thelibertybeacon--2020-12-17--Two Vaccine Truth Warriors Die Within Weeks of Each Other

Two Vaccine Truth Warriors Die Within Weeks of Each Other During the past few weeks , two of our leading vaccine truth warriors , Sallie O. Elkordy and Brandy Vaughan , have sadly passed away , leaving behind not only their devastated families but also thousands of their followers from around the world .
Both of these ladies have spent many years of their lives highlighting the dangers of vaccination and although they came from very different backgrounds , they were both totally dedicated to the cause .
Sallie began her tireless mission to ban the use of vaccinations after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffer horrendous disabilities after adverse reactions to vaccination , which later led to her tragic death .
Brandy , a former pharmaceutical representative , began her mission to educate the public on vaccination danger after seeing firsthand the corruption that went on behind the scenes at the pharmaceutical company Merck where she had worked .
Both ladies shared one burning ambition : to expose the truth and to educate the world about vaccination danger .
We at The Liberty Beacon do not believe that it is our place to speculate on how these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ instead we would like to highlight some of their wonderful work as a tribute .
I could write pages on my dear friend Sallie Elkordy ’ s wonderful work and about the hundreds of radio shows and articles that she and I had worked on together .
However , I believe that her own daughter Mary said everything that I could have , on her poignant post on Facebook , shortly after her mother died .
“ She taught us all many things .
To name a few : • Question everything .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Do your research .
• Love all without expectation for a ROI .
She had a huge heart .
Everyone one of you who has asked for her help , she treated like family .
Your children and your family she treated as if they were her own .
• Help someone if you have the means to or if you can ’ t just even lend an ear .
Being there for someone doesn ’ t have only one definition .
• Don ’ t just talk but do !
She always @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How can we tackle this ?
What can I do to help ?
How can we save lives ?
’ Sometimes what was possible were small actions but nonetheless she was always action oriented .
Always had a plan and if she didn ’ t have one , she would keep figuring out a new one .
• Family is everything .
She loved her husband and her children dearly .
She believed everything she was fighting for was to protect us and her future grandchildren one day .
• Laughter is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Museum of Comedy and went out of her way for 20 years and 1000+ shows later to bring laughter in hospitals and homeless shelters .
The places where she said it was needed most .
• Be passionate about what you do and what you put your energy into .
She was always 1000 % in what she did and it showed .
If you ’ re not sure what your passionate about , it ’ s ok you will find it .
Discovering your purpose doesn ’ t happen overnight .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ about helping others .
I know heaven will welcome her with open arms because all she wanted to do was good.
” I feel truly honored and humbled to have known Sallie for the many years that I did and having had the pleasure of working alongside her on so many occasions .
She was a brave and talented lady who had attended hundreds of rallies , protests and meetings advocating for the protection of children and their families from the dangers of vaccination worldwide .
I felt blessed and honored when , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a journalist and invited me to New York to receive an award .
Sadly , due to vaccine laws , I had to decline her offer , but she sent me my award anyway .
It was the most wonderful banner signed by many of my followers and friends .
Many of her many wonderful radio shows are listed on her website , Vaccines Are Not Healthy for Children and Other Living Thing .
This selection alone demonstrated just how many distinguished guests that she had spoken with over the years .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the countless radio shows that we did on shaken baby syndrome and the many brave families that we interviewed together .
Each and every one of these families had been falsely accused of injuring their child after their child had suffered a vaccine injury .
On one occasion , we even managed to interview a prisoner who was serving life without parole for a crime that he did not commit .
I will miss you every day , dear Sallie ; rest in peace , my dear friend .
I will leave you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ song that she dedicated to her mother ’ s memory .
[ 2 ] Brandy was probably the bravest lady that I have ever known .
Having worked for the pharmaceutical giant Merck during the Vioxx scandal , Brandy witnessed the corruption that went on behind the scenes firsthand and she decided to make it her mission to speak out .
After leaving the company in 2004 , she began her campaign to educate the world on the dangers of pharmaceutical products .
I was first introduced to her work many years ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerns .
To say that I was impressed by her bravery was an understatement , and from then on I began to follow her work .
In 2015 , she founded her website , Learn The Risk , where she outlined the dangers of vaccinations and advocated healthy living .
“ Learn The Risk is a US-based , non-profit organization and a powerful force for educating people WORLDWIDE on the dangers of pharmaceutical products , including vaccines and unnecessary medical treatments — that are literally killing us .
Learn The Risk was founded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an ex-Merck sales executive who never meant to take on the world ’ s most powerful industry .
But she felt she had no choice when the industry ’ s agenda to keep us all sick began to spiral out of control .
Brandy saw the corruption from the inside when she sold a drug ( VIOXX ) that was literally killing thousands of people .
Now Brandy exposes the truth behind the “ health ” care system and encourages people to make healthy changes NATURALLY .
Please consider donating to support our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the campaign , your contribution may just ” [ 3 ] Part of her mission to educate the world about the dangers of vaccination , was to have billboards erected across the US , as part of a nationwide campaign .
I am sure that you will agree that these billboards portray an extremely powerful message .
Her business partner , Tina Marie , has vowed to continue her wonderful work .
In 2017 , I was honored to meet Brandy in person when she came to London to appear alongside Dr. Andrew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secret screening of the film Vaxxed in Regent ’ s Park , London .
After we went to lunch the following day , I was thrilled and honored when she agreed not only to write a chapter for my new book on HPV vaccination but to also speak at my conference the following year , titled Spotlight on HPV Vaccines .
Her presentation was absolutely amazing and although we did not manage to record it , we have some amazing photos of her giving her presentation .
Although I am not able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my conference , I have decided to publish the link to another presentation in her memory .
[ 4 ] It is difficult to find the words to describe what a wonderful activist and campaigner that the world has lost , but as a tribute to all her wonderful work I have decided to republish the chapter that she wrote in our book , on my website .
[ 5 ] About the Author : Christina England , BA Hons , Research Journalist and Author Christina was born and educated in London , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a children ’ s library , specialising in storytelling and book buying .
In 1978 , Christina changed her career path to dedicate her time to caring for the elderly and was awarded the title of Care Giver of the Year for her work with the elderly in 1980 .
After taking an A Level in Psychology and a BTEC in Learning Support , Ms. England spent many years researching vaccines and adverse reactions .
She gained a Higher National Diploma in Journalism and Media Studies in 2010 and in 2016 she gained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Humanities .
She currently writes for VacTruth , Health Impact News , GreenMedInfo , The Liberty Beacon , Vaccine Impact and Medical Kidnap on immunisation safety and efficacy .
She has co-authored the book – Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis – Are Parents Being Falsely Accused ?
with Dr. Harold Buttram and Vaccination Policy and the UK Government : The Untold Truth with Lucija Tomljenovic PhD , which are sold on Amazon .
She also compiled the book Shattered Dreams : The HPV Vaccine Exposed Her website is Parents and Carers @ @ @

Two Vaccine Truth Warriors Die Within Weeks of Each Other
By TLB Contributing Partner: Christina England, BA, Hons
During the past few weeks, two of our leading vaccine truth warriors, Sallie O. Elkordy and Brandy Vaughan, have sadly passed away, leaving behind not only their devastated families but also thousands of their followers from around the world.
Both of these ladies have spent many years of their lives highlighting the dangers of vaccination and although they came from very different backgrounds, they were both totally dedicated to the cause.
Sallie began her tireless mission to ban the use of vaccinations after watching her beloved sister, Mary, suffer horrendous disabilities after adverse reactions to vaccination, which later led to her tragic death.
Brandy, a former pharmaceutical representative, began her mission to educate the public on vaccination danger after seeing firsthand the corruption that went on behind the scenes at the pharmaceutical company Merck where she had worked.
Both ladies shared one burning ambition: to expose the truth and to educate the world about vaccination danger.
We at The Liberty Beacon do not believe that it is our place to speculate on how these wonderful ladies lost their lives, but instead we would like to highlight some of their wonderful work as a tribute.
••••
Sallie O. Elkordy
I could write pages on my dear friend Sallie Elkordy’s wonderful work and about the hundreds of radio shows and articles that she and I had worked on together. However, I believe that her own daughter Mary said everything that I could have, on her poignant post on Facebook, shortly after her mother died.
Mary wrote:
“She taught us all many things. To name a few:
Question everything. Never take things at face value. Do your research.
