the National Task for the COVID-19 constituted by Indian Council of Medical Research recommendations for HCQ for prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection for selected individuals.Wellness ProtocolDr. Teryn Clark @MdTerynTHIS IS NOT MEDICAL ADVICE. Every situation is unique and every person must check with his or her own physician, especially if you are taking any other medication.Age >15Quercetin 500 mg. twice daily,Zinc 50 mg daily,Vitamin D 2000 Iu daily,Melatonin 3-6 mg. nightly (exclude if <25)Age < 15Elderberry and Zinc gummiesZelenko ProtocolDr. Vladamir Zelenko @zevdrTreat patients based on clinical suspicion as soon as possible, preferable within the first 5 days of symptoms. Perform PCR testing but do not withhold treatment pending results.Risk Stratify PatientLow-risk patient-Younger than 60, no comorbidities, and no serious symptoms.High-risk patient-Older than 60, younger than 60 with comorbidities, or serious symptoms.Treatment OptionsLow-risk patientRest, oral fluids, Tylenol as neededVitamin C 1 gm once a day for 7 daysQuercetin 500 mg. twice a day for 7 daysElemental Zinc 50 mg. once a day for 7 daysClose follow up with a doctorHigh-risk patientRest, oral fluidsTylenol as neededElemental Zinc 50 mg. once a day for 7 daysHydroxychloroquine (HCQ) 200 mg twice a day for 5 to 7 daysAzithromycin 500 mg. once a day for 5 days or doxycycline 100 mg twice a day for 5 to 7 daysNote if HCQ is inaccessible then use Quercetin 500 mg. three times a day in place of HCQ. If HCQ becomes accessible, then switch to HCQ.Additional treatment options. Should be custom tailored for every patient.Ivermectin 6 mg. twice a day for 1 dayBudesonide 1 mg/2cc solution via nebulizer twice a day for 7 daysDexamethasone 6 mg. once a day for 5 to 7 daysBlood thinners (i.e. Eliquis or Xarelto)Home 02Home IV fluids(9) Dr Christiane Northrup joins the 'Disinformation Dozen'Big Pharma weaponized by the Globalists to bypass the world's legal systemshttps://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/elite-doctor-breaks-for-freedom/Doctor Breaks Ranks From The Elite For Truth And FreedomApril 24, 2021Until recently, Dr Christiane Northrup was a rock star of the Liberal media, with three New York Times Bestsellers, 10 appearances on Oprah! and numerous TV appearances on The Dr. Oz Show, Today, Rachel Ray Show, The View, 20/20 and eight PBS Specials, which raised millions of dollars for the network. She was a celebrated Feminist on the front lines of women's Mind-Body Medicine, when doing this was still OK – before the Big Pharma global coup d'état.Today, she is eviscerated on her Wikipedia page for having "embraced QAnon ideology during the COVID-19 pandemic," based on this article, which is totally laughable. "QAnon" has become the latest iteration of the term, "conspiracy theorist", used to discredit truth-telling opponents of the criminal establishment.I've seen it used against others and it was recently used against me, as if I live and breathe "QAnon" and therefore, I am garbage, so don't listen to anything I say. It looks to me like low-rent journalists are being hired to systematically deploy the "QAnon" label in hit pieces against those who question the corporatist narrative that has hijacked the planet since March, 2020. These derogatory articles are designed to appear in internet searches of the target's name.The "QAnon" trope is one of total disparagement, falsely associating those to whom it is ascribed with "extreme right wing" "white supremacist" "domestic terrorism" (despite Q promoting none of this); even PBS' very own Dr Northrup, with eight blockbuster seasons, not including re-runs is now a suspected Nazi. The patent absurdity of it beggars belief.As Dr Northrup explains here, "In 2013, I was one of Reader's Digest Most Trusted People in America, and now, in 2021, I am one of the 'Disinformation Dozen', along with Sherri [Tenpenny], those of us accused of 70% of the disinformation about vaccines on the internet – which is an astounding fall from grace, until you understand who is determining what grace is."That "who" is Big Pharma and the world's largest corporations, which have been weaponized by the Globalists to bypass the world's legal systems and to commit a litany of COVID crimes against humanity over the past 14 months, not the least of which are the so-called "vaccines".In this short video, Dr Northrup, who unlike Clif High is a physician and was a clinical assistant professor of OBGYN for 25 years corroborates Clif's report last week of miscarriages and other reproductive dysfunction in both men and women.Disturbingly, she also corroborates what Clif said about these problems being seen in non-vaccinated women working in proximity to vaccinated people, all but confirming his most serious concern, that the synthetic spike protein antibodies shed by the vaccinated could conceivably lead to the complete sterilization