De-banking used as a hammer to force businesses to go cashless or go under/ The Telegraph

Crypto accounts slammed too. Remits from abroad. And too much cash. The CBDCs are being brought in through the back door. Or so the cabal thought.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/07/29/nigel-farage-accounts-small-businesses-cash-shut-down/

”… After having his own accounts at Coutts closed because his political views were deemed not to align with the bank’s values, Mr Farage last week welcomed the resignations of Dame Alison Rose, the chief executive of NatWest, which owns Coutts, and Peter Flavel, the Coutts chief executive.

He wants to significantly widen his campaign with AccountClosed.org, saying he decided to launch the website because “at the moment we don’t quite know the scale of the problem”.

He said he had been “overwhelmed” by members of the public sending him their own cases since revealing how his account was closed.

“I start work at four o’clock in the morning looking at all this stuff,” he added. “I’m beginning to have the impression this is much, much bigger than any of us could have contemplated.”

The website will try to establish in detail the various reasons why customers are having services withdrawn, with people invited to submit their own experiences along with the banks involved to help identify the “worst offenders”.

‘We don’t want cash’

Based on what he has heard to date, Mr Farage’s “biggest worry” relates to small and medium-sized businesses – including banks allegedly threatening to close the accounts of enterprises reliant on cash.

“There are clearly a couple of things that have emerged,” he says. “Number one, a concerted attempt to drive out cash.

“You’re running a fish store? Well get a credit card machine – we don’t want cash. You’re a window cleaner? Sorry, we don’t want cash. A lot of that.

“I’ve got dozens of accounts of people saying to me that their bank is saying they are putting in too much cash, where’s the cash coming from, do they have the receipts to back up the cash?” He said accounts being closed on this basis has “happened to plenty of people”.

Investors in cryptocurrencies have also been affected, he added. “I had a 19-year-old today, telling me that he puts 50 quid a month into crypto. And the bank have said ‘nope, sorry, we don’t want your business’. So they’re even limiting how people spend money, which I find quite a shock.”

…“This is about the right to free speech,” he said. “About having a country where people are treated fairly in an age when you frankly can’t function on a personal level, let alone a business level, without a bank account.”

NYT blows the 'aging demographic' horn: pensions etc. can't be paid in future. More fear porn to push 7 very important narratives.

The NY Times ran a major story today to get in front of the depopulation narrative, it seems. Countries don’t actually need to depopulate to stop the world population from increasing. Depopulation is already here, happening organically. [By that I mean families are having fewer children in response to the strip mining of the middle classes everywhere.] I described the lack of a growing world population last February, here.

No doubt both depopulation and the aging of all our nations has sped up as a result of COVID vaccinations being forced on 2/3 of the world’s population.

Yes, forced. Illegally forced. By spewing lies at everyone about the vaccines’ benefits and harms, which governments, regulators and manufacturers knew were lies, by scaring the Bejesus out of people by lying about the severity of COVID, by threatening and sanctioning refusers, by exhorting the world to shun refusers, by demanding vaccine passports to participate in normal activities like shopping… the list goes on and on. The people who wrote, spread and repeated these lies are culpable of crimes against humanity.

But the COVID lies and the vaccine lies were only the beginning. Governments also lied about borders, about immigration, about unaccompanied children crossing borders, and most importantly about WHY all these bizarre policies were being hoisted on most of the developed and developing world. The NY Times has been front and center in carrying the dirty water—and amplifying it—for each of these criminal lies and the policies they buttressed.

Now the NYT is at it again.

I see many narratives that the NY Times may be trying to push with this piece:

ONE: Lack of intent. We did not create the COVID virus nor the vaccines with the intent to depopulate, because we actually need more young people as workers. Therefore, such claims make no sense, and must be dismissed in their entirety.

TWO: In fact, we knew the population was decreasing. It has been obvious for years. Why would we shoot our economies in the foot by depopulating? Don’t blame us. [Ignores the fact that by crashing our economies, the assets can be purchased on the cheap, while putting people and nations into a debt trap that will close in on them later as interest rates rise, or money gets tight, or using other schemes.]