Love all without expectation for a ROI. She had a huge heart. Everyone one of you who has asked for her help, she treated like family. Your children and your family she treated as if they were her own.
Help someone if you have the means to or if you can’t just even lend an ear. Being there for someone doesn’t have only one definition.
Don’t just talk but do! She always thought in terms of action. ‘How can we tackle this? What can I do to help? How can we save lives?’ Sometimes what was possible were small actions but nonetheless she was always action oriented. Always had a plan and if she didn’t have one, she would keep figuring out a new one.
Family is everything. She loved her husband and her children dearly. She believed everything she was fighting for was to protect us and her future grandchildren one day.
Laughter is the best medicine. She used to run the Museum of Comedy and went out of her way for 20 years and 1000+ shows later to bring laughter in hospitals and homeless shelters. The places where she said it was needed most.
Be passionate about what you do and what you put your energy into. She was always 1000% in what she did and it showed. If you’re not sure what your passionate about, it’s ok you will find it. Discovering your purpose doesn’t happen overnight.
More than half her life was solely about helping others. I know heaven will welcome her with open arms because all she wanted to do was good.”
I feel truly honored and humbled to have known Sallie for the many years that I did and having had the pleasure of working alongside her on so many occasions.
She was a brave and talented lady who had attended hundreds of rallies, protests and meetings advocating for the protection of children and their families from the dangers of vaccination worldwide.
I felt blessed and honored when, in 2019, she honored my work as a journalist and invited me to New York to receive an award. Sadly, due to vaccine laws, I had to decline her offer, but she sent me my award anyway. It was the most wonderful banner signed by many of my followers and friends.
I will treasure this banner forever.
Many of her many wonderful radio shows are listed on her website, Vaccines Are Not Healthy for Children and Other Living Thing. This selection alone demonstrated just how many distinguished guests that she had spoken with over the years. [1]
I will never forget the countless radio shows that we did on shaken baby syndrome and the many brave families that we interviewed together. Each and every one of these families had been falsely accused of injuring their child after their child had suffered a vaccine injury.
On one occasion, we even managed to interview a prisoner who was serving life without parole for a crime that he did not commit.
I will miss you every day, dear Sallie; rest in peace, my dear friend.
I will leave you with her daughter’s eulogy and song that she dedicated to her mother’s memory. [2]

••••
Brandy Vaughan
Brandy was probably the bravest lady that I have ever known.
Having worked for the pharmaceutical giant Merck during the Vioxx scandal, Brandy witnessed the corruption that went on behind the scenes firsthand and she decided to make it her mission to speak out.
After leaving the company in 2004, she began her campaign to educate the world on the dangers of pharmaceutical products.
I was first introduced to her work many years ago after she released a video outlining her concerns.
To say that I was impressed by her bravery was an understatement, and from then on I began to follow her work.
In 2015, she founded her website, Learn The Risk, where she outlined the dangers of vaccinations and advocated healthy living.
Her website stated that:
“Learn The Risk is a US-based, non-profit organization and a powerful force for educating people WORLDWIDE on the dangers of pharmaceutical products, including vaccines and unnecessary medical treatments — that are literally killing us.
Learn The Risk was founded by former pharmaceutical insider Brandy Vaughan, an ex-Merck sales executive who never meant to take on the world’s most powerful industry. But she felt she had no choice when the industry’s agenda to keep us all sick began to spiral out of control.
Brandy saw the corruption from the inside when she sold a drug (VIOXX) that was literally killing thousands of people. Now Brandy exposes the truth behind the “health” care system and encourages people to make healthy changes NATURALLY.
Please consider donating to support our mission. Every $ goes straight to the campaign, your contribution may just SAVE a life! ” [3]
Part of her mission to educate the world about the dangers of vaccination, was to have billboards erected across the US, as part of a nationwide campaign.
I am sure that you will agree that these billboards portray an extremely powerful message.
Her business partner, Tina Marie, has vowed to continue her wonderful work.
In 2017, I was honored to meet Brandy in person when she came to London to appear alongside Dr. Andrew Wakefield and Dr. Suzanne Humphries in a secret screening of the film Vaxxed in Regent’s Park, London.
After we went to lunch the following day, I was thrilled and honored when she agreed not only to write a chapter for my new book on HPV vaccination but to also speak at my conference the following year, titled Spotlight on HPV Vaccines.
Her presentation was absolutely amazing and although we did not manage to record it, we have some amazing photos of her giving her presentation.
Although I am not able to publish a recording of her presentation at my conference, I have decided to publish the link to another presentation in her memory. [4]

It is difficult to find the words to describe what a wonderful activist and campaigner that the world has lost, but as a tribute to all her wonderful work I have decided to republish the chapter that she wrote in our book, on my website. [5]
••••
References:
1. Sallie O Elkordy – Vaccines Are Not Healthy for Children and Other Living Things – https://brightfuture83.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/the-mary-and-sallie-show-2017-tinyurl-comvaccinefreeradio/ 2. Eulogy and Song by Mary Elizabeth Elkordy. https://www.facebook.com/maryelkordy/videos/10218690881608127 3. Learn The Risk Website – https://learntherisk.org/ 4. Ex Merck rep Brandy Vaughan – We Are the Army
Our Health for $ale – What You Need to Know About Pharmaceuticals, Vaccines and What’s Coming Next – https://www.facebook.com/rene.vries.5/videos/1708949352602680 5. Brandy Vaughan – Shattered Dreams: The HPV Exposed – https://parentsandcarersagainstinjustice.weebly.com/professional-papers.html
••••
Note from Christina: Please visit my new facebook page Arlos New Beginning, where you can follow my little foster dog Arlo’s, journey to his new life. Arlo is a little dog that I am fostering. He is under a year old and completely unable to walk, due to severe birth deformities. I am fostering him from Hessa’s Homeless Hounds in Hertfordshire. We need to raise around £12.000 ($15.900) to enable him to have the surgery that he so desperately needs, to free him from pain and get him on his feet for the first time in his life. If you enjoy reading my articles/work then please consider donating through my fundraiser, where you can read his full story. Or through my PayPal [email protected] Thank you.
••••
About the Author: Christina England, BA Hons, Research Journalist and Author Christina was born and educated in London, U.K. She left school to work in a children’s library, specialising in storytelling and book buying. In 1978, Christina changed her career path to dedicate her time to caring for the elderly and was awarded the title of Care Giver of the Year for her work with the elderly in 1980. After taking an A Level in Psychology and a BTEC in Learning Support, Ms. England spent many years researching vaccines and adverse reactions. She gained a Higher National Diploma in Journalism and Media Studies in 2010 and in 2016 she gained a BA Hons degree in Literature and Humanities. She currently writes for VacTruth, Health Impact News, GreenMedInfo, The Liberty Beacon, Vaccine Impact and Medical Kidnap on immunisation safety and efficacy. She has co-authored the book – Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis – Are Parents Being Falsely Accused? with Dr. Harold Buttram and Vaccination Policy and the UK Government: The Untold Truth with Lucija Tomljenovic PhD, which are sold on Amazon. She also compiled the book Shattered Dreams: The HPV Vaccine Exposed Her website is Parents and Carers Against Medical Injustice
••••
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-12-17--Unconstitutional? Wisconsin city election officials sought private money to register voters

City officials in Green Bay , Wis. , solicited private money from a voter advocacy group backed by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg , pledging they would use some of the $ 1 million grant to run registration campaigns and conduct outreach to “ underrepresented ” minority voters , according to memos obtained by Just the News through an open records request .
“ [ W ] e ’ d like to reach out to the Hmong , Somali and Spanish-speaking communities with targeted mail , geo-fencing , posters ( billboards ) , radio , television and streaming service PSAs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ texts , as well as voter-navigators , ” the city ’ s grant questionnaire to the Center for Tech and Civic Life stated .
“ We could also employ our voter navigators to have town halls , registration drives in trusted locations and conduct virtual events , ” the questionnaire added .
Legal experts and Wisconsin GOP officials said Wednesday the grant arrangement appeared to put city election officials in the business of conducting partisan activities like get-out-the-vote efforts and registrations usually reserved for political parties and candidates .
They added it possibly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution by targeting only certain ethnic communities deemed favorable to Democrats .
“ Using private funds to have government workers implement voter registration drives — that should be done by political groups — is an ethical concern , ” Wisconsin GOP chairman Andrew Hitt told Just the News .
