DNA Monthly (Vol. 16, No. 2)

Subscribe for FREE

Go to Archive Index

March-April 2020 (Vol. 16, No. 2)

Whatever Coronavirus Is, or Isn’t, Here Are 12 Proactive Things You Can Do to Fortify Your Immunity

Sol Luckman

Facebook followers of mine who actually read my posts—those that aren’t fascistically shadow-banned by overzealous “fact checkers” anyway—know that I’ve been highly skeptical about many, even most, of the claims made by fearmongering talking heads, politicians and bureaucrats about the new scarily named coronavirus, COVID-19.

Shamefully, even many respected alternative news sites—such as Zero Hedge, which I’m henceforth boycotting for its unconscionable clickbaitery—have contributed to the pandemic panic with article after article of sheer fear porn. A lot of this material attempts to paint COVID-19 as a deliberately engineered bioweapon. To which I say: if it was made in a lab, whoever made it did a piss-poor job of making it actually very deadly.

For a situation that, going purely by the numbers, despite clever attempts to skew them, is nowhere near as dangerous as the yearly flu that kills tens of thousands, it’s abundantly clear to anyone with half a brain still in use that a massive psy-op is underway.

Various dark agendas for the unprecedented scare tactics have been proposed. Judging by the swine flu vaccine that caused permanent brain damage, there’s probably some truth to the idea that the controllers desire to herd the sheeple into getting the coronavirus jab once it’s available. Then, and only then, will we have a real major catastrophe on our hands—which means more control for the controllers and more profit for the medical mafia.

Here are Dr. Drew’s thoughts on the subject of COVID-19 scaremongering:

Pulitzer Prize-nominated journalist Jon Rappoport goes so far as to claim that there’s no such thing as COVID-19, that the main test (the PCR) used everywhere except China to diagnose it has never been tested itself and is fatally flawed. You can check out his reasoning and thoughts on the relationship between coronavirus and 5G technology (which, I must admit, are fascinating) here, here, here, and here.

But even if COVID-19 is real, there’s a chance that it’s not even communicable in the ways that are being so horrifically—and possibly even downright unscientifically—portrayed.

Continue reading on Sol’s blog.


1. How to Stage a Fake Epidemic (& Brainwash Billions of People)” by Jon Rappoport

The Two Best Times for Sun Exposure” by PreventDisease.com

3. The Geopolitics of Epistemological Warfare: From Babylon to Neocon” by Matthew Ehret

Coronavirus Fearmongering Getting to You? Take Steps to Strengthen Your Immune System” by Thomas Cowan, MD

The Old Swine Flu Vaccine Caused Permanent Brain Damage; Will the New Coronavirus Vaccine Do the Same? by Ethan Huff

Featured Videos ... The Infectious Myth—Coronavirus COVID-19 Panic & QAnon—"Ask The Q"

1. How to Stage a Fake Epidemic (& Brainwash Billions of People)

Jon Rappoport

This article assembles facts contained in my ongoing series on the “China epidemic.” To get the details, I recommend going back and reading all those articles (archive here).

If a group wants to stage a fake and frightening epidemic, how would they do it?

First of all, what reasons would they have to launch such an audacious plan?

On one level, they want to cover up human harm that is already occurring. They want to explain this harm with a false story. For example, suppose a combination of deadly corporate air and water and 5G* electronic pollution is making people sick and killing them. The parties responsible are surely not going to admit their crimes. No. Instead, they’re going to claim a new virus is causing this harm in the form of, say, lung disease. The virus just “emerged.” “It showed up out of nowhere. It crossed species from animals to humans.”

So … the first thing needed is a cluster of cases in one locale. A small group of people who have the same symptoms. This is easy to find. How about ordinary flu symptoms? Fever, fatigue, weakness, with an emphasis on lung complications [from the forms of pollution]. A few of these people are very ill. Two of them die. Now, the publicity/news machine swings into gear.

It’s called an “outbreak.” It isn’t, but that’s the story. “They were all ‘exposed to something’” at, say, a riverfront dock restaurant.

The news—shoveled directly into mainstream outlets—comes from elite public health agencies like the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO).


To use a technical term, this is all BULLSHIT. Understand? People in the locale of the “new case cluster” are falling ill and dying as a result of the actual pollution-causes I listed above. But the news takes a different slant: “Researchers from WHO and CDC state that a ‘mystery illness’ has emerged in City X, and they are working to discover the virus …”

Who said it was a virus? Who made that unwarranted assumption? WHO and CDC. They always say it’s a virus.