THREE: The NYT provides the justification why pensions cannot be paid in full, and why retirement ages must increase.

FOUR: If we were in fact trying to depopulate, we would have aimed for the elderly. The fact that so many young people have myocarditis, sudden deaths, and that there are 40% more deaths in working age groups should be additional evidence that vaccine depopulation was accidental, not intentional.

FIVE: To justify crazy ‘immigration’ policies [the border is open, just wade across] the NYT reveals that with a younger group of workers entering the country, maybe we can pay your pension after all. Fingers crossed. So shut up about immigration if you want to retire.

SIX: All those unaccompanied minors crossing the border? Shut up, they will become our young workers in a few years, the ones that pay for your pensions. Stop asking what happened to them.

SEVEN: We could so easily fix this if it wasn’t for those right-wing populist movements nipping at the heels of our totalitarian one world governance project.

Excerpts follow.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/07/16/world/world-demographics.html

The world’s demographics have already been transformed. Europe is shrinking. China is shrinking, with India, a much younger country, overtaking it this year as the world’s most populous nation.

But what we’ve seen so far is just the beginning.

The projections are reliable, and stark: By 2050, people age 65 and older will make up nearly 40 percent of the population in some parts of East Asia and Europe. That’s almost twice the share of older adults in Florida, America’s retirement capital. Extraordinary numbers of retirees will be dependent on a shrinking number of working-age people to support them.

In all of recorded history, no country has ever been as old as these nations are expected to get.

As a result, experts predict, things many wealthier countries take for granted — like pensions, retirement ages and strict immigration policies — will need overhauls to be sustainable. And today’s wealthier countries will almost inevitably make up a smaller share of global G.D.P., economists say….

As in many young countries, birth rates in Kenya have declined drastically in recent years. Women had an average of eight children 50 years ago, but only just over three last year. Demographically, Kenya looks something like South Korea in the mid-1970s, as its economy was beginning a historic rise, although its birth rate is declining somewhat more slowly. Much of South Asia and Africa have similar age structures….

there is evidence that sub-Saharan African countries’ fertility rates are dropping even faster than the U.N. projects… [Uh oh, what else have we done to them?]

The transformation of rich countries has only just begun. If these countries fail to prepare for a shrinking number of workers, they will face a gradual decline in well-being and economic power….

To cope, experts say, aging rich countries will need to rethink pensions, immigration policies and what life in old age looks like. [Do they mean what life in old age looks like, or do they mean enforced death in old age?]

Change will not come easy. More than a million people have taken to the streets in France to protest raising the retirement age to 64 from 62, highlighting the difficult politics of adjusting. Immigration fears have fueled support for right-wing candidates across aging countries in the West and East Asia.

“Much of the challenges at the global level are questions of distribution,” Dr. Myrskylä said. “So some places have too many old people. Some places have too many young people. It would of course make enormous sense to open the borders much more. And at the same time we see that’s incredibly difficult with the increasing right-wing populist movements.”…

“You can say with some kind of degree of confidence what the demographics will look like,” Mr. O’Keefe said. “What the society will look like depends enormously on policy choices and behavioral change.”

Treating COVID-19 in 2023

Since RFK, Jr. suggested going to my website for info on HCQ and IVM during his Town Hall yesterday with Sean Hannity, I am updating the info.  Here is the 3 minute clip of RFK and Sean Hannity discussing COVID treatment in which I am mentioned.

What’s New with respect to Treatment?

The COVID-19 virus has mutated considerably since it was sequenced in Wuhan in December 2019. I heard Dr. Didier Raoult, one of the pioneers in the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19, recently state that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is much less effective against current COVID variants than it used to be. I cannot find a document to cite so I don’t have any more to say about that.