“ And the fact that they initially offered this money to Democrat cities , to target Democrat constituencies , sheds more light on their actual intentions.
” Phill Kline , head of the Thomas More Society ’ s AMistad Project that has filed lawsuits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 election , said the grant application suggested private money was used to “ fund partisan political activity by local election officials .
Such conduct violates equal protection and federal law .
Such private interests must not be in the voting booth or the counting room.
” When the Center approved a grant for $ 1,094,400 grant for the fall election to Green Bay , it included the requirement to “ dramatically expand voter & community education & outreach , particularly to historically disenfranchised residents , ” suggesting a target of 20,000 new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials might help residents get the official documents needed to register .
“ It would require both considerable staff time to construct that list of residents and directly mail a professionally-designed piece ( in multiple languages ) to those voters .
( $ 50,000 total for staffing , design , printing , and postage ) .
To assist new voters , the City would also like resources to help residents obtain required documents ( i.e .
birth certificates ) which are needed to get a valid state ID needed for voting , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center ’ s grant approval letter stated .
In a section of “ add on questions , ” city officials were asked “ what steps [ they could ] take to register new voters.
” The city ’ s mayor , chief of staff and city clerk responded : “ We would ideally like to use voter navigators to work with community groups to identify and register voters.
” Amaad Rivera , a spokesman for Green Bay Mayor Eric Gengrich ’ s office , told Just the News on Wednesday that city officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
Rather , the city engaged in what he said was “ voter education ” efforts throughout the election year .
That distinction conflicted with the terms contained in the Wisconsin Safe Voting Plan , a document submitted to CTCL by the mayors of Milwaukee , Madison , Green Bay , Kenosha , and Racine , all urban Democrat strongholds .
The cities in that proposal said they were seeking funds to engage in “ voter outreach and education , ” which the document said would involve efforts to “ encourage and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also said that “ significant resources are needed for all five municipalities to … encourage and facilitate new voter registration and registration updates.
” Rivera did not respond to a followup email asking for clarification on those proposals .
Asked earlier about “ voter navigators ” who would help “ community groups ” in their voter registration efforts , Rivera said that term refers to municipal employees “ who helped people answer questions such as , what forms of ID work ?
What are the early vote rules ?
If I have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The Center for Tech and Civic Life , which ultimately distributed $ 6.3 million to the Wisconsin cities , did not respond to a query on Wednesday regarding the funds .
CTCL made headlines earlier in the year when it received what ended up being more than a third of a billion dollars from Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan that it planned to use to “ help ensure that [ local jurisdictions ] have the staffing , training , and equipment necessary ” to conduct the 2020 election .
That infusion occurred after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wisconsin cities .
In the U.S. , get-out-the-vote campaigns and voter registration drives are overwhelmingly the province of nonprofit groups and political campaigns rather than government authorities , though municipal authorities , including in Wisconsin , have at times undertaken voting outreach and registration efforts , as Milwaukee County was doing prior to the pandemic this year .
Yet the documents offer further evidence that the major cash infusion from the CTCL into Wisconsin politics was intended in part to allow municipal authorities to proactively boost voter numbers in Democratic strongholds in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been officially certified with Joe Biden holding a razor-thin 20,000-vote lead , even narrower than Trump ’ s victory there in 2016 .
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB )

Unconstitutional? Wisconsin city election officials sought private money to register voters
GOP official, legal expert says private funding requirements detailed in memos raises ethical, Constitutional issues
By Daniel Payne , John Solomon and Natalia Mittelstadt
City officials in Green Bay, Wis., solicited private money from a voter advocacy group backed by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, pledging they would use some of the $1 million grant to run registration campaigns and conduct outreach to “underrepresented” minority voters, according to memos obtained by Just the News through an open records request.
“[W]e’d like to reach out to the Hmong, Somali and Spanish-speaking communities with targeted mail, geo-fencing, posters (billboards), radio, television and streaming service PSAs, digital advertising, robo calls and robo texts, as well as voter-navigators,” the city’s grant questionnaire to the Center for Tech and Civic Life stated.
“We could also employ our voter navigators to have town halls, registration drives in trusted locations and conduct virtual events,” the questionnaire added.
Legal experts and Wisconsin GOP officials said Wednesday the grant arrangement appeared to put city election officials in the business of conducting partisan activities like get-out-the-vote efforts and registrations usually reserved for political parties and candidates. They added it possibly violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution by targeting only certain ethnic communities deemed favorable to Democrats.
“Using private funds to have government workers implement voter registration drives — that should be done by political groups — is an ethical concern,” Wisconsin GOP chairman Andrew Hitt told Just the News. “And the fact that they initially offered this money to Democrat cities, to target Democrat constituencies, sheds more light on their actual intentions.”
Phill Kline, head of the Thomas More Society’s AMistad Project that has filed lawsuits in several states challenging irregularities in the 2020 election, said the grant application suggested private money was used to “fund partisan political activity by local election officials. Such conduct violates equal protection and federal law. Such private interests must not be in the voting booth or the counting room.”
When the Center approved a grant for $1,094,400 grant for the fall election to Green Bay, it included the requirement to “dramatically expand voter & community education & outreach, particularly to historically disenfranchised residents,” suggesting a target of 20,000 new registered voters. It even suggested city officials might help residents get the official documents needed to register.
“It would require both considerable staff time to construct that list of residents and directly mail a professionally-designed piece (in multiple languages) to those voters. ($50,000 total for staffing, design, printing, and postage). To assist new voters, the City would also like resources to help residents obtain required documents (i.e. birth certificates) which are needed to get a valid state ID needed for voting,” one of the documents attached to the Center’s grant approval letter stated.
In a section of “add on questions,” city officials were asked “what steps [they could] take to register new voters.”
The city’s mayor, chief of staff and city clerk responded: “We would ideally like to use voter navigators to work with community groups to identify and register voters.”
Amaad Rivera, a spokesman for Green Bay Mayor Eric Gengrich’s office, told Just the News on Wednesday that city officials never held any voter registration drives this year. Rather, the city engaged in what he said was “voter education” efforts throughout the election year.
That distinction conflicted with the terms contained in the Wisconsin Safe Voting Plan, a document submitted to CTCL by the mayors of Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, Kenosha, and Racine, all urban Democrat strongholds. The cities in that proposal said they were seeking funds to engage in “voter outreach and education,” which the document said would involve efforts to “encourage and explain new voter registration.” The plan also said that “significant resources are needed for all five municipalities to … encourage and facilitate new voter registration and registration updates.”
Rivera did not respond to a followup email asking for clarification on those proposals. Asked earlier about “voter navigators” who would help “community groups” in their voter registration efforts, Rivera said that term refers to municipal employees “who helped people answer questions such as, what forms of ID work? What are the early vote rules? If I have a disability, what can I do?”
The Center for Tech and Civic Life, which ultimately distributed $6.3 million to the Wisconsin cities, did not respond to a query on Wednesday regarding the funds.
CTCL made headlines earlier in the year when it received what ended up being more than a third of a billion dollars from Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan that it planned to use to “help ensure that [local jurisdictions] have the staffing, training, and equipment necessary” to conduct the 2020 election. That infusion occurred after CTCL’s multimillion-dollar grant to the Wisconsin cities.
In the U.S., get-out-the-vote campaigns and voter registration drives are overwhelmingly the province of nonprofit groups and political campaigns rather than government authorities, though municipal authorities, including in Wisconsin, have at times undertaken voting outreach and registration efforts, as Milwaukee County was doing prior to the pandemic this year.
Yet the documents offer further evidence that the major cash infusion from the CTCL into Wisconsin politics was intended in part to allow municipal authorities to proactively boost voter numbers in Democratic strongholds in the state, critics say. Wisconsin has been officially certified with Joe Biden holding a razor-thin 20,000-vote lead, even narrower than Trump’s victory there in 2016.
_________
THE FACTS INSIDE OUR REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-12-18--How the State Spreads … ‘Mass Hysteria’

How the State Spreads … ‘Mass Hysteria’

The history of mass hysteria , or mass sociogenic illness is fascinating .
Cases of mass hysteria have been documented since the Middle Ages .
Let me just mention a few of the more recent cases .
When a radio play by Orson Welles , War of the Worlds , was broadcasted in 1938 shortly after the suspension of the Munich agreement , the play allegedly caused panic among listeners , who thought that they were under attack by Martians .
Another intriguing case is an episode of a Portuguese TV show called Strawberries with Sugar .
