34 Comments

Hopefully the first of many defeats for CDC, FDA, EPA moving forward.

Expand full comment

They lost but they won. They got to harvest the maximum amount of money, reward the maximum number of their pharma captors, harm/kill the maximum amount of lab rats and defrock the maximum amount of health care providers guilty of thought crimes. Other than that "we won".

It's like when you steal an election and later are found out. "Oops my bad". But the election result still stands.

There is no justice without PUNITIVE AND SUBSTANTIVE consequences and correction. By that metric there is no justice this time either. "Oops my bad", better than nothing, but does not hack it. The ruling just shows who's in charge. In fact pretty sure we don't even get an "oops my bad" apology. Just removal of some postings and a lesson on sovereign immunity.

IE "we can do what we want without consequence ... just so you know"

Always good that the pharma captured masters remind us.

As Catherine Austin Fitts is famous for saying, "crime that pays is crime that stays". Appears this crime paid very well and so next time they need to harvest some dollars and kill a bunch of us for their masters there is no incentive not to do it. Because we are in the Sovereign Immunity consequence free zone.

No different than stealing elections. NEVER a consequence and ALWAYS a huge reward to the perps and the compliant

Expand full comment

Yep. They committed the crime and got their payday. Were there any consequences? Nope. They printed cash off their money printing machines to cover their legal bills and the good guys likely ate their legal cost and blew hundreds of hours for this "win". It's 4 years post-pandemic and all the money's been made. Time for the criminals to close up shop and prepare for the next rape of civiliaztion. They set a lot of new precedents with covid to allow for a more efficient rape next time.

Expand full comment

Absolutely on the money. Each psyop looting they take copious notes to update the manuals to more efficiently rape us the next round if they did not kill you the last round. Event 201 was not run because they aren't gaming this stuff. And you gotta admit. They are pretty dam good at it. In a world where you can't get 3 old friend couples to agree on where to order equally poison burgers for take out they managed to get virtually ALL the heavyweights of western leadership to step to the podium and sing Build Back Better in unison. Now THAT'S what you call unit cohesion! It is a war on the lab rats and the leadership is marching lock step while the lab rats fight each other because they can't figure out the common enemy

Expand full comment

It is clear that The EUGENICS community is EXTREMELY well funded and that their goals are being met Incrementally. These SICK BASTARDS must be flushed out into the DAYLIGHT, dragged into the International Criminal Court and Sumarilly CONVICTED of crystal clear Crimes Against Humanity. #MEGA

Expand full comment

They got off too easy. They need to pay all the families that were impacted by their lies.

Expand full comment

Love FLCCC! Thank you for the depth of your fight!

Expand full comment

I was refused ivermectin and finally used the horsepaste, successfully. More recently, when my husband had a visit with a new care provider, he was offered more covid-19 jabs, pneumococcal vaccine, tetanus vaccine and 1 other I can not remember. I told the NP that he won’t be taking any covid-19 BIOWEAPONS or any other injections!

Expand full comment

The settlement is a small, very small, victory.

My definition of victory includes change.

Nothing has changed.

The beast will do as it wishes.

This is not even a battle victory, much less a war victory.

The beast has no arms, no legs, no head.

The beast is directed by people.

People have arms, legs, and heads.

Until people suffer they will continue to direct the beast for their malicious intentions.

The past head of Herzt is looking for job with non profit organizations.

Who, what bureaucrat has suffered from their ivermectin decisions?

Expand full comment

I don't see it as a win until those at the FDA who pushed the ridiculous lies are sent to prison for decades. Their lies resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands at a minimum.

Expand full comment

Ivermectin was banned in UK nhs and unpurchasable unless you knew people in countries where it could be bought. Google just told you it would kill you, it was for horses and this was peddled by the BiasedBritishCorporation when they did deign to mention it. THANK YOU brave medics and scientists for persevering. We must now perservere to spread the victory and un blind the blinkered.

Expand full comment

This "wonderful" decision just hid the issue so it can be repeated. I see nothing at all in the court decision that will prevent the FDA's fro0m badmouthi8ng some other cure. The phrase "Retaining a right to publish a correction" is hardly a command. Thus, this saga will be repeated, and the results will be similar (aka insanity) after much litigation making some lawyers wealthier, making the taxpayers poorer, and way too late to prevent injury and death for as yet untold numbers of people. By merely making Ivermectin disappear from the COVID section of the FDA, without further comment there is nothing to stop the media from continuing to call it by any negative terminology it chooses. Chances are if Ivermectin were a human being, the court would have demanded that a retraction be posted, an appropriate apology, suitable punishment for those in charge of the negation campaign and compensation. This decision will not stop governments or media from doing the same thing to force people to spend more money than necessary and fill their pockets.

Expand full comment

While I'm very happy about the case, the last sentence of the settlement leaves much to be desired:

"Neither this Stipulation of Dismissal nor the actions described herein shall constitute an admission or evidence of any issue of fact or law, wrongdoing, misconduct, or liability on the part of any party to this litigation."

What's to stop the FDA from hanging out to dry the doctors who prescribed ivermectin for viruses like Covid in the past or in the future? FDA could just point to that last sentence of the settlement and say, "hey, we deleted the tweet, but never said that we'd not take action against you for prescribing ivermectin."

Expand full comment

The judges bear a lot of the blame for this decision as well (and many other bad decisions). Illegal aliens that murder people get leniency and bureaucrats that murder people have their names hidden from the public.