At this point, suddenly, it’s news all over the planet, and most of the population is roped in, right from the get-go. Virus. Yes. I see. Which virus?

And shortly and miraculously, the answer comes: it’s VX-20. A new virus, never seen before, “which probably emerged from fish and crossed over into humans. One fisherman has already died.”

Voila. We have a new disease. VX-20.

Next question: did researchers actually find this virus? Did they?

Follow the next piece closely. There is sleight of hand involved.

One scenario
: Researchers used what are called “indirect markers” to INFER that a new virus was there, in samples of tissue taken from several people in the original “cluster” of riverfront victims.

The researchers didn’t actually use basic procedures to purify the tissue sample from even one patient, and they didn’t see MANY identical viruses in an electron microscope photograph of the purified sample—if they took such a photograph at all. They certainly didn’t perform this complete test on several hundred emerging patients—they should have, but they didn’t. And most certainly, other researchers, including INDEPENDENT analysts, didn’t perform the necessary electron microscope test on hundreds of so-called “epidemic patients.”

So … the CDC and WHO researchers came up with a notion, an idea, an inference about a virus, through these indirect markers. And via a process of continuing inferences, they characterized the virus they never saw.

Scenario two
: Let’s be generous and assume the researchers did bother to look at electron microscope photos, derived from only a few patients, not hundreds of patients, as they should have. What did they actually see in the photos? Maybe they saw a few particles that looked similar to each other, BUT quite possibly these virus-like particles were just passengers that ordinarily live in the body and cause no harm. However, the researchers jump up and down and say, THIS IS IT. THIS IS THE NEW KILLING VIRUS. AND WE WILL NOW ASSEMBLE ITS GENETIC SEQUENCE.


So what? These researchers don’t bother to make the distinction between viruses that might do harm and those that do nothing. Why? Because they’re determined to find something. Anything. That’s their basic mission.

In both scenarios, they’ve fallen woefully short of proving that a new virus is responsible for making people ill

But never mind—news outlets and governments are already on the march. THIS IS IT. A new epidemic. VX-20. A whole city is already locked down. Screeners are waving wands at passengers getting off planes. Some US talking head is saying there is now a rush to develop a vaccine. New cases of VX-20 are showing up in other cities and other countries. Boom.

Let’s examine that last part, about new cases and “spreading”— because this is where people REALLY fall for the con. They say: “Well, here is a city where there is no air or water or 5G pollution, and they’re discovering new cases, so how do you explain that?”

The new cases and the spread are based entirely on DIAGNOSTIC TESTS. Those test-results determine whether there is an “epidemic case” or a “spread.”

There are two main tests: antibody and PCR. In a nutshell, neither test is adequate to say HERE IS A NEW CASE. Both tests are unreliable and worthless. It’s more of the con. Both tests will claim to show “new cases” when they DON’T. They might show some antibodies or a few tiny fragments of what might possibly be a virus, but they show NOTHING that directly points to human illness. Relying on those tests would be on the order of laying down a bet on a game that isn’t even scheduled. It’s a farce.

Antibody tests, which purport to prove illness coming from a virus, are actually showing, at best, that the patient came in contact with a virus. Actually, before 1984, this was generally taken to mean the patient was in good shape. His immune system had defeated the germ. But then, for several no good reasons, the science was turned on its head. All of a sudden, a positive antibody test was taken to mean the patient was ill or would soon become ill. Nonsense. Farce.

The PCR test takes a tiny, tiny sample from a patient that might contain a virus, but the virus particle is far too small to comprehend. The PCR blows up that particle many times, so it can be analyzed. BUT the test says nothing about HOW MUCH virus, if any, is replicating in the patient’s body. And you need millions and millions of a virus replicating in the body to even begin talking about a cause of actual illness.

AND both tests rely on the unwarranted assumption that a virus actually causing illness—VX-20—was truly discovered in the first place.

Armed with these pathetic tests
, public officials begin reporting a new epidemic case here and a new one there, and pretty soon 40 countries have new cases, and the public falls for it, hook, line, and sinker.

And THAT’S HOW you stage a fake epidemic. The rest is pure publicity and lockdown and theater.

Dangerous theater.

Toxic drugs and toxic vaccines will be brought on board to treat the epidemic that was never there.

The ACTUAL ONGOING causes of illness and dying will remain in place, shoved into the deep background. And THIS amounts to a capital crime. As in: murder. Remember that.