In the episode @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life-threatening virus .
After the show , more than three hundred students reported similar symptoms as the ones experienced by the TV show characters such as rashes and difficulty breathing .
Some schools even closed .
The Portuguese National Institute for Medical Emergency concluded that the virus did not exist in reality and that the symptoms were caused by mass hysteria .
Similarly , on Emirates flight 203 in September 2018 , dozens of passengers started to believe they were sick after observing other passengers with flu-like symptoms .
As a consequence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quarantined .
In the end only a few passengers had a common cold or the seasonal flu .
It is well known that there exist nocebo effects , which are the opposite of placebo effects .
Due the placebo effect , a person recovers from an illness because she expects to do so .
When we suffer a nocebo effect , on the other hand , we get ill just because we expect to become ill. ( 1 ) In a self-fulfilling prophecy , the expectation can cause the symptoms .
Anxiety and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) Mass hysteria can cause people to have symptoms .
Moreover , hysteria , be it collective or not , makes people behave in ways that prudent persons not affected by the hysteria would likely consider absurd .
It is open for empirical research to investigate if and to what extent the world has been suffering from mass hysteria during the covid-19 epidemic .
( 3 ) We all have seen people hoarding toilet paper , wearing masks while driving alone in cars , or have heard stories of people virtually not leaving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know people who are scared by the virus even though their own risk of death is minuscule .
While investigating the possibility of a corona mass hysteria is certainly interesting , I would like to focus here on a more fundamental question ; namely , the extent to which the existence of the state can exacerbate mass hysteria .
Certainly , there can be cases of mass hysteria in a free society , due to the negativity bias of the human brain .
We focus on negative news and suffer psychological stress when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This may happen also in a free society when negative news prevail .
Yet in a free society there exist certain self-corrective mechanisms and limits that make it more difficult for mass hysteria to spiral out of control .
As a corrective mechanism , there exist well-known strategies to reduce fear and anxiety .
In a free society people are free to make use of these strategies .
One can release tension from one ’ s body through sports and exercises .
Moreover , it is essential to find distractions from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ free society these distractions abound .
It is true that hysteria can lead people to inflict enormous harm on themselves and others .
Yet in a free society there exists an essential limit to the havoc caused by mass hysteria , and this limit is private property rights .
In a free society mass hysteria can not lead to a massive violation of private property rights by the state , simply because the state does not exist .
Moreover , while anyone in a health hysteria may voluntarily close his business , wear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in a free society no one can force others who do not succumb to the hysteria to close their businesses , wear masks , or quarantine .
A small minority who continue to live their normal lives and are free to do so can be a wake-up call to those who succumbed to the mass hysteria , especially the borderline cases .
Imagine that a small group of people continues to go shopping , to work , to breath freely , to meet with friends and family , and that they do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their example and the group of hysterics shrinks .
While the destruction inflicted by mass hysteria is limited by private property rights in a free society , such limits do not exist when there is a state .
( 4 ) Indeed , a well-organized group that has succumbed to mass hysteria may get control of the state apparatus and impose measures on the rest of the population and inflict untold harm .
The possibility of mass hysteria is an important reason why the institution of the state is so dangerous .
Moreover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are mechanisms that reduce mass panics , mass hysteria can be exacerbated by the state for several reasons : First , the state can and , as in the case of the covid-19 epidemic , does prohibit and diminish those activities that reduce fear and anxiety , such as sports and diversion .
The state actually fosters social isolation , contributing to anxiety and psychological strain , ingredients that spur mass hysteria .
Second , the state takes a centralized approach to dealing with the source of the hysteria , in our case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The state imposes its solution , and in consequence there is no or very reduced experimentation to solve the problem .
People who have not succumbed to the hysteria and oppose the state ’ s approach are suppressed .
They can not demonstrate alternative ways to confront the “ crisis , ” because these alternative ways are prohibited by the state .
As a consequence , groupthink increases and the hysteria feeds itself , as no alternatives are shown to people .
Third , in a state , the media is often politicized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have close relationships with the state .
Media outlets may be directly owned by the state , as are public TV channels , they may need state licenses to operate , they may look for the goodwill of state agencies , or may simply be staffed with people who were educated in state schools .
These news agencies and social media platforms engage in massive negative news campaigns , intentionally scare people , and suppress alternative information .
If people listen to , watch , or read negative and one-sided stories all day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mass hysteria sponsored by a biased media sector may run out of control .
Fourth , negative news from an authoritative source is especially harmful for psychological health and produces anxiety .
If there exists in society an institution of total power such as the state that intervenes in the lives of people from birth to death , ( 5 ) the announcements of its representatives acquire weight .
Many people attach great authority to these representatives and to the warnings of state institutions .
So , when a doctor such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state and tells the people to worry and wear masks , it becomes easier for mass hysteria to develop than would be the case in a decentralized society .
Fifth , the state sometimes actively wants to instill fear in the population , thereby contributing to the making of mass hysteria .
In fact , during the first months of the corona epidemic , an internal paper of the German Department of the Interior was leaked to the public .
In the paper , the experts recommend that the German government instill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paper recommends increasing fear with three communication measures .
First , the authorities should emphasize the breathing problems of covid-19 patients , because the human beings have a primordial fear of death by suffocation , which can easily trigger panic .
Second , fear should also be instilled in children .
Children could get infected easily when meeting with other children .
They should be told that when they in turn infect their parents and grandparents these could suffer a distressful death at home .
This measure intends to invoke feelings of guilt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possibility of unknown long-term irreversible damage after a corona infection and the possibility of the sudden deaths of people who were infected .
All these measures were intended to increase fear in the population .
Fear , at the end , is the foundation of every government´s power .
As H.L .
Mencken put it : To sum up : mass hysteria is possible in a free society , but there are self-correcting mechanisms .
The harm such hysteria may inflict is limited by the enforcement of private property rights .
The state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tremendous havoc .
What are local , limited , and isolated outbreaks of mass hysteria in a free society the state can convert into a global mass hysteria .
Unfortunately , there is no limit to the damage mass hysteria can do to life and liberty if it takes hold of the government , as the state does not respect private property .
The unscrupulous violation of basic liberties during the corona epidemic is a case in point .
The possibility of mass hysteria is another reason why the state is such a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 ) In a famous case a man tried to suicide himself .
He thought he was swallowing twenty-nine capsules of an experimental drug .
However , they were in reality placebos .
But he was thinking he would be killing himself .
He arrived at the hospital with extreme low blood pressure and other serios symptoms .
When the doctor of the medical trial arrived and told him that he had taken just placebos , the man recovered within fifteen minutes .
• ( 2 ) During the Spanish flu panic contributed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occurred .
• ( 3 ) Keep in mind that the psychological strain on and the anxiety suffered by the population during the lockdowns was tremendous .
• ( 4 ) For the psychology of masses and their irrationality see the classical work of Gustave Le Bon .
• ( 5 ) A related point regards the consequences that come with a population that stopped believing in God and started to believe in the state instead .
When people turn away from religion and stop believing in a life after death , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong fear of death is another factor contributing to panics , disorders , and mass hysteria .
As Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn has put it : “ It is difficult to fear death if one is very pious .
It is difficult not to worship health if one fears death .
It is difficult to enforce general health without large scale state intervention and it is equally difficult to imagine increased state intervention without a loss of liberties.
” The Menace of the Herd or Procrustes at Large ( Milkwaukee , WI : Bruce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
38–39 .

How the State Spreads Mass Hysteria
By: Philipp Bagus
The history of mass hysteria, or mass sociogenic illness is fascinating. Cases of mass hysteria have been documented since the Middle Ages. Let me just mention a few of the more recent cases.
When a radio play by Orson Welles, War of the Worlds, was broadcasted in 1938 shortly after the suspension of the Munich agreement, the play allegedly caused panic among listeners, who thought that they were under attack by Martians.
Another intriguing case is an episode of a Portuguese TV show called Strawberries with Sugar. In the episode, the characters were infected by a life-threatening virus. After the show, more than three hundred students reported similar symptoms as the ones experienced by the TV show characters such as rashes and difficulty breathing. Some schools even closed. The Portuguese National Institute for Medical Emergency concluded that the virus did not exist in reality and that the symptoms were caused by mass hysteria.
Similarly, on Emirates flight 203 in September 2018, dozens of passengers started to believe they were sick after observing other passengers with flu-like symptoms. As a consequence of the panic, the whole flight was quarantined. In the end only a few passengers had a common cold or the seasonal flu.
