Yoel Roth, the former head of trust and safety at Twitter, said it was a mistake for the company to censor the 2020 Hunter Biden laptop story
The story revealed Hunter’s private life and controversial business ties to Ukraine in the run-up to his father’s presidential race against Donald Trump
Roth said the story set off ‘hack and leak’ alarms, but he did not believe it should have ever been censored
He said the uncertainty over the story was ultimately what led to it being suppressed for 24 hours, a decision slammed by new Chief Twit Elon Musk
Musk has vowed to release files detailing the company’s decision to censor the story as Roth and former CEO Jack Dorsey appear to have passed the buck
The purpose of this essay is threefold: (1) to bring to the attention of readers the existence of a long-standing conspiracy about the identification of “The Richest Man in the World”, (2) to dismiss from contention the current list of candidates, and (3) to document that a small number of Jewish banking families operating out of the City of London have for generations held these wealth records with fortunes that are orders of magnitude above anything we might have imagined. I will address these points in reverse order, and deal with the current crop of wunderkind at the end.
If this true, there is no need to worry about a one-world government because it already exists and will do what it wants. The author of this article answers a reader’s question thusly: Q: “I’d love to read something on how to counter this phenomenal concentration of wealth, and some successful examples from the past (Reconquista Spain, Eastern Roman Empire, Tsarist Russia…?).” A: I don’t think it can be countered. I think it is already too total. The only solutions from the past that I am aware of, are the total expulsions. I doubt that is possible today. ABN
🇨🇦 Trudeau did everything he could to make sure Canadians couldn’t get a hold of Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine, but he made sure every hospital had plenty of Remdesivir. Here is a list of evidence I’ve compiled over the last two years. 🧵
Remdesivir is causing many diagnosed Covid Patients to Die
Summary of the Evidence for Ivermectin in COVID-19
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) telling people to “stop” taking ivermectin for COVID-19 was informal and just a recommendation, government lawyers argued during a recent hearing:
The cited statements were not directives. They were not mandatory. They were recommendations. They said what parties should do. They said, for example, why you should not take ivermectin to treat COVID-19. They did not say you may not do it, you must not do it.
COVID-19 represents the first time in the history of pandemics that we confined healthy populations. While the ancients did not understand the mechanisms of infectious disease—they knew nothing of viruses and bacteria—they nevertheless figured out many ways to mitigate the spread of contagion during epidemics. These time-tested measures ranged from quarantining symptomatic patients to enlisting those with natural immunity, who had recovered from the illness, to care for the sick.
From the lepers in the Old Testament to the plague of Justinian in Ancient Rome to the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, lockdowns were never part of conventional public health measures. The concept of lockdowns arose in part from a public health apparatus that had become militarized over the previous two decades. We now routinely hear of “countermeasures,” but doctors and nurses never use that word, which is a term of spycraft and soldiering.
In 1968, while an estimated one to four million people died in the H3N2 influenza pandemic, businesses and schools stayed open and large events were never cancelled. Until 2020 we had not previously locked down entire populations, because that strategy does not work. In 2020 we had zero empirical evidence that lockdowns would save lives, only flawed mathematical models whose predications were not just slightly off, but wildly exaggerated by orders of magnitude.
When it was first published in 1949, George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four was a dystopian satire aimed at the left. In 2022, the novel seems to have become an instruction manual used by the left. For example, in Orwell’s satire the worst of all offences is thoughtcrime, the denial of official ideology and rebellion against the self-proclaimed wisdom and virtue of the state. The modern left have invented many forms of thoughtcrime to justify censorship and their own control. And the supreme form of thoughtcrime today is racism. In Britain, leftists have concealed and even collaborated with decades of organized rape and child-prostitution because the criminals are brown-skinned Muslims and their victims are White.
This is a good example of an authoritarian abuse of speech and language. A powerful person (who spent $150 mil on PR), “reasons” falsely on national TV, thus defining the narrative that is soon to follow. A narrative like this is a story that defines how we speak and what we are allowed to say. Fauci and many others did what Gates is doing in this video. These public statements define the conversation and even many of the vocabulary words that will be used to bracket it—antivaxxer, covidiots, “The Science”, conspiracy theory, etc. Masking is an extension of language or a semiotic that signals obeisance to the narrative. For people within a culture to communicate they must have rules for speech and what words means. Properly, those rules and definitions in Western society are established through transparent, open, uncensored speech and reasoning based on evidence. During covid, it was the alternative medical and scientific views that carried on our proper tradition, while people like Gates and Fauci were hijacking it for their own perverse interests. ABN
If CTH had a small part in helping people to reset their reference points around modern electioneering, well, that’s a good thing.
The difference between “ballots” and “votes” is previously explained {SEE HERE} and absolutely critical to understand before moving forward.
Thankfully a large percentage of conservatives, intellectually honest independents and even some establishment republican donors have read our research and are now starting to have the ‘votes‘ vs ‘ballots‘ conversation. That understanding is critical, because any conversation that does not accurately identify and accept the problem is futile.
Having said that, please do not think we are smarter than the RNC. We are not. Miss this point and you miss the next ‘ah-ha‘ moment.
The RNC club knew exactly what the DNC club were doing in their 2022 midterm “ballot submission assistance” program. Yes, that’s exactly what “ballot harvesting” is called now. “Ballot Harvesting” is illegal in many states, “Ballot Submission Assistance” is not.
Progressive political activists in the state of Arizona are now scrubbing the footprints of their ballot submission assistance programs. Wait, Arizona(?) you say. Yes, Arizona a state where “ballot harvesting” is illegal, but email, fax, online and in person drop-off is possible. Ballot assistance is essentially the same harvesting process but in a smaller and more individualized scale.
If you want to understand American politics, you must read Sundance at The Last Refuge, often called CTH or the Conservative Treehouse. Even if you are a communist anti-American parasitic seditionist who hates everything about this country, you still must read CTH if you want to really understand what you are trying to destroy. I strongly encourage all Americans, Europeans, and others to read CTH often. Read the comments and follow some of the links as well. At least do that for a period of time. You will gain a deep understanding of USA politics, people, and intellectual history second to none. I know American professors and others with degrees in American history and political science who can’t hold a candle to Sundance. ABN
American Buddhist Net 