But he would know, so perhaps ivermectin should be our go-to drug for COVID-19 today, in addition to vitamin D, nasal irrigation with non-irritating viral killers like dilute betadine (iodine) solutions, and other supplemental items as needed. As always, the FLCCC guidelines are my go-to source:

https://covid19criticalcare.com/protocol/i-care-early-covid-treatment/

Ivermectin

But what about the research supporting the use of ivermectin? As RFK, Jr. said, there are currently 99 controlled trials (total) that have looked at how ivermectin prevented COVID deaths, hospitalizations, ICU stays, ventilation, and cases. Several of the studies were funded by Bill Gates and other shady characters and those studies’ methods are extremely questionable. I have written about that before, as have Tess Lawrie, Pierre Kory, Phil Harper and many others.

Only a subset of studies looked at each of these outcomes, which are called ‘endpoints.’ The wonderful website C19study.com has collected all the studies for all the drugs and OTC remedies used for COVID-19, and has broken them down into different categories, as well as displaying useful information. [That the hardworking authors remain anonymous to avoid repercussions tells you something.]

If you look at all these 99 studies together, including those that appear to me and others to be fraudulent, you get the following statistics regarding ivermectin: 77% show benefit and 23% show harm. Including all, the overall benefit is about 62%. Used prophylactically, the benefit is over 80%.

If, however, you look at only the best studies, chosen using very specific criteria as Dr. Harvey Risch has done, you find that ivermectin is 77% effective at preventing deaths and 69% effective at preventing hospitalizations. Mortality and hospitalization are considered solid, non-subjective endpoints.

National or regional governments in 22 countries recommended or provided ivermectin to their citizens for COVID.

Ivermectin has a long half life, and will last for weeks in your body’s tissues. Getting an adequate dose in early is important. It is difficult to overdose on ivermectin, unless you take the dose that is recommended for a horse or a moose. (I live in Maine.) IVM has very few side effects. You must check for drug interactions with other drugs you may be taking. Luckily, websites exist where you can do this yourself, such as this one. Ivermectin has many different pharmacologic actions, and while it is always best to take the drug early, it is also useful later in the disease.

Hydroxychloroquine

The available data on hydroxychloroquine were mostly collected prior to the current variants. The drug was assuredly beneficial, since national or regional governments of 42 countries chose to recommend or provide hydroxychloroquine to COVID patients.

HCQ is a great drug with multiple actions, including viral inactivation and immune modulation. I have taken it several times and used it in 100 or 200 or more patients before COVID without problems—though I had to take one patient off it because someone else prescribed a high dose for too long.

However, it can cause fatal arrhythmias when overdosed. Therefore I urge anyone who uses it to be careful of the dose, which should be reduced in those weighing less than 60 kg (132 pounds). It also accumulates in the body tissues due to a very long half life, but its accumulation does not appear to cause cardiac rhythm issues, and is actually beneficial for COVID—a 5 or 7 day course would last several weeks.

The c19study.org org website reveals that there are now 402 controlled trials of HCQ for COVID. Most show benefit.  However, several of the largest studies used too-high doses of HCQ, which almost certainly led to excess deaths in those studiesI believe the studies were designed to make the drug appear dangerous. I discussed these studies at length in 2020 and two of my several articles were reposted here and here.

HCQ must be given early to be really effective, unlike ivermectin, so I tend to only look at studies in which the drug was given early. If you wait till someone is hospitalized before using this drug, usually 10-14 days into the illness, it has very little benefit. When given early, mortality is reduced by 72%.  Throwing all the early treatment studies (37) together with the different endpoints, the benefit is 62% overall.  Only 3 of the 37 were negative, and all were small studies. Here is the list:

Most of the 402 studies were in hospitalized patients, (easier to perform because the patients come to you, and you don’t have to beat the bushes to recruit them) — but the problem with this is that HCQ does not do much once the virus is dead, which occurs about 10 days after disease onset. Unless you are highly immunocompromised, the later stage of COVID illness that occurs in some people is due to your body attacking itself.  Most people go to hospital in the second stage of illness, when it is too late for HCQ, and the primary drug needed is a steroid to suppress the immune response.