It is well known that there exist nocebo effects, which are the opposite of placebo effects. Due the placebo effect, a person recovers from an illness because she expects to do so. When we suffer a nocebo effect, on the other hand, we get ill just because we expect to become ill.(1) In a self-fulfilling prophecy, the expectation can cause the symptoms. Anxiety and fear exacerbate this process.(2)
Mass hysteria can cause people to have symptoms. Moreover, hysteria, be it collective or not, makes people behave in ways that prudent persons not affected by the hysteria would likely consider absurd. It is open for empirical research to investigate if and to what extent the world has been suffering from mass hysteria during the covid-19 epidemic.(3) We all have seen people hoarding toilet paper, wearing masks while driving alone in cars, or have heard stories of people virtually not leaving their houses for months. We also know people who are scared by the virus even though their own risk of death is minuscule.
While investigating the possibility of a corona mass hysteria is certainly interesting, I would like to focus here on a more fundamental question; namely, the extent to which the existence of the state can exacerbate mass hysteria. Certainly, there can be cases of mass hysteria in a free society, due to the negativity bias of the human brain. We focus on negative news and suffer psychological stress when we think we are not in control. This may happen also in a free society when negative news prevail. Yet in a free society there exist certain self-corrective mechanisms and limits that make it more difficult for mass hysteria to spiral out of control.
As a corrective mechanism, there exist well-known strategies to reduce fear and anxiety. In a free society people are free to make use of these strategies. One can release tension from one’s body through sports and exercises. Moreover, it is essential to find distractions from the negative news and socialize. In a free society these distractions abound.
It is true that hysteria can lead people to inflict enormous harm on themselves and others. Yet in a free society there exists an essential limit to the havoc caused by mass hysteria, and this limit is private property rights. In a free society mass hysteria cannot lead to a massive violation of private property rights by the state, simply because the state does not exist.
Moreover, while anyone in a health hysteria may voluntarily close his business, wear a mask, or stay at home, in a free society no one can force others who do not succumb to the hysteria to close their businesses, wear masks, or quarantine. A small minority who continue to live their normal lives and are free to do so can be a wake-up call to those who succumbed to the mass hysteria, especially the borderline cases. Imagine that a small group of people continues to go shopping, to work, to breath freely, to meet with friends and family, and that they do not die. Others may then follow their example and the group of hysterics shrinks.
While the destruction inflicted by mass hysteria is limited by private property rights in a free society, such limits do not exist when there is a state.(4) Indeed, a well-organized group that has succumbed to mass hysteria may get control of the state apparatus and impose measures on the rest of the population and inflict untold harm. The possibility of mass hysteria is an important reason why the institution of the state is so dangerous.
Moreover, while in a free society there are mechanisms that reduce mass panics, mass hysteria can be exacerbated by the state for several reasons:
First, the state can and, as in the case of the covid-19 epidemic, does prohibit and diminish those activities that reduce fear and anxiety, such as sports and diversion. The state actually fosters social isolation, contributing to anxiety and psychological strain, ingredients that spur mass hysteria.
Second, the state takes a centralized approach to dealing with the source of the hysteria, in our case the perceived threat of a virus. The state imposes its solution, and in consequence there is no or very reduced experimentation to solve the problem. People who have not succumbed to the hysteria and oppose the state’s approach are suppressed. They cannot demonstrate alternative ways to confront the “crisis,” because these alternative ways are prohibited by the state. As a consequence, groupthink increases and the hysteria feeds itself, as no alternatives are shown to people.
Third, in a state, the media is often politicized. News outlets and social media platforms have close relationships with the state. Media outlets may be directly owned by the state, as are public TV channels, they may need state licenses to operate, they may look for the goodwill of state agencies, or may simply be staffed with people who were educated in state schools. These news agencies and social media platforms engage in massive negative news campaigns, intentionally scare people, and suppress alternative information. If people listen to, watch, or read negative and one-sided stories all day, their psychological stress and anxiety increases. Mass hysteria sponsored by a biased media sector may run out of control.
Fourth, negative news from an authoritative source is especially harmful for psychological health and produces anxiety. If there exists in society an institution of total power such as the state that intervenes in the lives of people from birth to death,(5) the announcements of its representatives acquire weight. Many people attach great authority to these representatives and to the warnings of state institutions. So, when a doctor such as Anthony Fauci speaks in the name of the state and tells the people to worry and wear masks, it becomes easier for mass hysteria to develop than would be the case in a decentralized society.
Fifth, the state sometimes actively wants to instill fear in the population, thereby contributing to the making of mass hysteria. In fact, during the first months of the corona epidemic, an internal paper of the German Department of the Interior was leaked to the public. In the paper, the experts recommend that the German government instill fear in the German population. The paper recommends increasing fear with three communication measures. First, the authorities should emphasize the breathing problems of covid-19 patients, because the human beings have a primordial fear of death by suffocation, which can easily trigger panic. Second, fear should also be instilled in children. Children could get infected easily when meeting with other children. They should be told that when they in turn infect their parents and grandparents these could suffer a distressful death at home. This measure intends to invoke feelings of guilt. Third, authorities should mention the possibility of unknown long-term irreversible damage after a corona infection and the possibility of the sudden deaths of people who were infected. All these measures were intended to increase fear in the population. Fear, at the end, is the foundation of every government´s power. As H.L. Mencken put it:
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
To sum up: mass hysteria is possible in a free society, but there are self-correcting mechanisms. The harm such hysteria may inflict is limited by the enforcement of private property rights. The state amplifies and exacerbates mass panics, causing tremendous havoc. What are local, limited, and isolated outbreaks of mass hysteria in a free society the state can convert into a global mass hysteria. Unfortunately, there is no limit to the damage mass hysteria can do to life and liberty if it takes hold of the government, as the state does not respect private property. The unscrupulous violation of basic liberties during the corona epidemic is a case in point. The possibility of mass hysteria is another reason why the state is such a dangerous institution to have.
References:
(1) In a famous case a man tried to suicide himself. He thought he was swallowing twenty-nine capsules of an experimental drug. However, they were in reality placebos. But he was thinking he would be killing himself. He arrived at the hospital with extreme low blood pressure and other serios symptoms. When the doctor of the medical trial arrived and told him that he had taken just placebos, the man recovered within fifteen minutes.
(2) During the Spanish flu panic contributed to deaths that otherwise would not have occurred.
(3) Keep in mind that the psychological strain on and the anxiety suffered by the population during the lockdowns was tremendous.
(4) For the psychology of masses and their irrationality see the classical work of Gustave Le Bon.
(5) A related point regards the consequences that come with a population that stopped believing in God and started to believe in the state instead. When people turn away from religion and stop believing in a life after death, they start to fear death more. A strong fear of death is another factor contributing to panics, disorders, and mass hysteria. As Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn has put it: “It is difficult to fear death if one is very pious. It is difficult not to worship health if one fears death. It is difficult to enforce general health without large scale state intervention and it is equally difficult to imagine increased state intervention without a loss of liberties.” The Menace of the Herd or Procrustes at Large (Milkwaukee, WI: Bruce Publishing Company, 1943), pp. 38–39.
••••
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-12-18--The Decimal Point that … Blew Up the World

The Decimal Point that Blew Up the World What was the basis of panic that led the lights to darken on civilization ?
The most important date here might be March 11 , 2020 .
That ’ s when Congress itself flew into an unwarranted panic , and acquiesced to a lockdown at the urging of the “ experts.
” State governors followed one by one , with few exceptions , and the rest of the world joined the lockdown frenzy .
In February , people were aching to know the answer to the following .
Would this “ novel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the flu , seasonal colds , and other predictable and manageable pathogens ?
Or would this be something entirely different , unprecedented in our lifetimes , terrifying , and universally deadly ?
Crucial in this stage was public-health messaging .
In previous pandemics from post-1918 throughout the 20th century , the central messaging was to stay calm , go to the doctor if you feel sick , avoid deliberately infecting others , and otherwise trust the systems in place and keep society functioning .
This was long considered responsible public-health messaging , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stood throughout most of January and February , when publications regardless of their political outlook maintained sobriety and rationality .
Something dramatically changed this time .
They pushed panic , tapping into a primal fear of disease .
The reality of pandemic , as it turns out , has been familiar .