Expand full comment

I am writing this wherever I can. CHD permanently banned me for asking the question " Why is RFK jr. shouting from the rooftops that the unborn babies of mothers who are pushed to get vaccines while pregnant are damaged and in some cases die before birth or soon afterward, but staunchly supports that same mothers right to pay an abortionist to dismember that child, burn it alive and/or decapitate it and that without anesthesia - at the very least. He is a hypocrite and a coward. Actually - much worse considering what he stands for. This one act of censorship alone shows this is all theatre.

Expand full comment

Here's a bit more ammo: Junior got about one thing right - the "vaccine" harm, but anyone who looks up his history will find some flaws that do not differentiate him from Biden. 1. He is an allegedly reformed hard drug addict, so his mind might not be all there. Junior only differs because he can manage stairs himself. 2. He hates "fossil" fuels and just about any other kind of energy that benefits mankind - a Joe clone. 3. He has demanded that CEOs of oil companies go to the ICC in the Hague and be sent up for hard time. Joe just has the real power and punishes everyone. 4. Both have law degrees. 5. Both are opportunists. 5. Family and party come ahead of country for both.

Some differences:

1. Jr. is a litigation lawyer. 2. He is an environmental lawyer. 3. He is an environmental fanatic. 4. He is a fanatic regulator (just what the world needs - more and more very expensive, counter-productive rules and regulations). 5. He claims to be a free marketer, here's some news - fanatic regulators do not make very good free marketers. 6. He is anti-nuclear power. Anything he says that appears to be to the contrary is a moderation of his previous stances that he developed when he started running for president. 7. Jr. keeps praising his uncle Ted Kennedy who left a young lady to drown at a place called Chappaquiddick while Teddy ran away and mobilized a coverup. Junior never mentions that. 8. Junior never tells us that Uncle Teddy was a pusher for wind and solar but when it came time to put wind power near his home, he became a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard).

9. Junior thinks that wind and solar are the only types of energy that people should be allowed to have. Presidential candidates are not very impressive when they tell us what they will allow us to have.

If anyone wants more look him up and read about his late first wife.

Expand full comment

Has the FLCCC already been labeled "controlled opposition"? There are certain substack authors out there who see anyone and everyone who exposes the mainstream medical madness as "controlled opposition"! It's a bit like the organized conspiracies, as Dr Vernon Coleman has pointed out, surrounding Kate's disappearance and the social media conjectures: "She's been sacrificed in a satanic ritual"; "she was abducted by reptilian aliens" blah blah blah. All designed to posit that independent journalists and independent social media are hotbeds of mental illness. This is clearly by design as its sole purpose is to push for much greater censorship, and the easiest way to do that is for TPTB to claim that totally bonkers lunatics are spreading the wildest conspiracy theories devoid of any factual basis.

Expand full comment

Controlled opposition is a real thing, but certainly not by the FLCCC. Controlled opposition is similar to false flags and is designed to confuse and weaken an opponent. I review this in a bit more detail in my Substack post - https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/telling-the-good-guys-from-the-bad.

Expand full comment

The problem with operative phrases such as "controlled opposition" and "hate speech" is that they are non-falsifiable. It's virtually impossible for anyone accused of such to prove their innocence - all but impossible.

Expand full comment

Controlled opposition is a term of art. It is heavily practiced by the government and regulatory bodies. Those who truly advance the interests of our freedom movement cannot by definition be controlled opposition.

Those who make negative comments in the "peanut gallery" and are not advancing our group's interests, but simply are sniping or subtracting from the strength of our legal victories - as in denigrating our latest victory against the FDA - could be controlled opposition.

Interestingly, the Wikipedia Page on Controlled Opposition was recently deleted.

https://www.reddit.com/r/purpleticket/comments/156kpr9/wikipedia_censored_the_article_on_controlled/

However, I am attaching a link to another Substack post which clarifies the meaning of controlled opposition. The government would love citizens to believe that it is impossible to identify controlled opposition, and they do their best to confuse the issue. Still, the signs of controlled opposition are clear. Here is the link:

https://www.hegemonmedia.com/p/what-is-controlled-opposition

Expand full comment

They should be made to PAY for these deaths. If they are taking down the information from social media that lead people to avoid life saving treatment, it is essentially admitting responsibility.

Expand full comment

The following copy and paste (in mealy mouthed weasel words) declares that ...

"The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration has ended a ban on off-label prescriptions of anti-parasitic drug ivermectin, nearly two years after floods of people attempted to procure the drug in the mistaken belief it would treat Covid-19.

The TGA announced it would remove the ban for off-label prescriptions of the drug from 1 June. Off-label prescriptions had been limited to specialists such as dermatologists, gastroenterologists and infectious disease specialists since September 2021.

The decision was made due to what the TGA said was “sufficient evidence that the safety risks to individuals and public health is low” in the “current health climate”. The high rates of vaccination against Covid-19 in Australia and high hybrid immunity meant that use of the drug by people was “unlikely to now compromise public health” including the risk of potential shortages of the drug for its stated use for treating river blindness, threadworm of the intestines, and scabies. But the regulator stressed the lifting of the ban did not amount to an endorsement of off-label prescribing of ivermectin to treat Covid-19, citing studies showing it was not an effective treatment.

A large number of clinical studies have demonstrated ivermectin does not improve outcomes in patients with Covid-19. The National Covid Evidence Taskforce (NCET) and many similar bodies around the world, including the World Health Organization, strongly advises against the use of ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of Covid-19.”

My comment: The last sentence demonstrates that the TGA is completely ignorant of peer reviewed journal articles quoted by Dr Marik and more-over the TGA refuses to admit that its Covid-19 management advisories were WRONG!

Expand full comment

...and I rate Rachael Maddow's credibility as the same as Anthony Fauci's - absolute zero!!!

Expand full comment

There’s so much to read so what does this mean ? Thank you doctors ❤️

Expand full comment