1/ UPDATE: from our deposition of Fauci yesterday in the MO v. Biden case. Fauci confirmed that in Feb 2020, Fauci sent Clifford Lane, his deputy at the NAIAD, as the U.S. representative for the WHO delegation to China. Lane convinced Fauci we should emulate China's lockdowns.
2/ The CCP had announced China had contained the virus through draconian lockdowns--a claim now known to be false. Given the China's pattern of falsified information, Lane and Fauci should have approached this claim with skepticism. Lockdowns were wholly untested & unprecedented.
3/ As our lawyer, @Leftylockdowns1 put it, Fauci "was apparently willing to base his lockdown advocacy on the observations of a single guy relying on reports from a dictator." Not exactly a double-blind randomized trial level of evidence, or indeed, any level of evidence.
4/ Days after Lane returned, WHO published its report praising China’s strategy: “China’s uncompromising and rigorous use of non-pharmaceutical measures [lockdowns] to contain transmission of the COVID-19 virus in multiple settings provides vital lessons for the global response.
5/ "This rather unique and unprecedented public health response in China reversed the escalating cases,” the report claimed. My colleague @jeffreyatucker at the @brownstoneinst gave a tongue-in-cheek gloss of WHO’s misty eyed report: “I’ve seen the future—and it is Wuhan.”
6/ Lockdowns quickly spread from China to the West, as a troubling number of Western apologists besides the WHO also looked to the Chinese Communist Party’s covid response for guidance.
7/ The U.S. & U.K. followed Italy’s lockdown, which had followed China, and all but a handful of countries around the globe immediately followed our lead. Within weeks the whole world was locked down.
8/8 From the very beginning, the evidential basis for this global policy catastrophe was always paper-thin.
1/ Regarding our lawsuit challenging CA's medical censorship law, I appreciate this endorsement of our case by the editorial board of the @ocregister and @ladailynews: "Judge right to halt California’s unconstitutional medical ‘misinformation’ law" msn.com/en-us/news/oth…
2/ "The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits any state from denying due process of law to any person. That includes any law that is so vague that people can’t possibly determine what is prohibited by it.
3/ "The law defines 'misinformation' as 'false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.' The judge called that provision 'grammatically incoherent'...
2/ "A face, gait and whole-body biometric recognition project begun in 2019 by U.S. national labs continues. Research teams across the nation are working on better ways to more accurately identify subjects outdoors and from a distance.
3/ "The project, known as BRIAR, or Biometric Recognition and Identification at Altitude and Range, is supposed to come up with better situational awareness for United States intelligence agencies and the military.
1/ BREAKING: Judge just granted our request for a preliminary injunction against AB 2098--the gag order on physicians in CA--in our Hoeg v. Newsom lawsuit. This effectively halts the implementation of this terrible law while our case is being tried.
2/ The ruling bodes well for our case: it indicates that our arguments that this law is unconstitutional have strong pre-trial facial plausibility. Not to get ahead of ourselves, of course, or try to predict the final outcome of the case, but this is a very positive development.
3/3 So grateful to be a part of this superb and courageous team of doctors and lawyers fighting for medical freedom and informed consent in CA. @TracyBethHoeg@AzadehKhatibi Ram Dureseti, Pete Masolewski @JeninYounesEsq@LauraPowellEsq
1/ The Global Biomedical Security State constantly perfects depersonalization and alienation, invading the most intimate aspects of your life and relationships.
Consider, for example, this physician's advice on sexual behavior written in 2020... tht.org.uk/news/how-have-…
2/ His "sexual health" recommendations include these dehumanizing bullets:
"You are your best sex partner: Masturbation, using sex toys and phone or cam sex are the safest options as they can be done without being in close proximity to anyone else."
3/ If you decide to take the risk of sexual intimacy with another person, the doctor advises, try to make the encounter as depersonalizing as possible:
"Not kissing, wearing a face mask during sex and favouring positions where you’re not face-to-face may also help..."
1/ If we continue on our current global trajectory we will see the fading of the nation-state as the dominant form of governance in the West—though the external apparatus of legislatures, parliaments, and courts may remain in place as window-dressing.
2/ With this dissolution of the fatherlands, what will remain are the great economic instruments—the world-spanning corporations, which operate like fiefdoms—with states serving as their executive instruments.
3/ One “ring” to rule them all—one corporatist collective—a global technocracy driven by economic interests alone. This regime will advance its aims under the banner of global health and safety.
When we filed the MO v. Biden lawsuit we alleged that the federal gov was pressuring social media to censor speech related to covid policy, the hunter Biden laptop, & election integrity. Documents obtained on discovery reveal these & many additional gov-censored topics...
We've also learned from discovery docs that many more gov officials have been involved than we initially thought. The government's censorship regime is vast, stretching across at least 17 federal agencies with countless state actors implicated.
A reminder that all of this--every one of the specific instances--egregiously violated the highest law of the land, namely, the U.S. Constitution. MO v. Biden will be the most significant free speech first Amendment case in our lifetimes, perhaps in U.S. history. No exaggeration.