The severity of its impact has been radically disparate across demographics , hitting mainly the elderly and infirm with 40 % of deaths tracing to long-term care facilities with an average age of death nearly equal to the average lifespan .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a seasonal pattern from pandemic to its endemic equilibrium .
What has been different has been the messaging that has almost universally been structured to create public frenzy , from the New York Times ’ s February 28 urge to “ go medieval ” to Salon ’ s latest demand that we panic even more .
My own sense of impending doom began on March 6 with the cancellation of South by Southwest in Austin , Texas , an action of the mayor alone , and completely without modern precedent .
I wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ days later , President Trump gave a nationwide address that ended with a shocking announcement that all flights from Europe would be stopped to keep the coronavirus out even though the virus had been here since January .
The next day , on March 13 , the administration issued what amounted to a shutdown plan for the nation .
We should also all be grateful to Ronald B .
Brown of Waterloo University for his extraordinary paper that appears in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness ( Vol 14 , No .
3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation.
” It also appears on the website of the National Institutes of Health with a date of August 12 .
Our author ’ s thesis was that the wild overreaction and unprecedented lockdowns of life began with what was a terminological mixup that led to a misplacement of a decimal point in a report from the National Institutes of Health .
It was a seemingly small error but it provided the basis on which Anthony Fauci testified at the House Oversight and Reform Committee about the seriousness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here is the video in question .
As you watch , you will note the seeming precision of data that actually masks a huge problem .
He obscures the huge difference between the infection fatality rate , the case fatality rate , and the overall death rate .
Nowhere does he mention survival rates .
Not one person present pushed back on his claims .
In the blizzard of data , he finally summarizes in a way that terrified everyone .
Covid , he said , is “ 10 times more lethal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from that prediction , his entire demeanor was : this is entirely new , very deadly , and unbearably unmanageable without extreme measures .
Fauci ’ s implicit message to Congress and the American people was that it is time to panic .
Fauci was claiming what in fact he could not know , conflating two distinct data sets , and extrapolating in ways that allowed him to make a completely unsupported claim that very obviously turned out to be false .
Two years ago , 61,000 Americans of all ages died of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you incorrectly impose on that a “ case fatality rate ” of 0.1 % and extrapolate to Covid infections , you end up with at least 800,000 deaths from Covid alone – not “ with ” or “ involving ” Covid as the CDC classifies deaths today ( that alone represents a big change ) .
This is a scary prediction at the time ; it seemed to add weight to the estimates out of the Imperial College of London that 2.2 million people would die without locking down .
This testimony @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe that none of the traditional medical measures could or would work .
There is no comparing this with the flu or any respiratory illness .
This was the Other that justified a once-in-many-generations national emergency that required an end to our way of life .
The trouble is that the whole claim was based on a terminological misstatement that fed a basic math error .
As Brown explains : Let ’ s follow Brown here as he takes the reader through the crucial differences between the IFR and the CFR .
IFRs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undiagnosed , asymptomatic , and mild infections.
” To calculate the average IFR across the population , you do randomized samples to judge its prevalence .
The results are inclusive of cases – what we used to call actual “ sick ” people – but extend to people who merely carry traces of the dead virus but are in no substantial danger of passing it onward or experiencing any severe outcomes .
Cases , on the other hand , “ are based exclusively on relatively smaller groups of moderately to severely ill diagnosed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The CFR is a smaller group .
Brown provides the following graphic to show how epidemiology has long considered the difference .
Based on this graphic alone , you can see why it becomes crucial to keep these terms straight .
The CFR is higher ; IFR is lower ; the crude mortality rate is lower still .
The CFR measures severity ; the IFR measures prevalence .
Those are the two general issues one needs to know to assess whether and to what extent a virus outbreak is mild , moderate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matters due to the long-observed evolved reality of respiratory viruses : there is a trade off between the forces .
The more severe the virus , the quicker it burns itself out .
The milder ( and “ smarter ” ) it is , the more it can spread .
To mix up severity and prevalence is to make a mess of all the important categories that infectious disease specialists use to assess the social impact of a new virus .
Moreover , if you are going to compare how severe a pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to apples , which means at the very minimum that we must be careful to distinguish apples from oranges from pears .
That is precisely what the early messaging surrounding the coronavirus did not do .
Cases are not deaths ; even more crucially , cases in a traditional sense mean that people are actually sick , not merely that they have been tested positive by a PCR test .
Adding to the confusion , most data sources on Covid today use the term “ cases ” to identify any positive test , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ correct word would be “ infections.
” Further , the PCR test itself presents its own problems .
As Brown notes , “ A serious limitation of RT-PCR testing is that nucleic acid detection is not capable of determining the difference between infective and noninfective viruses.
” The widespread use of the PCR test has made its own contribution to blurring all these crucial distinctions .
Now consider an extraordinary article from the New England Journal of Medicine that appeared on February 28 , with Anthony Fauci as the co-author .
The import @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid and flu are quite similar in severity .
“ The overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza ( which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1 % ) or a pandemic influenza ( similar to those in 1957 and 1968 ) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS , which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10 % and 36 % , respectively.
” What matters here is not the prediction as such but the switching of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flu has “ a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1 % .
” This was incorrect even at the time of writing .
You can call it a misprint or sloppy or downright duplicitous .
Regardless , even the World Health Organization had identified the 0.1 % figure as the flu ’ s infection fatality rate .
If you assume one symptomatic confirmed case for every infection ( or what is now confusingly called “ cumulative cases ” ) , the error could be a misplace decimal : 0.01 % not 0.1 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly contradicted the WHO , and ran counter to everything that was already then known .
But his CFR claim about flu is precisely what led him to claim in front of the Congressional committee that Covid would be deadly in ways that defy all experience of this generation .
As of this writing , however , deaths “ involving ” or “ with ” Covid has passed 300,000 , which while less than half as high as what Congress heard they would be on March 11 , is still quite high , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ misclassified .
However , on March 24 , the CDC made an announcement of serious significance .
It would now calculate coronavirus mortality by including “ probable ” and “ likely ” deaths in the International Classification of Diseases code ( ICD ) .
This became an invitation to misclassification .
People who otherwise would have previously been classified as having heart disease or some other comorbidity could now be classified as Covid .
This also included a financial incentive to do just that .
For this reason , when the CDC announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths , Covid-19 was the only cause mentioned , ” it came as a shock to people .
What that means is that 94 % of the deaths attributed to Covid were associated with additional comorbidities that prevented the immune system from fighting off the virus .
Following the March 11 Fauci testimony , in which he conflated IFR and CFR , the national media went wild with Covid and flu comparison .
The following article , for example , blew up from BusinessInsider in June : “ The coronavirus death rate in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than that of the flu .
See how they compare by age bracket.
” If you look carefully at the charts , you can see something fishy : they calculated infection fatality rate for flu against the case fatality rate for Covid .
That necessarily generates a wild overestimate for Covid deaths .
The charts are terrifying – and have nothing to do with reality .
Let ’ s hop forward from the testimony days to one month later when full-scale panic had already hit the U.S .
Speaking at a White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claim that strains credulity at every level .
He said at a White House press briefing that the stringencies and “ social distancing ” could not and would not be relaxed until there are no “ no new cases , no deaths.
” Such a thing has happened only once in the history of viruses : smallpox .
From the first experiments with inoculation to the final eradication took some 250 years .
And yet here we have Fauci explaining that life could not be normal and functioning again until this widespread virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the population , was completely eradicated from the planet !
And now we have the vaccine , and plenty of questions remaining about it , such as why non-vulnerable populations would prefer to take it over gaining the exposure necessary for naturally acquired immunity .
Asking such a basic question is very close to being tabooed , even as lawmakers and other institutions are toying with the idea of making it mandatory .
Even then , many of the lockdown advocates from earlier this year are saying that it will not enable us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take off the masks , to go to the movies , or travel again .
This is precisely the belief you might expect from a crowd that participated in what John Iaonnidis called a “ one-in-a-century evidence fiasco ” and are desperately trying to dig themselves out of losing every bit of scientific credibility .
Whether Brown is correct that the whole panic truly does trace to a brain flakeout on the part of Fauci – or even perhaps a deliberate “ noble lie ” to deceive the public into accepting the unacceptable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we face now is a huge tangle over terminology such that “ infections ” that could include as many as 90 % false positives ( according to the NYT ) are called cases , while the once-distinct condition called cases which used to indicate actually being sick no longer has any precise meaning .
