Dr. Simon Goddek Profile picture
Oct 2 12 tweets 10 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
🧵THREAD: The Krassenstein twins not only admitted to being paid by "higher ups" to manipulate public opinion, but they’ve also bought Twitter accounts and converted tween fan pages—with massive followings—into their private accounts.

But let’s take things one step at a time.⬇️
#1 Ponzi Scheme: Before Brian (@krassenstein) and Ed (@EdKrassen) became Twitter phenomena, the left-wing brothers allegedly ran Ponzi schemes and online financial 'scams'. In 2017, law enforcement seized nearly half a million dollars from them, contending it was derived from wire fraud.

Although they deny this, court records back me up! Their history already shows they've duped people by promoting multi-level marketing programs (MLMs) and high-yield investment programs (HYIPs). The latter is a type of Ponzi scheme, a scam that promises unrealistic high returns on investment by paying previous investors with the funds from the new ones. This seems to be their M.O.: deceiving people on a grand scale to line their own pockets.


Image
Image
Image
#2 Making Money with Facebook: Around the same time, the Krassensteins ran several Facebook pages designed to play on people's emotions to accumulate followers. Consider this one as an example. They exploited Facebook's design to make a ludicrous promise: get me to a million followers and, somehow, I'll accomplish something completely out of my control.

Then, in January 2010, the Krassensteins saw disaster as an opportunity just like their idol Hillary Clinton. They launched three groups related to the Haitian catastrophe, all to amass a substantial following. Here you see the first group, discussing the second one. I'll discuss the third group in the follow-up post below.


Image
Image
Image
#3 Absurd Facebook Group: This third Facebook group is the most outrageous of them all. The Krassensteins promised to empty their bank account if they reached 10 million fans on that Facebook page, which is frankly unattainable. They claimed that the 'bank account' being emptied would only amount to $2,450 if (!!!) they ever achieved their ridiculous fan target.

Then, after accumulating a significant following, they utilized the group to disseminate posts about their own ventures and websites—like their @KrassenCast podcasts or articles on their numerous websites. I wonder if any of the Krassensteins can demonstrate that they made donations to the victims of the 2010 Haitian earthquake. I have my doubts.


Image
Image
Image
#4 Buying Social Media Accounts: Around this time, starting in 2010, Brian (@krassenstein) and Ed (@EdKrassen) have been actively purchasing social media accounts. Even though the twins assert they have never bought any social media accounts, the evidence is more than just overwhelming. It appears that they bought Twitter accounts on a large scale to self-promote through retweets, follow recommendations, and so forth.

However, the charge looming over them is the mass buying and selling of Twitter accounts, as evidenced by the attached screenshots, and consequently breaking the rules of this platform.

Ed + Brian equals Edbri, and ed@ay.com is clearly linked to @EdKrassen. He has already acknowledged the planned operation of the social network AY in his post, and the connection to OUYA is illustrated in my following tweet. Why would someone else pen these posts in their names, as they claim, given that they were practically unknown back then?

By the way, it seems that @EdKrassen's account was formerly @bieberfanclubs (LOL!!!) with 250K followers, and @krassenstein's account was @JONASBROTHERS5 with 22K followers.


Image
Image
Image
#5 The case ‘OUYA’: The Justin Bieber and the Jonas Brothers Twitter profiles are just two examples targeting naive teenagers. The Krassenstein brothers have consistently utilized the same strategy, monitoring trending topics as potential catalysts for building traction and engagement.

In one instance, they identified a product that experienced a remarkable $8.5 million launch on Kickstarter: "OUYA," a video game console. They proceeded to acquire several domains and establish forums. This was supplemented with numerous social media accounts from which they would spam their messages.


Image
Image
Image
#6 Follow-Unfollow-Script: Their primary OUYA account quickly amassed a suspiciously high number of followers, and it's evident that the follower count aligns with the following count. Everything indicates the use of a follow-unfollow script, which automatically followed a large number of accounts daily, retracting follows in the event of no reciprocation (which is also against the community guildines, by the way).

