patrick.net

They bought all the MP's with shares, then had the english government provide military support when "governing" India became too expensive.

If Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is confirmed as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, he will undoubtedly strike some blows against regulatory capture. Whatever he does in this position can only be an improvement over what we have now, and it is possible that some of his reforms may even endure beyond his own tenure. But he has the chance to do much more.

The regulatory state is a Gordian knot, and it is not enough to work at untangling its various components. It needs to be sliced through once and for all. The way to do this is simple: Abolish the FDA, abolish the NIH, abolish the CDC. End all medical licensing and accreditation. Get the government out of health care everywhere.

Perhaps this sounds like a political impossibility. And perhaps it is. But until very recently, RFK, Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services was a political impossibility. I submit that we do not know what is possible and what is not.

JONI MCGARY: However, you have to look at these colleges being of a mindset similar to the narrative. So that is definitely steeped in those universities.

They also receive tremendous amounts of money from the federal government, including the NIH[2], the CDC, the, you know, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Defense. I mean, the Ivy Leagues alone, 8 colleges,[3] they get about 3.8 billion dollars a year in federal funds.

So when the CDC makes recommendations that people should be boosted, they're going to just wrap that into their recommendations. And I think that's what's happened. And there hasn't been a lot of curiosity to look beyond those recommendations. And these colleges clearly have not done their own risk benefit analysis, and nor have they engaged with us when we've asked them to discuss that data, which is why we've changed tactics with our new initiative.

STEVE K. BANNON: Have you— I take it if you sue or you— obviously this is going to have to go to court, I assume. That in discovery[4] if you were to find that, that they either made the money contingent upon, or there was some quid pro quo, you guys got to follow along here, that would be pretty damning, would it not?

JONI MCGARY: Well it's really hard to say what would happen in a court of law on that. I think that, I've not been able to find that there was a quid quo pro, per se, except that in the third batch of the CARES funding[5] there is a new provision in there that says that you need to do certain mitigation efforts that are data based, or evidence based. But it doesn't come right out and say that you must mandate vaccination.

So I don't really see it as a direct influence, I see it more as a couple of things. I think it's a lack of curiosity on the part of the administrators, I think a willingness to take CDC guidance on its face. And also, you know, you're not going to bite the hand that pays your light bill. I mean, I'll tell you that one of the heads of the covid task force, the scientific part of that team at one of the Ivy League schools, his lab gets 600 to 900,000 dollars a year from the the NIH for funding. So it's very institutionally captured.

Academy Award nominee Liam Neeson narrates this powerful investigation into how pharmaceutical giants systematically captured governments and deceived families worldwide.

Featuring whistleblower authors and attorneys Kent Heckenlively and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., this documentary spans 80 years of deception and betrayal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWxQ89BDIo0