The cacophony of statistical confusion here truly boggles the mind .
In the midst of all of this , the CDC itself finally updated its own estimates of the infection fatality rate of Covid-19 .
The CDC wisely took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ severe outcomes .
There is not one rate that applies to the whole population or to any particular individual .
There are only backward looking estimates of outcomes .
They are all follows : Flipping the data to state it by survival rate by age : John Ioannidis sums up the disparity by age with the following infection fatality rate for people under the age of 70 : 0.05 % .
This conclusion has been peer-reviewed and published by the World Health Organization .
How does this compare with the flu ?
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalist Shin Jie Yong has written , “ There seems to be no data on age-specific IFR of the seasonal flu.
” What this means is that crucial testimony of Fauci from March 11 , in which he casually predicted based on bad numbers , that Covid would be ten times worse than the flu , can neither be confirmed or denied based on age-specific severe outcomes .
However , we can assemble the data based on years of lost life .
Consider the long-term view over the future course of existing lifetimes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanded dramatically throughout the population , the estimated infection fatality rate of Covid will fall further .
Thus can we observe a chart of “ cases ” ( actually positive tests ) all over the world and compare it with severe outcomes and see something remarkable that should make every living person fundamentally question why they decided to shut down the world and wreck billions of lives .
Another statistic that bears repeating , Covid – based on infections vs deaths – has close to a 99.9 % survival rate .
Imagine how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fauci told that to the Congress on that fateful day of March 11 .
Or what if Fauci had revealed that the average age of death from Covid would almost equal the average lifespan in the US and exceed it in most parts of the world ?
People present might have wondered why they were holding hearings at all .
All these categories of data placement carry with them the danger of creating an illusion of control .
Viruses do not come with little gears inside them with these rates .
Human beings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not one of them ( whether IFR , CFR , infection rates , mortality rates , survival rates ) pertains infallibly to any single individual .
Our response to a virus is contingent on our own health , age , cross immunities , T cell memory , and a thousand other factors that no politician controls .
What we know is that a terminological confusion , a misplaced decimal point , a one-word error in data description , and a massive amount of arrogant presumptions about how to control a virus set in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our great and prosperous country into a disaster of confusion , demoralization , foregone medical services , closed businesses , wrecked arts and education , and long bread lines .
The lockdowners who created this appalling disaster , the people who turned our trust into betrayal and a blizzard of statistical baloney , need to look at the science and data as they stand and come clean .

The Decimal Point that Blew Up the World
By: Jeffrey A. Tucker
What was the basis of panic that led the lights to darken on civilization? The most important date here might be March 11, 2020. That’s when Congress itself flew into an unwarranted panic, and acquiesced to a lockdown at the urging of the “experts.” State governors followed one by one, with few exceptions, and the rest of the world joined the lockdown frenzy.
In February, people were aching to know the answer to the following. Would this “novel virus” have familiar patterns we associate with the flu, seasonal colds, and other predictable and manageable pathogens? Or would this be something entirely different, unprecedented in our lifetimes, terrifying, and universally deadly?
Crucial in this stage was public-health messaging. In previous pandemics from post-1918 throughout the 20th century, the central messaging was to stay calm, go to the doctor if you feel sick, avoid deliberately infecting others, and otherwise trust the systems in place and keep society functioning. This was long considered responsible public-health messaging, and this was pretty much where we stood throughout most of January and February, when publications regardless of their political outlook maintained sobriety and rationality.
Something dramatically changed this time. They pushed panic, tapping into a primal fear of disease. The reality of pandemic, as it turns out, has been familiar. The severity of its impact has been radically disparate across demographics, hitting mainly the elderly and infirm with 40% of deaths tracing to long-term care facilities with an average age of death nearly equal to the average lifespan. It is regionally migratory. It follows a seasonal pattern from pandemic to its endemic equilibrium.
What has been different has been the messaging that has almost universally been structured to create public frenzy, from the New York Times’s February 28 urge to “go medieval” to Salon’s latest demand that we panic even more.
My own sense of impending doom began on March 6 with the cancellation of South by Southwest in Austin, Texas, an action of the mayor alone, and completely without modern precedent. I wrote about it on March 8. Four days later, President Trump gave a nationwide address that ended with a shocking announcement that all flights from Europe would be stopped to keep the coronavirus out even though the virus had been here since January. The next day, on March 13, the administration issued what amounted to a shutdown plan for the nation.
This timeline, however, misses a crucial step.
We should also all be grateful to Ronald B. Brown of Waterloo University for his extraordinary paper that appears in Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness (Vol 14, No. 3): “Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation.” It also appears on the website of the National Institutes of Health with a date of August 12. Our author’s thesis was that the wild overreaction and unprecedented lockdowns of life began with what was a terminological mixup that led to a misplacement of a decimal point in a report from the National Institutes of Health.
It was a seemingly small error but it provided the basis on which Anthony Fauci testified at the House Oversight and Reform Committee about the seriousness of novel coronavirus spreading across the globe.
Here is the video in question. As you watch, you will note the seeming precision of data that actually masks a huge problem. He obscures the huge difference between the infection fatality rate, the case fatality rate, and the overall death rate. Nowhere does he mention survival rates. Not one person present pushed back on his claims. In the blizzard of data, he finally summarizes in a way that terrified everyone. Covid, he said, is “10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu.”
Even apart from that prediction, his entire demeanor was: this is entirely new, very deadly, and unbearably unmanageable without extreme measures. Fauci’s implicit message to Congress and the American people was that it is time to panic.

Fauci was claiming what in fact he could not know, conflating two distinct data sets, and extrapolating in ways that allowed him to make a completely unsupported claim that very obviously turned out to be false. Two years ago, 61,000 Americans of all ages died of flu, exclusive of other ailments. If you incorrectly impose on that a “case fatality rate” of 0.1% and extrapolate to Covid infections, you end up with at least 800,000 deaths from Covid alone – not “with” or “involving” Covid as the CDC classifies deaths today (that alone represents a big change). This is a scary prediction at the time; it seemed to add weight to the estimates out of the Imperial College of London that 2.2 million people would die without locking down. This testimony led a whole generation of lawmakers to believe that none of the traditional medical measures could or would work. There is no comparing this with the flu or any respiratory illness. This was the Other that justified a once-in-many-generations national emergency that required an end to our way of life.
The trouble is that the whole claim was based on a terminological misstatement that fed a basic math error. As Brown explains:
Sampling bias in coronavirus mortality calculations led to a 10-fold increased mortality overestimation in March 11, 2020, US Congressional testimony. This bias most likely followed from information bias due to misclassifying a seasonal influenza IFR as a CFR, evident in a NEJM.org editorial. Evidence from the WHO confirmed that the approximate CFR of the coronavirus is generally no higher than that of seasonal influenza. By early May 2020, mortality levels from COVID-19 were considerably below predicted overestimations, a result that the public attributed to successful mitigating measures to contain the spread of the novel coronavirus.
Let’s follow Brown here as he takes the reader through the crucial differences between the IFR and the CFR. IFRs from samples across the population “include undiagnosed, asymptomatic, and mild infections.” To calculate the average IFR across the population, you do randomized samples to judge its prevalence. The results are inclusive of cases – what we used to call actual “sick” people – but extend to people who merely carry traces of the dead virus but are in no substantial danger of passing it onward or experiencing any severe outcomes. Cases, on the other hand, “are based exclusively on relatively smaller groups of moderately to severely ill diagnosed cases at the beginning of an outbreak.” The CFR is a smaller group. Brown provides the following graphic to show how epidemiology has long considered the difference.
Based on this graphic alone, you can see why it becomes crucial to keep these terms straight. The CFR is higher; IFR is lower; the crude mortality rate is lower still. The CFR measures severity; the IFR measures prevalence. Those are the two general issues one needs to know to assess whether and to what extent a virus outbreak is mild, moderate, serious, or severe. This matters due to the long-observed evolved reality of respiratory viruses: there is a trade off between the forces. The more severe the virus, the quicker it burns itself out. The milder (and “smarter”) it is, the more it can spread. To mix up severity and prevalence is to make a mess of all the important categories that infectious disease specialists use to assess the social impact of a new virus.
Moreover, if you are going to compare how severe a pandemic is, you have to compare apples to apples, which means at the very minimum that we must be careful to distinguish apples from oranges from pears. That is precisely what the early messaging surrounding the coronavirus did not do.