People will be told not to question the official line on the “epidemic.” This is called a clue. Why not ask questions? Because the answers might lead to a correct conclusion about the enormous con job.

Let me add a few comments.

The World Health Organization itself states that every year, there are millions of cases of ordinary flu around the world, and several hundred thousand deaths. This isn’t “coronavirus.” But the flu sufferers can easily be called “new epidemic cases.” Ordinary flu can be statistically “imported” and called “coronavirus.”

Then there is the medical treatment imposed on people who are told they are “coronavirus cases.” I’m talking about highly toxic antiviral drugs, which have the ability to stop natural reproduction of cells in the body. Particularly when such people already have weakened immune systems, or organ-function problems, the results can be catastrophic. The patients can die. Of course, if they do, they will be called “deaths from the epidemic.”

Finally, there is something else you may have heard of. I mentioned it a few paragraphs ago: murder. Do you really think the people who are consciously launching a fake epidemic, with all its consequences—including covering up and never remedying ongoing real causes of dying and death—would stop short of staging a few spectacular incidents of dying and death, in order to make a splash and convince the public that the virus is really a killer? Are you KIDDING?

For example, suddenly, out of the blue, a few friends, previously healthy, in a small town, fall ill, and a few days later, they’re dead. Health officials state they were “positive for the virus.” “It came on quickly.” Are tests run to detect an intentional covert act of direct poisoning? Of course not. Media blare this horrible story all over the world: “THE VIRUS IS ON THE MOVE.” Same thing happens to a previously healthy family in Country X. They fall ill and die. And then a group of travelers on a mountain in Country Y become ill and die. Murder. However, the cover story is: “THE VIRUS KNOWS NO BOUNDS. IT CAN COME ON ANYWHERE, AT ANY TIME.” THESE EVENTS OF DEATH “CAN ONLY BE EXPLAINED BY THE VIRUS.” That’s right, when the audience is brainwashed and completely naïve.

“But … but how could anyone actually commit premeditated murder of innocent people, in order to convince the public that a virus is spreading in unlikely places?”

As I mentioned, such controllers are ALREADY guilty of murder, because they’re hiding the actual ongoing causes of death with the cover story of a virus. This sort of cover-up of crime has been happening, around the world, for a long, long time. To cite just two instances, look at parts of Africa and Haiti, where the “HIV story” has been promoted and funded, wall to wall, in order to conceal intentionally created and sustained poverty, stolen farm land, and corporate takeovers involving massive poisonous industrial pollution.

When you go back in history—as I have—you’ll realize that fake epidemics are standard operating procedure. SARS, Swine Flu, West Nile, Zika, etc. I’ve written about every one of these phonies in detail.

Concerning 5G technology and China, I recommend watching Dana Ashlie’s video, The BEST NEWS re CΟRΟNΑ VΙrus you’ve heard all month! Kinda.

Copyright © Jon Rappoport. All Rights Reserved.

The author of three explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed, Exit from the Matrix and Power Outside the Matrix, Jon Rappoport was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for thirty years, writing articles on politics, medicine and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails here. To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit from the Matrix, click here.

Featured Video ... The Infectious Myth - Coronavirus COVID-19 Panic

2. The Two Best Times for Sun Exposure

Researchers said the wavelengths at two specific times have the biggest impact to brain centers that regulate our circadian clock and our mood and alertness.

Their study, “A Color Vision Circuit for Non-image-forming Vision in the Primate Retina,” published in Current Biology, identifies a cell in the retina, which plays an important role in signaling our brain centers that regulate circadian rhythms, boost alertness, help memory and cognitive function, and elevate mood.

These effects have been attributed to a pigment in the eye called melanopsin, which is sensitive to blue light, but researchers say cone photoreceptors are a thousand times more sensitive to light than melanopsin.

The cone photoreceptor inputs to the circadian circuitry respond to short wavelength blue light, but they also respond strongly to long wavelength oranges and yellows and contrasting light uniquely demonstrated at sunrise and sunset. What makes good lighting, researchers discovered, is lighting capable of stimulating the cone photoreceptor inputs to specific neurons in the eye that regulate circadian rhythms.

Lead author Sara Patterson, a graduate student in neuroscience at the University of Washington School of Medicine, said how we set our internal clocks to the external light-dark cycle has been studied a lot. But how the changes in the color of light affect our brain has not.