of the human species – including the unvaccinated.Dr Sherri Tenpenny has described the spike protein antibodies produced by the COVID injection as "Absolutely deadly." According to her, these injections and their synthetic spike proteins have so far been found to do the following, usually by Day 19 after exposure:o Attack your lung tissue and break it down.o Attack your pancreas: Cause diabetes in non-diabetics and aggravate diabetes symptoms in diabetics.o Cause adverse reactions in 27 out of 55 of the tissue types exposed to the serum.o Cause anaphylaxis, probably from the polyethylene glycol.o Inhibit your anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages, sometimes resulting in a deadly cytokine storm.o Attack your astrocytes and oligodendrocytes, which are two different kinds of brain/nerve cells; attacking by two different mechanisms, through the inner mitochondria membrane and through the neurofilament protein of the motor neurons, leading to uncontrolled seizures.o Cause debilitating fatigue by attacking your mitochondria and the intracellular antigen, GAD 65 inside of your mitochondria and;o Cause autoimmune disease in roughly 48 weeks.o Cause mutant strains of COVID, in what Dr Tenpenny describes as "A perfectly-designed kill machine."Worst of all, there is no "off" switch to stop the cells' manufacture of these spike protein antibodies, once the messenger RNA (mRNA) in the COVID shots instruct the cells to start making them. Therefore, this mRNA may not only lead to a runaway train of adverse health consequences for the vaccinated but it may also lead to the mass sterilization of the unvaccinated.During her speech at Clay Shaw's Health & Freedom conference in Tulsa, Dr Northrup warned those who wished to remain unvaccinated about the potential hazards of being exposed to the bodily fluids of those who are.In this video, Dr Northrup says, "My feeling on this is there is some kind of bioweapon; some kind of bioweapon that the body is now secreting, transmitting, as it were, as you said, Sherri, from somebody who's had the shot."Because, as we know: this is not a normal immunization. This is something that causes the body to make a synthetic protein against a SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. It is a synthetic protein that's never been seen and the body begins to produce this as a factory. It doesn't shut off."I've had people say 'Well, maybe, you know, in two weeks, this will stop.' There is no way this is going to stop, because it's made your body into a factory for a synthetic protein that's never been seen before, that theoretically can be in your saliva, urine, feces, sweat, seminal fluid, blood, flatus, maybe."And so when you're around a person, then I think this is coming out of their bodies and possibly adversely affecting the most delicate hormonal system. I mean, to get pregnant and stay pregnant is an enormously complex system and we know that that spike protein antibody cross-reacts with syncytin 1 and 2, and those are proteins absolutely essential for the placenta, for fertilization, for maintaining a pregnancy."We now have women who are miscarrying, they are unable to get pregnant, they're having heavy bleeding. We don't know why. But my feeling about this is that something is being produced by the body of a vaccinated person that is possibly adversely affecting others and it is of great concern to me."Contributed by Alaxandra Bruce(10) Covid investigative commission is like that for 9/11, Fox guarding the Henhousehttps://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/04/27/covid-commission-gates-led-cover-up.aspxComing COVID Commission Is a Gates-Led Cover-UpAnalysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact CheckedApril 27, 2021Having gone as far as he can with the World Health Organization's cover-up, Bill Gates takes another bite at the apple with his corporate-funded investigation into the origins of COVID-19 to cleverly cover up this massive conspiracy with an "official" investigation.While the so-called COVID Commission Planning Group — set up to create and support an investigative commission like that for 9/11 — is advertised as a nonpartisan effort, you really couldn't come up with a more dangerously biased set of participants.In short, individuals and organizations with some of the most egregious conflicts of interest, and everything to gain by being in charge of analyzing and writing the history of this pandemic, are leading and supporting this effort. This is a classic fox guarding the henhouse scenario.According to the Miller Center, the planning group will lay out the plans for nine separate task forces, each focused on one of the following topics, to lay "the foundation for a future commission to investigate":1The origins of SARS-CoV-2 and its preventionThreat assessment, including the creation of an international network for detection and warning, "biological