Cases are not deaths; even more crucially, cases in a traditional sense mean that people are actually sick, not merely that they have been tested positive by a PCR test. Adding to the confusion, most data sources on Covid today use the term “cases” to identify any positive test, with or without symptoms, when the correct word would be “infections.” Further, the PCR test itself presents its own problems. As Brown notes, “A serious limitation of RT-PCR testing is that nucleic acid detection is not capable of determining the difference between infective and noninfective viruses.” The widespread use of the PCR test has made its own contribution to blurring all these crucial distinctions.
Now consider an extraordinary article from the New England Journal of Medicine that appeared on February 28, with Anthony Fauci as the co-author. The import of the piece was to claim that Covid and flu are quite similar in severity. “The overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”
What matters here is not the prediction as such but the switching of the word infection with case: the flu has “a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%.” This was incorrect even at the time of writing. You can call it a misprint or sloppy or downright duplicitous. Regardless, even the World Health Organization had identified the 0.1% figure as the flu’s infection fatality rate. If you assume one symptomatic confirmed case for every infection (or what is now confusingly called “cumulative cases”), the error could be a misplace decimal: 0.01% not 0.1%. Regardless, Fauci’s article directly contradicted the WHO, and ran counter to everything that was already then known. But his CFR claim about flu is precisely what led him to claim in front of the Congressional committee that Covid would be deadly in ways that defy all experience of this generation.
Brown further explains:
As the campaign to mitigate coronavirus transmission was implemented from March into May, 2020, expected coronavirus mortality totals in the United States appeared much lower than the overestimation reported in Congressional testimony on March 11. Compared with the most recent season of severe influenza A (H3N2) in 2017-2018,with 80,000 US deaths reported by CDC officials, US coronavirus mortality totals had just reached 80,000 on May 9, 2020. By then, relative to the 2017-2018 influenza, it was clear that the coronavirus mortality total for the season would be nowhere near 800,000 deaths inferred from the 10-fold mortality overestimation reported to Congress. Even after adjusting for the effect of successful mitigation measures that may have slowed down the rate of coronavirus transmission, it seems unlikely that so many deaths were completely eliminated by a nonpharmaceutical intervention such as social distancing, which was only intended to contain infection transmission, not suppress infections and related fatalities. Also in early May, 2020, a New York State survey of 1,269 COVID-19 patients recently admitted to 113 hospitals found that most of the patients had been following shelter-in-place orders for 6 wk, which raised state officials’ suspicions about social distancing effectiveness. Still, polls showed the public credited social distancing and other mitigation measures for reducing predicted COVID-19 deaths, and for keeping people safe from the coronavirus.
As of this writing, however, deaths “involving” or “with” Covid has passed 300,000, which while less than half as high as what Congress heard they would be on March 11, is still quite high, provided these deaths have not been broadly misclassified. However, on March 24, the CDC made an announcement of serious significance. It would now calculate coronavirus mortality by including “probable” and “likely” deaths in the International Classification of Diseases code (ICD).
This became an invitation to misclassification. People who otherwise would have previously been classified as having heart disease or some other comorbidity could now be classified as Covid. This also included a financial incentive to do just that. For this reason, when the CDC announced that “for 6% of the deaths, Covid-19 was the only cause mentioned,” it came as a shock to people. What that means is that 94% of the deaths attributed to Covid were associated with additional comorbidities that prevented the immune system from fighting off the virus.
Following the March 11 Fauci testimony, in which he conflated IFR and CFR, the national media went wild with Covid and flu comparison. The following article, for example, blew up from BusinessInsider in June: “The coronavirus death rate in the US is almost 50 times higher than that of the flu. See how they compare by age bracket.” If you look carefully at the charts, you can see something fishy: they calculated infection fatality rate for flu against the case fatality rate for Covid. That necessarily generates a wild overestimate for Covid deaths. The charts are terrifying – and have nothing to do with reality.
Let’s hop forward from the testimony days to one month later when full-scale panic had already hit the U.S. Speaking at a White House press conference, Fauci then made a claim that strains credulity at every level. He said at a White House press briefing that the stringencies and “social distancing” could not and would not be relaxed until there are no “no new cases, no deaths.” Such a thing has happened only once in the history of viruses: smallpox. From the first experiments with inoculation to the final eradication took some 250 years. And yet here we have Fauci explaining that life could not be normal and functioning again until this widespread virus, relatively mild for 95% of the population, was completely eradicated from the planet!
And now we have the vaccine, and plenty of questions remaining about it, such as why non-vulnerable populations would prefer to take it over gaining the exposure necessary for naturally acquired immunity. Asking such a basic question is very close to being tabooed, even as lawmakers and other institutions are toying with the idea of making it mandatory. Even then, many of the lockdown advocates from earlier this year are saying that it will not enable us to go back to normal, to take off the masks, to go to the movies, or travel again. This is precisely the belief you might expect from a crowd that participated in what John Iaonnidis called a “one-in-a-century evidence fiasco” and are desperately trying to dig themselves out of losing every bit of scientific credibility.
Whether Brown is correct that the whole panic truly does trace to a brain flakeout on the part of Fauci – or even perhaps a deliberate “noble lie” to deceive the public into accepting the unacceptable – it hardly matters. The problem we face now is a huge tangle over terminology such that “infections” that could include as many as 90% false positives (according to the NYT) are called cases, while the once-distinct condition called cases which used to indicate actually being sick no longer has any precise meaning. The cacophony of statistical confusion here truly boggles the mind.
In the midst of all of this, the CDC itself finally updated its own estimates of the infection fatality rate of Covid-19. The CDC wisely took account of the huge demographic stratification of severe outcomes. There is not one rate that applies to the whole population or to any particular individual. There are only backward looking estimates of outcomes. They are all follows:
0.003% for 0-19 years
0.02% for 20-49 years
0.5% for 50-69 years
5.4% for 70+ years
Flipping the data to state it by survival rate by age:
99.997% for 0-19 years
99.98% for 20-49 years
99.5% for 50-69 years
94.6% for 70+ years
John Ioannidis sums up the disparity by age with the following infection fatality rate for people under the age of 70: 0.05%. This conclusion has been peer-reviewed and published by the World Health Organization.
How does this compare with the flu? We do not really know. As science journalist Shin Jie Yong has written, “There seems to be no data on age-specific IFR of the seasonal flu.” What this means is that crucial testimony of Fauci from March 11, in which he casually predicted based on bad numbers, that Covid would be ten times worse than the flu, can neither be confirmed or denied based on age-specific severe outcomes.
However, we can assemble the data based on years of lost life. Consider the long-term view over the future course of existing lifetimes. JusttheFacts reports:
If 500,000 Covid-19 deaths ultimately [in the future] occur in the United States—or more than twice the level of a prominent projection—the disease will rob about 6.8 million years of life from all Americans who were alive at the outset of 2020.
In contrast:
* the flu will rob them of about 35 million years.
* suicides will rob them of 132 million years.
* accidents will rob them of 409 million years.
As testing has expanded dramatically throughout the population, the estimated infection fatality rate of Covid will fall further. Thus can we observe a chart of “cases” (actually positive tests) all over the world and compare it with severe outcomes and see something remarkable that should make every living person fundamentally question why they decided to shut down the world and wreck billions of lives.
Another statistic that bears repeating, Covid – based on infections vs deaths – has close to a 99.9% survival rate. Imagine how the world would have been different had Fauci told that to the Congress on that fateful day of March 11. Or what if Fauci had revealed that the average age of death from Covid would almost equal the average lifespan in the US and exceed it in most parts of the world? People present might have wondered why they were holding hearings at all.
All these categories of data placement carry with them the danger of creating an illusion of control. Viruses do not come with little gears inside them with these rates. Human beings collect data and create them, and not one of them (whether IFR, CFR, infection rates, mortality rates, survival rates) pertains infallibly to any single individual. Our response to a virus is contingent on our own health, age, cross immunities, T cell memory, and a thousand other factors that no politician controls.
What we know is that a terminological confusion, a misplaced decimal point, a one-word error in data description, and a massive amount of arrogant presumptions about how to control a virus set in motion a series of events that turned our great and prosperous country into a disaster of confusion, demoralization, foregone medical services, closed businesses, wrecked arts and education, and long bread lines. The lockdowners who created this appalling disaster, the people who turned our trust into betrayal and a blizzard of statistical baloney, need to look at the science and data as they stand and come clean.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.