Currently, both of them are following 506.3K people but deny ever running follow-unfollow scripts. To follow that many people manually would take 60 whole days. Considering that they didn’t only follow people but also unfollowed those who did not reciprocate, reaching this point must have taken years of work. And I doubt that both of them were sitting at the computer for that long just to follow (and unfollow) that many people.

So, why should we trust individuals who:
▪️Firstly, purchase Twitter accounts, likely to boost each other’s engagement;
▪️Secondly, accumulate tween followers fond of Justin Bieber and the Jonas Brothers;
▪️Thirdly, execute fully automated follow-unfollow scripts to augment their follower base;
▪️Lastly, rename the accounts to their names, making it appear as if they personally achieved these follower numbers through their content?
Image
#7 DNC Propaganda: They honestly claim that they are independent political journalists, but they are not critical towards the ‘current thing’ at all. For instance, @krassenstein publicly stated that it was okay for random people to be naked in front of kids, and @EdKrassen claimed that the unvaccinated had a 100 times higher chance to get myocarditis.

Image
Image
#8 More wrong claims: In this video, for example, @krassenstein claims that the C0vid gəne therapy would have prevented both infəctions and transmissions. When he was then critically addressed on his misinformation, he became snippy with his valley girls voice and stuck to his DNC-loyal line. And now, imagine two of them in an @X space against you? That's their strategy. That's most likely how they make a living.
#9 Blackmailing Becky: Naturally, the Krassensteins will now claim that the video in my first post was a parody or was made merely to illustrate how quickly misinformation spreads. Incidentally, they did the same when I asked them why they had deleted a tweet in which they apparently attempted to blackmail @RebeccaSeetahal from the DNC. They stated that they posted and immediately deleted it to demonstrate how swiftly conspiracy theories propagate on the internet. However, by posting it, it ceased to be a mere conspiracy theory. Most likely, @krassenstein confused submitting a tweet with submitting a DM. Admit mistakes? No chance.

Image
Image
#10 Conclusion: In conclusion, the Krassensteins seem to maneuver their way out of every situation and deny any and all criticism, no matter how overwhelming it might be. Moreover, their paired appearances mean that criticizing one immediately brings the annoyance of dealing with both. However, one must give credit where it's due; they have mastered the algorithm of the platform to trigger people, farming engagement, which together possibly earns them between $30-50k USD per month. This is aided, not least, by the support of Elon Musk, who frequently reacts to their posts, thus endorsing their agenda.

Doubts about the integrity of these twins persist. Rumors circulate that they are working for a Middle Eastern state; others claim they are on the DNC payroll. What is certain is that they fully endorse and defend the DNC party agenda in an unwavering manner. If any scandals arise, they are conveniently swept under the rug. Neutral reporting is nowhere to be seen. For instance, they've labeled Trump as a horrific and 'demented human being,' while remaining conspicuously silent on Biden, who displays all the signs of advanced dementia.

Ultimately, the right to freedom of speech and opinion also applies to these twins, which I greatly value on this platform, but everyone here should be aware of their past and present to properly contextualize their content.

Cheers,
Dr. Simon (@goddeketal)
Image
#11 About Me: If you are new to my content, please check out the pinned tweet on my profile to learn more about me and to understand why I am speaking out against governmental misinformation. Feel free to also follow my Vitamin D information account, @sunfluencer.

Thank you! 🌞

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr. Simon Goddek

Dr. Simon Goddek Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @goddeketal

Sep 24
🧵THREAD: This is @PeterHotez, a doctor and scientist from Texas who, in the past three years, has particularly been noted for his radical statements against vaccine and measure critics. He labeled them as terrorists and Putin supporters and called for military action against them. And when he had absolutely no arguments left, he discredited those who rightly criticized Big Pharma based on available data, branding them as anti-Semites.