intelligence" and other data collectionNational readiness and a review of the initial responseAt-risk communities and how to address gaps in public health capacities, worker safety and the responsibilities of private businessesState and local readiness, containment and mitigation, including when and how to use lockdowns, mandates and school closingsHealth care challenges surrounding patient care, including those with long-hauler syndromeDiagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines, including the regulatory environment that might benefit or stifle innovation and/or global supply chainsTelling the stories of COVID-19 victims, frontline workers and public health officials (i.e., propaganda generation)Solving data issuesPhilip Zelikow — Chief Investigator for the CabalThe chosen leader of this new planning group is Philip Zelikow, former executive director of the 9/11 Commission2 and a member of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's Global Development Program Advisory Panel.3,4 While Gates may not be a physical member of this planning group, he's certainly involved indirectly. Of that we can be virtually assured.Zelikow, a former director of the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, is also a current strategy group member of the Aspen Institute,5 a technocratic hub that has groomed and mentored executives from around the world about the subtleties of globalization.He also directed the Markle Foundation's Task Force on National Security in the Information Age,6 the focus of which has been to make information relating to potential security threats discoverable and accessible to officials without breaking civil liberty laws.7 As reported by the University of Virginia:8"The planning group hopes to prepare the way for a potential National COVID Commission set up to help America and the world learn from this pandemic and safeguard against future threats. 'This is perhaps the greatest crisis suffered by America, if not the world, since 1945,' said Zelikow … 'It is vital to take stock, in a massive way, of what happened and why.These sorts of civilizational challenges may become more common in the 21st century, and we need to learn from this crisis to strengthen our society … Scholars and journalists will do their jobs, but there is also a role for the kind of massive investigation and research effort that only a large-scale commission can provide.'"Foundations Backing the COVID CommissionAs reported by the Miller Center,9 the COVID Commission Planning Group includes more than two dozen virologists, public health personas and former government officials, and is backed by four charitable foundations — all of whom have histories revealing them to be part of the technocratic alliance that for years, in some cases decades, have been plotting and planning for the wealth redistribution and global power grab we're now experiencing. These foundations include:oSchmidt Futures,10 founded by Eric Schmidt, former CEO and executive chairman of Google and Alphabet Inc., which owns the greatest artificial intelligence (AI) team in the world.11oThe Skoll Foundation, founded by Jeff Skoll, a former eBay president, to "pursue his vision of a sustainable world" by catalyzing "transformational social change."12 It acts as a support organization to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.Skoll has funded pandemic preparedness and prevention since 2009 through the Skoll Global Threats Fund, and his movie production company Participant Media produced the movie "Contagion" and Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth."13oStand Together Foundation, which is part of the Koch Network, founded by Charles Koch. Its primary focus is criminal justice and poverty issues, and it teaches Koch's "market based management" philosophy to community leaders.14oThe Rockefeller Foundation, which in April 2020 released the white paper,15 "National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan," laying out a strategic framework clearly intended to become part of a permanent surveillance and social control structure that severely limits personal liberty and freedom of choice. I wrote about this in "Rockefeller Foundation's Plan to Track Americans."The tracking system it calls for is eerily similar to that already being used in China, where residents are required to enroll in a health condition registry. Once enrolled, they get a personal QR code, which they must then enter in order to gain access to grocery stores and other facilities.16 The plan also demands access to other medical data.Operation LockstepThe Rockefellers, like Gates, built an empire around health and medicine despite having no medical expertise whatsoever. Their influence is rooted in money, which is spent in self-serving ways. While Rockefeller and Gates are both known as philanthropists, their donations grow their wealth, as the money they spend