FDA lied about Ivermectin
https://vervetimes.com/secret-documents-reveal-fdas-attack-on-ivermectin/ Jim Bell's comment:I first alerted the CP list to Ivermectin early in 2020.
look! it's jim bell who won't comment on the AIDS fraud because "he dont know that science" but can still 'have opinions' about 'medical science' fucking dishonest asshole.
I suppose there are a number of 'AIDS frauds'.Which one were you referring to? When I hear AIDS fraud, I think of this: During the 1982-84 period, I noticed the scientific and media establishment were continually saying how difficult it was to get AIDS. But at some point, maybe 1985, such talk began to be much reduced. Why, I thought? Eventually, I concluded that the more difficult it was to get AIDS, the more blameworthy the population that got it must have been. Do you have a different conclusion? On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:47 AM, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0<punks@tfwno.gf> wrote: look! it's jim bell who won't comment on the AIDS fraud because "he dont know that science" but can still 'have opinions' about 'medical science' fucking dishonest asshole.
On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 16:43:26 +0000 (UTC) jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
I suppose there are a number of 'AIDS frauds'.Which one were you referring to?
to the whole claim that there's a contagious AIDS disease caused by some 'hiv' virus.
When I hear AIDS fraud, I think of this: During the 1982-84 period, I noticed the scientific and media establishment were continually saying how difficult it was to get AIDS. But at some point, maybe 1985, such talk began to be much reduced. Why, I thought? Eventually, I concluded that the more difficult it was to get AIDS, the more blameworthy the population that got it must have been. Do you have a different conclusion?
that's part of the fraud, yes. In the so called 'developed' countries at least part of the people 'diagnosed' with 'aids' were people with bad health because of too much partying. but that's not true regarding africa where they use a different set of lies http://duesberg.com/subject/africa2.html bottom line is that the whole scientific and media establishment have been lying for almost 50 years, and that their wildly successful aids scam is the forerunner of the fascist flu farce. And from the point of view of anybody with minimal 'libertarian' sensibility the fascist flu farce is a complete political disaster.
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:47 AM, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0<punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
look! it's jim bell who won't comment on the AIDS fraud because "he dont know that science" but can still 'have opinions' about 'medical science'
fucking dishonest asshole.
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin? David On Tue, Nov 9, 2021, 11:43 AM jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
I suppose there are a number of 'AIDS frauds'. Which one were you referring to? When I hear AIDS fraud, I think of this:
During the 1982-84 period, I noticed the scientific and media establishment were continually saying how difficult it was to get AIDS.
But at some point, maybe 1985, such talk began to be much reduced. Why, I thought? Eventually, I concluded that the more difficult it was to get AIDS, the more blameworthy the population that got it must have been.
Do you have a different conclusion?
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 7:47 AM, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks@tfwno.gf> wrote:
look! it's jim bell who won't comment on the AIDS fraud because "he dont know that science" but can still 'have opinions' about 'medical science'
fucking dishonest asshole.
On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:16:03 -0500 David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
Can you help me understand
barrett, yet another piece of US nazi shit, this one explicitly working for the NSA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expensify > expense reporting mobile and web application NSA malware. > On October 22, 2020, Barrett sent emails to all Expensify customers and non-customers on Expensify's marketing list worldwide, urging them to vote for U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden. not only that barrett is a piece of shit criminal spammer.
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
Which among the following do you believe have suppressed, censored, banned, deleted, cancelled, biased against, lawed regulated policied mandated or ordered against, lied about, and blackballed regarding Ivermectin, HCQ, etc... - World's health agencies - Governments - Corporations - News Media - Social Media - Big Tech
On 11/11/21, David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
Which among the following do you believe have suppressed, censored, banned, deleted, cancelled, biased against, voted lawed regulated policied mandated ordered or enforced against, lied about, blackballed, deranked, demonetized... among other suppressive influences... regarding Ivermectin, HCQ, etc... - World's health agencies - Governments - Corporations - News Media - Social Media - Big Tech - Democrats, Socialists, Leftists
On 11/11/21 8:16 AM, David Barrett wrote:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
To kill as many people as possible, thus increasing the wealth, power and importance of all the world's health agencies. Invermectin is out of patent, so it is very cheap, and anyone can make it. Lots of obscure businesses with no connection to power can and do make it. The powerful want you to use treatments that are a under patent or license, so that only businesses that are in good with the Most Holy Medical Priesthood of official science and manufacture those treatments. Fauci get massive bribes for approving treatments - no one is going to bribe him to approve lvermectin, because anyone can make it. .