Last week, Peter Hotez published his new book “The deadly rise of anti-science” and gave an interview to @USATODAY, the content of which is highly concerning. Not only because the interviewing journalist didn't pose a single critical question, but because his statements reveal just how openly radical this individual is.
Image
@PeterHotez #2 Before I delve into the interview, it's essential to watch the following two video clips. In this first clip, Hotez makes a 180° turn concerning a vaccine for a respiratory virus in no time at all.
@PeterHotez #3 In this second video, you will see that he adjusts his statements regarding the number of necessary vaccinations every few months, thereby validating those critics who have been warning about this from the beginning.

Now, onto the interview - it is going to be wild!
Read 11 tweets
Sep 5
🧵THREAD: Meet @CaulfieldTim, a Canadian law professor and health law 'expert' at the University of Alberta. During Covid, he notably defamed anyone questioning Big Pharma. But should a "science communicator" act this way? Isn't the essence of science to challenge our own hypotheses and explore all possible options?

What Timothy Caulfield did was equate those distrusting Big Pharma with Holocaust deniers instead. This association was made both directly and indirectly, as he frequently used the term "denier" in numerous posts—a term often linked with Holocaust denial. He also never questioned the 'vaccines' and public measures such as 'masks' and 'lockdowns'.

One should be cautious accusing others of corruption due to potential consequences. However, the attached evidence suggests otherwise. In April 2020, Caulfield received $380,000 to combat Covid misinformation, and a year later, a whooping $1,750,000.

Under the hashtag #ScienceUpFirst, he cherry-picked data and discredited those with differing views—all in the name of science. Timothy Caulfield has acted as a digital witch-hunter for the past three years, which I'll prove in subsequent tweets. I would strongly advise @UAlberta to consider initiating disciplinary proceedings against this "anti-science aggressor" (to borrow Caulfield's own phrasing). Otherwise, the institution may soon face scrutiny for its continued association with someone who appears to be an overtly unscientific propagandist.

(I'm writing this thread in real-time, so please come back for upcoming posts or hit the notification bell on my profile!)

⬇️⬇️⬇️
Image
2/ Just two weeks ago, on August 22nd, @CaulfieldTim made a post. He contended that Ivermectin is ineffective, despite a meta-analysis of 99 studies indicating an 85% improvement in prophylaxis with Ivermectin. He also claimed that vaccines don't cause autism, even though there are numerous indications to the contrary, and no definitive statement can be made.

He also suggests that Covid 'vaccines' don't result in infertility. However, a video from Project Veritas captures a former Pfizer employee suggesting otherwise. Furthermore, data indicates a significant drop in fertility rates in many countries, with numerous women reporting missed periods post-vaccination. Such assertions from him appear highly unscientific and intentionally misleading.
Image
3/ Just four months ago, @CaulfieldTim was outraged by @joerogan's statement that he had taken Ivermectin. According to him, this was "nonsensical" since Ivermectin isn't on the WHO essential medical list. To further discredit @joerogan's statement AND Ivermectin, he employed three additional tactics:

1. Guilt by association - he accuses Joe of relying on 'anti-vaxxer' @RobertKennedyJr.

2. False balance - he criticizes @newsweek for promoting misleading false balance. This refers to presenting opposing viewpoints as equally valid, even when one lacks evidence or credibility.

3. Lying - he claims that Ivermectin doesn't work and presents this as a fact.

Fortunately, I can fact-check this too, while providing evidence. So:

Ivermectin works. Period. ✅
Tim Caulfield is a paid liar. Period. ✅
Image
Read 6 tweets
Sep 4
🧵THREAD: You've probably seen this meme more times than you can count over the past few years. But it's not that simple.

Having secured numerous funding proposals myself, I'll shed some light on the somewhat unsettling reason why almost all scientists support the current thing. It's more of a systemic problem than you might think. ⬇️⬇️⬇️
2/ I'm convinced only a few scientists are actively corrupt. In the past, university funding and stable positions were the norm. Today, most scientists rely on external private or public funds to conduct their research.