“Color vision used for something other than color perception was the most exciting part for me,” she said.

In the study, Patterson and colleagues identified a cell known as an inhibitory interneuron or amacrine cell in the retina, which signals to photosensitive ganglion cells that affect our circadian brain centers. The researchers said these amacrine cells provide “the missing component of an evolutionary ancient color vision circuit capable of setting the circadian clock by encoding the spectral content of light.”

Patterson said so little is known about rare retinal circuitry that it was possible to find a new blue cone cell. She said there is a lot more to be discovered about how blue cone cells are projecting to other areas of the brain.

While sunrise lights, blue lights and seasonal affective disorder (SAD) lights have all tried to capture benefits of natural light, they haven’t been that effective because they are missing key science data, said corresponding author Jay Neitz, professor of ophthalmology at the UW School of Medicine, a scientist at the UW Medicine Eye Institute, and a well-known color vision researcher. He said the science behind SAD lights, for example, is to make lights hundreds of times brighter than normal lights to stimulate melanopsin.

“This research all started because of our interest in the health benefits of having natural light that occurs at the right time of day that helps regulate our circadian clock and our mood and alertness,“ Neitz said.

Older People Need More Time

Dr. Richard Weller, senior lecturer in dermatology at Edinburgh University, last year published a report in the journal Maturitas warning that older people in particular need to get into the sun more. “Advice on healthy sun exposure needs to be reconsidered,“ he urges. “The older population are particularly sun-deprived as shown by low blood levels of vitamin D and lack of outdoor activity.“

He adds that there is a reduction in cardiovascular disease and deaths from all causes with increased sun exposure. Two years ago, Dr. Weller’s team established that exposure to sunlight may lower people’s blood pressure and thus cut their risk of heart attack and stroke. This benefit has nothing to do with vitamin D.

Instead, it is due to the fact that when our skin is exposed to the sun a compound—called nitric oxide)—is released in our blood vessels which in turn lowers blood pressure by causing blood vessels to widen.

Dr. Weller told Good Health: “It also appears that sunlight alters the way that our genes behave. Last year, Cambridge University scientists showed that the expression of 28 per cent of our entire genetic make-up varies from season to season.“

Copyright © PreventDisease.com. All Rights Reserved.

This article, republished with permission, originally appeared here.

3. The Geopolitics of Epistemological Warfare: From Babylon to Neocon

think any sane human being can agree that while war was never a good idea, war in the 21st century is an absolutely intolerable one. The problem we currently face is that many of the forces driving world events towards an all-out war of “Mutually Assured Annihilation” are anything but sane.

While I’m obviously referring here to a certain category of people who fall under a particularly virulent strain of imperial thinking which can be labelled “neo-conservative” and while many of these disturbing figures honestly believe that a total war of annihilation is a risk worth taking in order to achieve their goals of total global hegemony, I would like to make one subtle yet very important distinction which is often overlooked.

What is this distinction?

Under the broad umbrella of “neo-conservative” one should properly differentiate those who really believe in their ideology and are trapped under the invisible cage of its unexamined assumptions vs. that smaller yet more important segment that created and manages the ideology from the top. I brushed on this grouping in a recent 3-part study called Origins of the Deep State and Myth of the Jewish Conspiracy.

To re-state my meaning: This group doesn’t necessarily believe in the ideological group they manage any more than a parent believes in that tooth fairy which they promote in order to achieve certain behavioral patterns in their children.

While belief in the tooth fairy is slightly less destructive than belief in a misanthropic neocon worldview of a Bolton, Pompeo or Cheney, the analogy is useful to communicate the point.

Cult Managers: Ancient Babylon & Now

Modern ideology-shapers serve the same role as those ancient high priests of Babylon, Persia and Rome who managed the many cults and countless pagan mystery religions recorded throughout the ages. It is well documented that any cult could comfortably exist under Rome’s control, as long as said cult denied any claim to objective truthfulness—making the rise of Abrahamic monotheistic faiths more than a little antagonistic to empire.

Did the high priests necessarily BELIEVE in those dogmas which they created and managed?

Hell no.

Was it politically necessary to create them?

Of course.


Because an empire, like everything in the world, exist as a whole with parts … but since they deny any principle of natural law (justice, love, goodness, etc.), empires are merely a sum of parts and their rules of organization can be nothing but zero sum (1). Each cultish group may coexist as an echo chamber alongside other groups sacrificing to whatever deity they wish without judgement of moral right or wrong bounded only by a common blind faith in their group’s beliefs—but nothing universal about justice, creative reason, or human nature is otherwise permitted. Here the a-moral “peace” of “equilibrium” can be achieved by an oligarchy which wishes to lord over the slaves.