If you restrict the studies you evaluate to only the best studies, Dr. Harvey Risch drew the following conclusions, with extremely statistically significant results:

“Every one of 10 studies of high-risk outpatient hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) use has shown risk reduction for hospitalization or mortality. Meta-analysis demonstrates 44% reduction in hospitalization, and 75% reduction in mortality.”

_______________

Having said all this, COVID is no longer the killer it once was. Most people who develop COVID now have a degree of immunity from prior exposure (nearly 100% in the US) and the virus is less virulent. Most COVID cases will not require these medications. But if you do need them, I hope this discussion has been helpful.

Our new organization: DOORtoFREEDOM.org rolls out today. Yay! And my interviews with Mercola, Roguski and Corbett on the WHO and global takeover are out now too.

I have gained nearly 200 paid substack subscribers since June 1. All my substack funds will go toward our expenses. Thanks to others who contributed without even being asked!

Bookmark DoortoFreedom.org

DoortoFreedom.org has applied for 501c3 status as an educational organization sharing information about the WHO and UN power grabs, and any other attempts at global governance by elites. The global biosecurity agenda is central to the plan.

We made a choice to go live with it today because my interview with Dr. Joe Mercola about the WHO went live today, and he has about a million subscribers. We felt we needed to have our website up for viewers by today. But the website is by no means finished yet!

Please come back again and again, as we will be uploading new content all the time.

We are also concerned by many rapid changes in society and will cover them as well. We believe the WHO power grab, digital ID/vaccine passports, gender confusion, transhumanism, the attacks on cash, food and agriculture and many other efforts are all part of the same plan to usher in a Great Reset: with a reduced standard of living, broad surveillance and extreme control.

What you will find today are twenty-five 2 minute reads that explain most of the topics shaking up our world today. Our goal is to make our site accessible and readable for everyone, giving basic, bite-sized articles as well as longer articles one could chew over. We currently have posted a small selection of longer articles, videos, pdfs and audiofiles.

The site is under construction. We hope to have it filled with dozens or hundreds of important articles by September 1. We need your help curating the best,  fact-based articles.

Once the site has been entirely built out, we will create a coalition of organizations that will work together to identify and carry out actions to help politicians and the public learn what is happening and fight back. By then we will also have created a 501c4 to permit lobbying if needed, so we can take actions that may be off limits to tax exempt groups.

Here is a tickler —our home page. Try out the site and let us know what you think.

My hour with James Corbett and Janes Roguski aired yesterday on CHD-TV, as we spoke about the WHO and the global biosecurity agenda that is already being built out with funds borrowed on the backs of the taxpayers, creating a massive debt trap that will come back to bite us in future. Things are advancing quickly in Europe.

My interview with Dr. Mercola is Here to read and watch for the next 48 hours.

After 48 hours, my interview with Joe Mercola will be Here to print or download, because his articles are removed from open access and placed in his Censored Library after 48 hours, to which you can subscribe. We discuss the way the biosecurity agenda and WHO are being used to take over sovereignty of the entire world. Don’t miss it!

Below is just a screenshot of the video; you can only watch it Here.

UK government admitted in March 2023 that young women who received the A-Z or J & J COVID vaccines were at high risk of death during the next 3 months

Females aged 12-29 who got an adenovirus vectored COVID vaccine in the UK were 3.5 times more likely to die in the next 3 months than those who had not

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/riskofdeathfollowingcovid19vaccinationorpositivesarscov2testinyoungpeopleengland/8december2020to25may2022

• There was evidence of an increase in cardiac death in young women after a first dose of non-mRNA vaccines, with the risk being *3.5 times higher* in the 12 weeks following vaccination, compared with the longer-term risk.