This means that scientists constantly need to secure new external funding to conduct their research projects. Projects typically last 3-4 years. Project finished? Secure new funding if you want to continue as a scientist.

I've never written a research proposal in the US, but I've done several in the EU. My success rate is over 50%, even though the typical approval rate for funding is only 1-3%.
3/ To succeed, one has to consider the following:
▪️The reputation and respect of the research institutes forming the consortium in the proposal.
▪️The credibility of the scientists involved, judged by their major publications and past successes.
▪️Addressing all essential aspects of Agenda 2030.
▪️Clearly aligning with the EU's main goals and priorities.
Read 10 tweets
Aug 21
🧵 THREAD: As an independent journalist, there's nothing I like more than exposing hypocrisy.

Many celebrities advocate for climate protection and combatting global warming, yet their actions don't align with their words. I'll shed light on this in this thread.⬇️⬇️⬇️


Image
Image
Image
Image
#1 “Avoiding a climate disaster will be one of the greatest challenges we have ever faced.”
– @BillGates

Gates' climate crusade would be slightly more believable if he weren't living a life of luxury, flying private jets and buying beachfront mansions. Image
#2 “Climate change is real, it is happening right now.”
– @LeoDiCaprio

Look at Mr. 'Eco-Warrior' DiCaprio, lounging on his $150 million yacht. So much for his green preachings. Image
Read 11 tweets
Aug 17
🚨 The Hardly Covered Scandal of Virology: Corrupt Scientists Exposed

Let me remind you of one of the biggest scandals in modern science, which has still not been properly addressed.

In early 2020, leading virologists made, among others, the following statements:

▪️ .@K_G_Andersen: “A lab leak origin possibility must be considered a serious scientific theory.”

▪️ Andrew Rambaut: “I literally swivel day by day thinking it is a lab escape or natural.”

▪️ Ian Lipkin: “I am concerned that scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology did not take adequate precautions when growing bat viruses.”

▪️ .@edwardcholmes: “No way selection could occur in the market.”

▪️ Robert Garry: “Someone should tell [the journal] Nature that the fish market probably did not start the outbreak.”

Also, on January 31, 2020 - before the Fauci Teleconference, @K_G_Andersen wrote an email to Fauci stating that: “One has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features (potentially) look engineered.... Eddie [Holmes], Bob [Garry], Mike [Ferguson] and myself all find the genome inconsistent with evolutionary theory.”

Four days later, and $16 Million USD richer in funding, @K_G_Andersen went public with the following statement: “The main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered... and that is demonstrably false.”

Together with the four other virologists above, Andersen published a paper in the journal “nature medicine” stating that they “do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”

It appears these four scientists were potentially bought off, swiftly pivoting their views by 180°. While the mainstream media seemingly turned a blind eye to this controversy, @K_G_Andersen was nonetheless called to testify before the US Congress (see post below).
#2 Mr. Comer: "Did Dr. Fauci reiterate a suggestion to draft a paper on that call?"

.@K_G_Andersen: "I don't believe that he directly suggested it, but there was support for us looking further into the origin of the pandemic."
@K_G_Andersen #3 What we learned from the @TuckerCarlson interview with @RobertKennedyJr is the fact that Fauci has managed and funded several bioweapons labs outside the USA (incl. Wuhan). All signs point to these scientists being bought off to cover up Fauci's actions.
Read 4 tweets
Aug 16
🧵THREAD: How many lives were spared?

Do you remember when they closed playgrounds to prevent kids from "killing grandma"? That was one of many absurd responses to the plandemic.

But there's more. Here are my top 17. ⬇️ Image
#1 Do you remember when they covered payment terminals with clear plastic sheets?

I took the photo below at the supermarket yesterday. Incredibly, they're still in use. How many lives do you think have been spared? Image
#2 Do you remember when they turned supermarkets into one-way labyrinths?

As if pathogens could read directions. How many lives do you think were spared? Image
Read 22 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(