Whether we are dealing with Caesar Augustus, Lord Metternich’s Congress of Vienna, Aldous Huxley, Sir Henry Kissinger, or Leo Strauss (father of modern neo-conservativism), “peace” can never be anything more than a mathematical “balancing of parts.”

Now it is a good moment to ask: What does this phenomenon look like in our modern age?

To answer this, let us leap over a couple of millennia and take a look at something a bit more personal: Adam Smith and the doctrine of free trade.

Smith at Her Majesty’s Service

Do Smith’s modern followers sincerely believe in the “self-regulating forces of the free market”?

Sure they do.

Did Adam Smith actually believe in his own system?

Whether he did or not, according to recent research conducted by historian Jeffrey Steinberg, Smith received his commission to compose his seminal book Wealth of Nations (published 1776) while riding with Lord Shelburne himself in a carriage ride from Edinburgh to London in 1763. The date 1776 is not a coincidence as this was the same Lord Shelburne who essentially managed the British Empire during the American Revolution and who always despised all colonial aspirations to use protective tariffs, emit productive credit or channel said credit towards internal improvements as Benjamin Franklin had championed in his 1729 Necessity of Paper Currency and Colonial Script.

Why develop Industry, asked Smith, when the new “Law” of “absolute advantage” demanded that everyone just do what they are good at for the best price possible? America has a lot of land, so they should stick with agriculture and slave-driven cotton. Britain had a lot of industry (don’t ask how that happened because it wasn’t through free trade), so they should stick with that! India had advanced textiles, but Britain had to destroy that so that India could then have a lot of opium fields so she could do that … which China could then smoke to death under the watch of British Gunships. “Free Trade” demanded it so.

Let’s look at another example: Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection.

A Not-too-natural Selection

Darwin’s theory published in his Origin of Species (1859) was based on the assumption that all changes in the biosphere are driven by “laws” of “survival of the fittest” within an assumed closed ecosystem of diminishing returns. Just as Smith asserted that an “invisible hand” brought creative order to the chaos of unregulated vice and self-interest, Darwin asserted that creative order on the large scale evolution of species could be explained by chaotic mutations on the micro level beyond a wall that no power of reason, free will or God could pass (2).

Did Charles Darwin believe his system? Probably.

But how about Thomas Huxley (aka: “Darwin’s Bulldog”) whose efforts to destroy all competing theories which included “purpose”, “meaning” or “design” were crushed and ridiculed into obscurity? Huxley himself was on record saying he did not believe in Darwin’s system. So why was this theory promoted by forces (like Huxley’s X Club) who recognized its many flaws? Well, here again it helps to refer to Darwin’s own account of his discovery from his autobiography where he wrote:

“In October 1838, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on, from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result would be the formation of a new species. Here then, I had at last got a theory by which to work.”

Malthus’s “Dismal Science”

And here we have it! Reverend Thomas Malthus (the coldhearted “Man of God” who taught economics at the British East India Company’s Haileybury College) provided the very foundation upon which Darwin’s system stood! Thomas Huxley and the other “high priests” of Huxley’s X Club were always Malthusian (even before there was Malthus) since empires have always been more focused on monopolizing the finite resources of an age, rather than encouraging creative discoveries and new inventions which would bring new resources into being—overcoming nature’s “limits to growth” (a disequilibrium not to be tolerated). Whether Malthus actually believed in the system which bears his name, as generations of his adherents sincerely do, remains to be seen. However, his own awareness of the needed extermination of the “unfit” by the Übermenschen of the British Aristocracy preceded Social Darwinism by a full century when he coldly called for the encouragement of the plague and other “natural forms of destruction” to cull the herd of the unfit in his Essay on the Principle of Population (1799):

“We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.”

A little later, Malthus even argued for the early extermination of poor babies who were of low value to society when he said:

“I should propose a regulation to be made, declaring that no child born from any marriage taking place after the expiration of a year from the date of the law, and no illegitimate child born two years from the same date, should ever be entitled to parish assistance … The infant is, comparatively speaking, of little value to society, as others will immediately supply its place.”