on "charity" ultimately ends up benefiting their own investments and/or business interests.In addition to the COVID-19 Action Plan document cited above — which doesn't even try to hide its draconian overreach and intent to permanently alter life and society as we know it — the Rockefeller Foundation also published a 2010 report17 titled "Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development," in which they laid out their "Lockstep" scenario — a coordinated global response to a lethal pandemic.The plan is to use bioterrorism to take control of the world's resources, wealth and people. It's to use coordinated pandemic response as a justification for wealth redistribution and the resetting of the global financial system.While the name and origin of the virus differs, the scenario laid out in this document matches many of the details of our present. A deadly viral pandemic. A deadly effect on economies. International mobility coming to a screeching halt, debilitating industries, tourism and global supply chains. "Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers," the document reads."In the absence of official containment protocols," the virus spread like wildfire. In this narrative, the U.S. administration's failure to place strict travel restrictions on its citizens proved to be a fatal flaw, as it allowed the virus to spread past its borders. China, on the other hand, fared particularly well due to its rapid imposition of universal quarantines of all citizens, which proved effective for curbing the spread of the virus.Many other nations where leaders "flexed their authority" and imposed severe restrictions on their citizens — "from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries of communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets" — also fared well.These and other reports spell out what the ultimate plan actually is. It's to use bioterrorism to take control of the world's resources, wealth and people. It's to use coordinated pandemic response as a justification for wealth redistribution and the resetting of the global financial system.What most fail to realize is that the wealth distribution they're talking about is not distribution from the wealthy to the poor, even though that's what they want you to believe. It's to centralize wealth at the top and eliminate private property rights and private business ownership from the lower and middle classes. The "equitable" living standards they're talking about is poverty for all but themselves. It's really crucial to begin to grasp this reality now, before it's too late.Pieces of a Global PuzzleThe Rockefeller Foundation is also a founding sponsor of The Mojaloop Foundation, set up to "promote digital payments for people outside the financial system, with support from Google and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation."18Right there we have Google, the Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation, all in one little nonprofit with a heart set on giving poor people access to digital banking using their cellphones. This is probably the three most dangerous nonprofits on the planet, as they are likely the most powerful and committed to global tyranny.All-digital banking using a centralized digital currency is a key component of the Great Reset, so this project has little to do with honest philanthropy and everything to do with making sure everyone can be swept into the digital net, which will include round-the-clock surveillance and tracking of physical location and biological data, a digital ID, along with your health data (including but not limited to vaccination status), banking and, ultimately, a social credit system.All of the pieces needed for the Great Reset are already in place; it's just a matter of seeing how all the separate pieces fit together. For example, Gavi, the vaccine alliance, set up with funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, partnered with the ID2020 Alliance to launch a digital identity program called ID2020.19Gates also funded the creation of EarthNow, a project involving 500 satellites equipped with machine learning technology to surveil the entire planet with real-time video.20 As one would expect, AI — a Google specialty — is also a key component of this global surveillance plot.COVID-19 — A Launch Pad for the Great ResetAnother key player in the COVID Commission Planning Group is the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security at the Bloomberg School of Public Health. As you may recall, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security co-hosted the pandemic preparedness simulation for a "novel coronavirus," known as Event 201, in October 2019 along with the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum.The event eerily predicted what would happen just 10 weeks later, when COVID-19 appeared. Gates and the World Economic Forum, in turn, are both partnered21 