• The subgroup who received non-mRNA vaccines was more likely to be clinically vulnerable and may be at greater risk of adverse events following vaccination than the general population. [‘Likely’ means they are throwing this idea out to try and find a non-vaccine cause when everyone knows all the COVID vaccines caused clots.—Nass]

• According to the statistical model, 11 out of the 15 cardiac deaths in young women that occurred within 12 weeks of a first dose of a non-mRNA vaccine were likely to be linked to the vaccine; this corresponds to 6 cardiac-related deaths per 100,000 females vaccinated with at least a first dose of a non-mRNA vaccine.

[But 1 in 17,000 women dying from the shot is a guess from a “statistical model” and it certainly could be higher… but even so, this is 60 deaths per million vaccine recipients, which is a huge number, especially in YOUNG women.

This report claims there was no increase in males. But my guess is that they underpowered their study, and so the increase had to be quite large in order to be statistically significant. 3.5 times was too large an increase to ignore, especially in an age group that sees almost no deaths.

When did the UK find this out, and when did they stop giving these shots? Note that FDA quietly took the J and J shot off the market a few months back.

Judge Doughty issued an important 155 page ruling in the matter of Missouri v. Biden today, July

Freedom of Speech must never again be shuttered, trampled on or blasphemied as the crime of "Misinformation, Disinformation or Malinformation"

Judge Doughty used 721 footnotes. He must have amazing young clerks. And on page 3 the good Judge included the following quotes to remind us why July 4 and our nation’s principles are so important to uphold:

For if men are to be precluded from offering their sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of speech may be taken away, and dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter. 

George Washington, March 15, 1783. 

Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the free acts of speech. 

Benjamin Franklin, Letters of Silence Dogwood. 

Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error. 

Thomas Jefferson. 

Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one place to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear. 

Harry S. Truman

__________

This is what Judge Doughty wrote, in small part:

“This case is about the Free Speech Clause in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The explosion of social-media platforms has resulted in unique free speech issues— this is especially true in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. If the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history. In their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech. Although the censorship alleged in this case almost exclusively targeted conservative speech, the issues raised herein go beyond party lines. The right to free speech is not a member of any political party and does not hold any political ideology.

The Plaintiffs have presented substantial evidence in support of their claims that they were the victims of a far-reaching and widespread censorship campaign. This court finds that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their First Amendment free speech claim against the Defendants. Therefore, a preliminary injunction should issue immediately against the Defendants . . . .”

The NY Times is apparently not all in on free speech. They prefer censorship. See how the Gray Lady “All the news that fits, we print” falsely spins this decision as impeding efforts to stop human trafficking.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/04/business/federal-judge-biden-social-media.html

A federal court in Louisiana on Tuesday barred parts of the Biden administration from communicating with social media platforms about broad swaths of content online, a ruling that could curtail efforts to combat false and misleading narratives about the coronavirus pandemic and other issues.

In the ruling, Judge Terry A. Doughty of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana said that parts of the government, including the Department of Health and Human Services and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, could not talk to social media companies for “the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech.”

Judge Doughty said in granting a preliminary injunction that the agencies could not flag specific posts to the social media platforms or request reports about their efforts to take down content. The ruling said that the government could still notify the platforms about posts detailing crimes, national security threats or foreign attempts to influence elections.

The ruling was a victory for Republicans and other conservatives who have filed a series of lawsuits accusing the government of cajoling or coercing Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other social media companies to censor its critics. Although the ruling is likely to be appealed by the administration, its impact could be sweeping, forcing government officials, including law enforcement agencies, to refrain from notifying the platforms of troublesome content.

Government officials have argued they do not have the authority to order posts or entire accounts removed, but they have long cooperated with Big Tech to take action against illegal or harmful material, especially in cases involving criminal activities like child sexual abuse or human trafficking. That has also included regular meetings to share information on, for example, the Islamic State and other terrorist groups.

The White House did not immediately offer a comment. Google and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Twitter did not immediately have a comment.

I can’t help saying that my medical license was immediately suspended—without a hearing or any chance to defend myself—in January 2022 for spreading misinformation, and yet every bit of what the state of Maine claimed was misinformation has been revealed as truth. My license remains suspended, but soon the state of Maine will learn what the First Amendment is all about.