The neo-Malthusian revivalists such as Prince Bernhard, Philip Mountbatten and Huxley’s own grandson Sir Julian who birthed the misanthropic deformity today called the Green New Deal were not ignorant to this tradition. The disastrous effect of this worldview upon races deemed “unfit” in the global south should also not be ignored. It is no coincidence that those three neo-Malthusian oligarchs founded the World Wildlife Fund, 1001 Nature Trust and Club of Rome which imposed a technological apartheid upon the third world over the bodies of countless statesmen during the Cold War.

The Danger of Creative Thought to an Empire

Encouraging creative thought and cooperation among diverse nations and linguistic, religious and ethnic groups tends to result in new uncontrolled systems of potential as humanity increases its capacity to sustain itself while imperial systems lose their ability to parasitically drain their host. In Lincoln’s great 1859 speech, the martyred leader stood up against this Malthusian paradigm endemic of the British Empire when he said: “All creation is a mine, and every man, a miner. The whole earth, and all within it, upon it, and round about it, including himself, in his physical, moral, and intellectual nature, and his susceptibilities, are the infinitely various ‘leads’ from which, man, from the first, was to dig out his destiny … Man is not the only animal who labors; but he is the only one who improves his workmanship. This improvement, he effects by Discoveries, and Inventions.”

Lincoln’s economic commitments to protective tariffs, state credit (greenbacks) and internal improvements are inextricably linked to this view of man also shared by the earlier Ben Franklin.

Today, the positive paradigm which Lincoln died to defend is most clearly represented by the leaders of such nations as Russia and China—both of whom have come out repeatedly attacking the post-truth neo-liberal order and also the win-lose philosophy of Hobbesian geopolitics (3). The folly of America’s new dance with impeachment and the neocon hand shaping Trump’s disastrous foreign policy agenda is tied to the oligarchy’s absolute fear of losing America to a new Eurasian partnership which Trump has promoted repeatedly since entering office in 2017.

Xi Jinping and Putin have not only responded to this obsolete system by creating an alternative system of win-win cooperation driven by unbounded scientific and technological progress but they have also managed to expose the Achilles heal of the empire. These statesmen have demonstrated a clear recognition that those ideologies ranging from neo-liberalism to neo-conservativism are entirely unsustainable, and defeatable (but not militarily). Xi expressed this insight most clearly during his recent trip to Greece.

Even though leaders like Putin and Xi understand this, citizens of the West will continue to be woefully unequipped to either make sense of these chaotic systems of belief, extract them from their own hearts if they are so contaminated or resist them effectively, without understanding that those who fabricated and manage these belief structures never truly believed in them.

Neoconservative founding fathers such as Leo Strauss, Sir Henry Kissinger and Sir Bernard Lewis absolutely never believed in the ideologies their cultish golems like Bolton, Cheney or Kristol have adhered to so religiously. Their belief was only that the sum-of-parts called humanity must ultimately be governed by a Hobbesian Leviathan (aka: a new globalized Roman Empire), and that Leviathan could only be created in response to an intolerably painful period of chaos which their twisted tooth fairies would usher into this world.

This article, republished with permission, originally appeared here.

Matthew J.L. Ehret
is a journalist, lecturer and founder of the Canadian Patriot Review. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

(1) From this standpoint, it is worth reviewing the character of Calicles in Plato’s Gorgias dialogue or Thrasymachus in book one of the Republic—both of whom exemplify the oligarchical world view by denying the existence of moral principles— relegating them to merely useful tools by which the “wise” may lord over the “slaves” born into lower classes. Neoconservative founding fathers like Leo Strauss or Alan Bloom who call themselves “neo-Platonist” merely take a literal reading of chosen selections from the Republic and then assert without evidence that Plato really believed in Thrasymacus and Calicles’ worldview.
(2) For those interested in digging a bit deeper into this topic, the author delivered a lecture in 2010 titled The Matter Over Darwin’s Missing Mind.
(3) Throughout the post JFK years, America’s clearest representative of this anti-oligarchical tradition was found consistently in the efforts of the late economist and Presidential Candidate Lyndon LaRouche, a selection of whose works can be reviewed here.

4. Coronavirus Fearmongering Getting to You? Take Steps to Strengthen Your Immune System

Thomas Cowan, MD

[Editor's note: Enjoy this timely wisdom from Thomas Cowan, one of the world’s foremost holistic medical doctors. Dr. Cowan’s groundbreaking (pun intended) research, culminating in Dr. Cowan’s Garden, “nutritionally powerful and playful vegetable powders,” continues to inspire many of us who aspire to more natural and effective ways than drugs and vaccines to heal and fortify ourselves.]