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021, 3:19 PM cherry <cherry@cpal.pw> wrote:
On 11/11/21 8:16 AM, David Barrett wrote:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
To kill as many people as possible, thus increasing the wealth, power and importance of all the world's health agencies.
To confirm I understand, who specifically in the FDA is personally profiting by orchestrating the deaths of US citizens? David
On Fri, 12 Nov 2021 15:27:56 -0800 nazi turd <dbarrett@expensify.com> vomited:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
the motivation is to sell more vaccines. Only a cop would ask such an infinitely idiotic question. A more relevant question is : why is a turd-cop like you susbscribed to this list?
On 11/11/21 8:16 AM, David Barrett wrote:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021, 3:19 PM cherry <cherry@cpal.pw
To kill as many people as possible, thus increasing the wealth, power and importance of all the world's health agencies.
On 11/12/21 3:27 PM, David Barrett wrote
To confirm I understand, who specifically in the FDA is personally profiting by orchestrating the deaths of US citizens?
Fauci is wealthy. So are most of his colleagues His wealth comes from business deals with businesses who need his approvals for medications in which they have monopolies. So highly effective medications that anyone can make, and which are thus reasonably cheap, such as Ivermectin, cut into his wealth, while deaths that frighten people, causing them to purchase medications from businesses that have monopolies in some medicine, increase his wealth and power and that of his colleagues. So the more Americans that die as a result of problems that are arguably medical, the richer and more powerful Fauci and the rest of his team gets. You will notice that the death rate among young people has risen substantially since vaccination started. Every child that suffers heart attack or stroke makes Fauci and his colleagues richer and more powerful.
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 7:16 PM cherry <cherry@cpal.pw> wrote:
Fauci is wealthy. So are most of his colleagues His wealth comes from business deals with businesses who need his approvals for medications in which they have monopolies.
This seems to be a really important component of the argument: that Fauci personally profits from the medications he recommends. Do you agree that if he *doesn't* profit in this way, the argument that he's intentionally undermining Ivermectin to protect his investment sorta falls apart? If so, it feels really important to determine if this is in fact true. Can you point me to why you feel this is true? -davi
On 11/11/21, David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
Can you help me understand what motivation a conspiracy of all the world's health agencies would have to intentionally suppress lvermectin?
Which among the following do you believe have suppressed, censored, banned, deleted, cancelled, biased against, voted lawed regulated policied mandated ordered or enforced against, lied about, blackballed, deranked, demonetized... among other suppressive influences... regarding Ivermectin, HCQ, etc... - World's health agencies - Governments - Corporations - News Media - Social Media - Big Tech - Democrats, Socialists, Leftists
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 7:16 PM cherry <cherry@cpal.pw <mailto:cherry@cpal.pw>> wrote:
Fauci is wealthy. So are most of his colleagues His wealth comes from business deals with businesses who need his approvals for medications in which they have monopolies.
On 11/14/21 11:54 PM, David Barrett wrote:
This seems to be a really important component of the argument: that Fauci personally profits from the medications he recommends. Do you agree that if he *doesn't* profit in this way, the argument that he's intentionally undermining Ivermectin to protect his investment sorta falls apart?
He has no investments - he destroys value, he does not create it. You are framing me as making an argument that is the opposite of the argument I am making. The implication of my argument is that his business deals not create value, but are cover for payouts. "Investment" would imply he owned businesses that create drugs and wanted to favor those businesses. No, not so, he shakes down businesses that create drugs.
participants (5)
-
cherry -
David Barrett -
grarpamp -
jim bell -
Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0