with the United Nations which, while keeping a relatively low profile, appears to be at the heart of the globalist takeover agenda.The World Economic Forum, while a private organization, works as the social and economic branch of the U.N. and is a key driving force behind modern technocracy and the Great Reset agenda. Its founder and chairman, Klaus Schwab, publicly declared the need for a global "reset" to restore order in June 2020.22Technocratic rule, which is what the Great Reset will bring about, hinges on the use of technology — in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection (which is what 5G is for) — and the digitization of industry, banking and government, which in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule (although that part is never expressly stated).Beyond pandemic preparedness and response, the justification for the implementation of the Great Reset agenda in its totality will be climate change. The Great Reset, sometimes referred to as the "build back better" plan, specifically calls for all nations to implement "green" regulations and "sustainable development goals"23,24 as part of the post-COVID recovery effort.But the end goal is far from what the typical person envisions when they hear these plans. The end goal is to turn us into serfs without rights to privacy, private ownership or anything else. In short, the pandemic is being used to destroy the local economies around the world, which will then allow the World Economic Forum to come in and "rescue" debt-ridden countries. The price for this salvation is your liberty.The Great ResetWhile the New World Order was long derided as a "conspiracy theory" that you'd have to be crazy to believe, the Great Reset, which is simply a rebranding of the same old NWO plan that has been in circulation for well over a decade, is now public fact.Many world leaders have spoken about it in an official capacity, and in June 2020, Zia Khan, senior vice president of innovation at the Rockefeller Foundation penned the article25 "Rebuilding Toward the Great Reset: Crisis, COVID-19, and the Sustainable Development Goals," reviewing the "social crisis" necessitating the world's acceptance of a new world order.The article was co-written with John McArthur, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute, which is one of several technocratic think-tanks. Keeping in mind what I've just said about what the Great Reset is really all about, and the justifications used to implement the theft of wealth and freedom, read how they posit these changes as being in your best interest ...Fortunately, we already have a strong starting point for what the world's economic, social, and environmental outcomes should be. Five years ago, in 2015, all 193 UN member states agreed on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a common set of priorities to be achieved in all countries by 2030."Another article titled "The Great Reset," written by Jimmy Chang, CFA, for the Rockefeller Capital Management blog, reads, in part:26"Regarding the post-pandemic reconstruction effort, progressives, led by the so-called Davos elites (of the World Economic Forum fame), are advocating an urgent 'Great Reset' of capitalism to ensure equality and sustainability. They also call for harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution (i.e., Big Tech) to address health and social challenges.Their vision for the future could be gleaned from a 2016 article penned by a young Danish politician with the title 'Welcome to 2030. I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy, and Life Has Never Been Better.' This title was so controversial that its posting on the World Economic Forum website was changed to a bland 'Here's how life could change in my city by the year 2030.' ...- Sources and References1, 9 Miller Center, COVID Commission Planning Group2 The Last American Vagabond September 7, 20163 Source Watch Philip Zelikow4, 6 Miller Center, Philip Zelikow5 Aspen Institute, Philip Zelikow7 Markle.org8 University of Virginia April 14, 202110 Schmidt Futures11 TechCrunch January 26, 201412 Skoll Foundation13 Forbes How the Billionaire Behind "Contagion" is working to stop this pandemic14 Influence Watch, Stand Together Foundation15 The Rockefeller Foundation, National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan — Strategic Steps to Reopen Our Workplaces and Our Communities, April 21, 2020 (PDF)16 Berggruen Institute March 6, 202017 Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development18 Techxplore.com May 6, 202019 Biometric Update September 20, 201920 Technology Review April 18, 201821 Canadian Truths, COVID-19 Bill Gates, United Nations and World Economic Forum22 Technocracy.news June 29, 202023 Canadian Post, World Economic Forum Wheel of Evil24 Intelligence.weforum.org COVID-1925 Rockefeller Foundation June 19, 202026 Rockefeller Capital Management December 1, 2020