Every winter we seem to be inundated with news about the latest flu or other viral threat to our health. Obviously, I have no special insight as to the severity of the new coronavirus scare from China, and I don’t want to diminish the impacts on people and families that have been affected.

I can only say that I remain skeptical of the fearmongering and am also concerned that the usual “new virus that is about to kill us all” story is not the whole story.

For example, in Arthur Firstenberg’s brilliant book The Invisible Rainbow, he traces the timing of each of the six major flu pandemics in the past 150 years to a dramatic change in the electrification of the earth.

Whether it was the introduction of electrical power lines, radar, radio signals or other wireless devices, each pandemic occurred within six months of the introduction of one of these technologies.

Furthermore, in many cases, the epidemiology of the outbreaks suggested that a contagious cause was impossible. For example, in 1918 the Spanish flu pandemic happened simultaneously worldwide, spreading faster than any possible physical contact between these disparate people.

In investigating the cause of this outbreak, the Boston Health Department tried to deliberately infect people by exposing them to the mucus or secretions from people who were suffering from the flu. They were unable to transmit the disease and concluded there was no contagious agent involved.

In another example, the Zika virus outbreak centered in Brazil was eventually traced to the use of a novel pesticide for mosquitoes in the Brazilian forests. The onset of the Zika crisis corresponded with the use of the insecticide and has waned since the curtailing of its use.

Other examples exist throughout history in which a supposedly contagious viral disease was actually the result of a weakening of our immune systems caused by a toxic agent. Although it is too soon to conclude anything about the new coronavirus, we should all be cautious before accepting the conventional story.

With this in mind, we can take the following steps to strength our immune systems and prevent harm from toxic exposures.

1. Eliminate as much as possible all EMF exposure. Turn off WiFi at night, use wired devices whenever possible, and keep all wireless devices in shielded pouches or on airplane mode as much as you can.
2. Eat only organic or biodynamic foods to decrease your exposure to agricultural chemicals, which also weaken your immune system.
3. Filter your water to eliminate fluoride, chlorine and other immune-suppressing chemicals.
4. Get out in the sun as much as possible and spend as much time in nature, particularly in forests, beaches and other wild places.
5. Take a good blend of botanicals and mushrooms along with vitamin C-containing foods. My favorite blend is Immunity Matrix. The usual dose is 1 teaspoon in hot water twice a day.
6. Take a good vitamin D3/K2 supplement, as these have been shown to reduce the severity and incidence of flu. One good brand is from Quick Silver Scientific. The dose is 1-2 pumps a day.
7. Cook with turmeric, dissolved in either butter or ghee. Turmeric helps to cleanse and detoxify the cells, lessening your need for detoxification reactions such as flu symptoms.
8. Practice an attitude of generosity and helpfulness to all those in your circles, including those who you may not be inclined to agree with. This might be the hardest but perhaps one of the most helpful practices you can do.

Copyright © Thomas Cowan. All Rights Reserved.

DISCLAIMER: This article is not intended to provide medical or nutritional advice, diagnosis, treatment, promises, or guarantees. Consult your healthcare provider before taking action regarding any medical or nutritional information presented.

Thomas Cowan, MD, is the author of Human Heart, Cosmic Heart: A Doctor’s Quest to Understand, Treat & Prevent Cardiovascular Disease.

AFFILIATE DISCLOSURE: This article contains affiliate links. The Phoenix Center for Regenetics may receive a commission for purchases made by way of these links.

Featured Video ... QAnon - "Ask The Q"

5. The Old Swine Flu Vaccine Caused Permanent Brain Damage; Will the New Coronavirus Vaccine Do the Same?

Ethan Huff, Natural News

Several years back when everyone was freaking out about the H1N1 swine flu, health authorities promised a “miracle” vaccine that, in the end, was shown to be far more dangerous than the swine flu itself because it caused permanent brain damage. Well, now this same situation is happening all over again with the Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19), with promised vaccines that will more than likely come with similar damaging adverse effects.

As you may recall, a shocking one in 16,000 people who were given the so-called Pandemrix vaccine, a product of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), were later observed to develop some combination of narcolepsy, brain damage and even death. Some individuals reportedly lost their ability to sleep for more than 90 minutes at a time, while others suddenly fell unconscious without warning.

The result was that many victims ended up suing GSK, and in the United Kingdom authorities agreed to pay out the equivalent of nearly $100 million in damages. The whole thing was a major fiasco, in other words, demonstrating once again that vaccines are hardly ever what they’re cracked up to be.

Fast-forward about five years and here we are again with another major disease outbreak that the government says will require a novel vaccine in order to eradicate. And just like previous ones, it probably won’t be nearly as safe or effective as health officials will one day claim.

Listen below as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, talks about this very thing, warning that future vaccines for the Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19) will more than likely be substantially more dangerous than the virus itself:

SARS-CoV Vaccines Shown in Study to Cause Immunopathology & Increased Susceptibility to More Disease

A 2012 study published in the journal PLoS One found that getting jabbed with SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) coronavirus vaccines can cause a person to develop pulmonary immunopathology, meaning more infection.

Researchers out of Texas determined that while getting vaccinated against SARS coronavirus results in a strong antibody response, the associated “challenge” of immunopathology creates other problems that, once again, makes these “medicines” more harmful than good.

“These SARS-CoV vaccines all induced antibody and protection against infection with SARS-CoV,” they concluded. “However, challenge of mice given any of the vaccines led to occurrence of Th2-type immunopathology suggesting hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV components was induced. Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated.”

It’s not as though the average person will even be able to get a future Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19) vaccine, seeing as how it will probably be too expensive for the average person who isn’t a multimillionaire. However, should it end up being subsidized in some way, the general public needs to beware of what could end up happening to them.

What we’re witnessing is, in many ways, a repeat of what happened during the swine flu scare. Health authorities and governments around the world created fear and panic over a novel disease in order to scare millions of people into getting a vaccine that was more dangerous than the disease itself. And just like with the Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19), taxpayers are largely footing the bill.

“There’s also a third option that nobody seems willing to consider: Tell everyone to take vitamin D and start eating anti-viral herbs and foods,” suggests the Health Ranger. “But since that advice doesn’t enrich the drug companies, no one in any position of authority dares state the obvious solution to all this.”

For more related news about the Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19), be sure to check out Pandemic.news.

You can also follow Outbreak.news for the latest Wuhan coronavirus (CoVid-19) updates.

Sources for this article include:





Copyright © Natural News. All Rights Reserved.


Subscriptions. Simply fill out our convenient subscription form. You will receive links to our current and future issues free via email, and you can opt out at any time. If you have a spam filter, please add This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it to your white-list.

Submissions. If you would like to submit an original article, excerpt, book review or letter to the editors, please copy and paste it into an email and send to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . Be sure to write
in the subject heading. We offer no financial remuneration for articles we choose to publish, but authors can include a bio and full contact information, including their website. While authors retain all copyrights to their work, DNA Monthly reserves the options to 1) edit any submission for clarity, length, grammar, and spelling; 2) excerpt portions of articles; 3) archive articles electronically; and 4) reprint popular articles in future ezines and on their blog. Please limit submissions to 2,500 words or less.

Mission. DNA Monthly seeks to empower readers with vital information relative to their genetic endowment: DNA. This information may range from generalized articles on DNA to news releases on breakthrough genetic research to educational materials devoted to specific DNA activation techniques and concepts. DNA Monthly is also committed to sharing articles and videos that promote healing, transformation, and awakening.

Disclaimer. The inclusion of articles, videos and other content in DNA Monthly does not necessarily denote or imply endorsement of such materials by the editors. The editors assume no responsibility, legal, medical or otherwise, for the information published as a free information service in their ezine. Articles, videos and other content appearing in DNA Monthly are not intended to provide medical claims, diagnoses, advice, or treatment.

DNA Monthly is sponsored by the Phoenix Center for Regenetics, facilitating conscious personal mastery as a bio-spiritual healing path through integrated DNA activation. For information on our unique products and services, visit www.phoenixregenetics.org.


Click on the slide!

Conscious Healing

Read the Book. Experience the Method. Activate Your Potential!

Click on the slide!

Potentiate Your DNA

Consciously Heal & Transform Your Life!

Click on the slide!

Activate Your Potential

Reset Your Bioenergy Blueprint.

Click on the slide!

Facilitator Certification

Become Certified in this "Revolutionary Healing Science" (NEXUS).

Frontpage Slideshow (version 2.0.0) - Copyright © 2006-2008 by JoomlaWorks

Save with Bitcoin

Save 25% on our products & services* by paying with bitcoin! Learn more here.
* Items with tuning forks not included.