“A Global Coup Has Been Carried Out Across the World – Has Destroyed the Very Foundations of the Rule of Law” – Archbishop Vigano’s Message to America (Transcript and Audio)
By Joe Hoft December 19, 2021
Italian Archbishop Vigano shared with The Gateway Pundit his transcript and audio message to the American people this week.
Italian Archbishop Vigano sent a message to the American people. He continues to speak out against the globalist threat this Christmas season.
He shared his message below:
DEAR AMERICAN PEOPLE, DEAR FRIENDS, for two years now, a global coup has been carried out all over the world, planned for some time by an elite group of conspirators enslaved to the interests of international high finance. This coup was made possible by an emergency pandemic that is based on the premise of a virus that has a mortality rate almost analogous to that of any other seasonal flu virus, on the delegitimization and prohibition of effective treatments, and on the distribution of an experimental gene serum which is obviously ineffective, and which also clearly carries with it the danger of serious and even lethal side effects. We all know how much the mainstream media has contributed to supporting the insane pandemic narrative, the interests that are at stake, and the goals of these groups of power: reducing the world population, making those who survive chronically ill, and imposing forms of control that violate the fundamental rights and natural liberties of citizens. And yet, two years after this grotesque farce started, which has claimed more victims than a war and destroyed the social fabric, national economies, and the very foundations of the rule of law, nothing has changed in the policies of Nations and their response to the so-called pandemic.
TRENDING: THOUSANDS Turn Out to See President Trump in Houston — AMAZING VIDEO!
Here is the full transcript of Archbishop Vigano’s message to the American people.
Message for American People Vigano Dec 19 by Jim Hoft on Scribd
Here is the audio of Archbishop Vigano’s message:
‘Giving advice online’ is protected by 1st Amendment
By Bob Unruh December 18, 2021
A Texas veterinarian has won a round in his fight with the state of Texas over his plan to offer advice to pet owners – over the phone and online.
The Institute for Justice says a federal judge has ruled that the state’s Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners must meet the requirements of the Constitution’s highest standard for free speech if it wants to restrict what Ron Hines tells pet owners.
Online medical advice has turned from a novelty to being relatively common under the COVID-19 pandemic, and now patients routinely access their physicians online, or by telephone, for consultant, even prescriptions.
But in Texas, the state has required veterinarians to see the pet before offering any advice.
The threats of disciplinary action from the state prompted Hines to get the assistance of the Institute for Justice, which is suing the state on behalf of the Brownsville, Texas, doctor.
The IJ said the recent ruling from U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas means that Hines’ free speech arguments will continue in court.
“Today’s decision recognizing that Dr. Hines’ advice is entitled to the greatest constitutional protection is the latest milestone in a long fight in which, for years, courts insisted that he had no First Amendment rights at all. Giving advice online is speech protected by the First Amendment,” explained IJ Senior Attorney Jeff Rowes.
“Especially in the wake of the pandemic, more and more people are serving their clients online. Just as Dr. Hines’ speech with pet owners is protected by the First Amendment, so too is the speech of others, like doctors and psychologists. Dr. Hines’ victory here will protect not only him and other vets, but people across the country who speak for a living and find themselves targeted by government licensing boards.”
Hines earlier fought the state’s requirement that he first examine an animal in person before giving any kind of advice in a case that erupted in 2013. It was two years later that the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals claimed his advice was not protected by the First Amendment.
But after a landmark 2018 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, in NIFLA v. Becerra, the so-called “professional speech doctrine” was abandoned.
And the case brought by Hines against the state was restarted.
In 2020, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that occupational speech is protected by the First Amendment, then sent Hines’ challenge down to the trial court to assess whether Hines’ advice counted as “speech” or “conduct,” the IJ reported.
“Unsurprisingly, the court agreed with Dr. Hines’ position that advice is speech. Now, Dr. Hines will have the opportunity for the court to declare once and for all that his First Amendment rights were violated,” the organization reported.
“A victory for Dr. Hines is a victory for all Americans who want to seek or give advice online,” said IJ Attorney Andrew Ward, who also represents Dr. Hines.
The court ruling said, “While the Texas statute may generally regulate the conduct of veterinarians, as applied to Hines, it regulates his alleged speech. First, it is undisputed that Hines did not physically examine any animal. Instead, he alleges that all of his interactions with pet owners took the form of verbal and written communities.
“He consoled distressed pet owners, recommended that pet owners seek immediate veterinary care because an animal’s symptoms indicated a serious medical condition, clarified information that other veterinarians had provided to pet owners, helped pet owners ‘decide how to proceed when local veterinarians had provided conflicting diagnoses’, and generally pointed them to relevant information on the internet.”
But those actions, the court said, “constitute speech, and not conduct.”
“The impact of the disciplinary proceedings upon Hines’s actions further demonstrates that the defendants applied the Texas statute to regulate speech. He alleges that the physical examination requirement, as applied to him, has wholly restricted him from interacting with pet owners, even when his communications do not consist of diagnosing, treating, or prescribing medication…”
The court said, “The overwhelming majority of what Hines sought to do, but which the defendants prohibited him from doing unless he satisfied the physical examination requirement, constituted speech and in no manner could be characterized as conduct.”
Unnerving: Dr. Peter McCullough warns Americans of biggest public health crisis
It’s ‘led to large numbers of deaths, hospitalizations and permanent disability’
By Art Moore December 19, 2021
Dr. Peter McCullough speaks to Joe Rogan on the “The Joe Rogan Experience” podcast (Screen capture)
In a podcast interview that would not have been allowed on YouTube, medical scientist Dr. Peter McCullough charged that media and government censorship related to COVID-19 treatments have caused untold harm, contributing to many deaths.
Joe Rogan, the nation’s No. 1 podcaster, told McCullough that on nearly every other online platform, including YouTube, their conversation would be censored.
“But what you’re saying is incredibly important,” said Rogan, whose podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” is streamed by Spotify.
“Censorship that has suppressed for two years information on safe and effective early treatment and censorship on vaccine safety has led to large numbers of deaths, hospitalizations and permanent disability,” McCullough said.
“There is no bigger public health crisis than the impact of censorship in COVID-19.”
McCullough has testified before the U.S. Senate on the suppression of early treatments that have been shown to be effective for COVID-19, including hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. His concern about the COVID-19 vaccines centers on the unusually high number of reports of deaths and severe adverse events, such as myocarditis, compared to previous vaccines.
‘Why won’t they let the vaccine injured tell their stories?’
Social-media networks such as YouTube, Twitter and Facebook have been among the chief censors of the opinions of qualified physicians and medical scientists such as McCullough.
YouTube suspended the account of Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in early November after he posted video of a roundtable event with a panel of medical experts and vaccine-injured people discussing vaccine mandates.
“Once again Big Tech is censoring the truth,” Johnson said in a statement. “Why won’t they let the vaccine injured tell their stories and medical experts give a second opinion? Why can’t we discuss the harmful effects of mandates? Apparently, the Biden administration and federal health agencies must not be questioned. How many more lives will be needlessly destroyed?”
When the renowned British Medical Journal published a report on a whistleblower’s claim, supported by documents, of poor practices in the clinical trial of the Pfizer vaccine that could impact data integrity and safety, Facebook slapped a “false information” label on posts of the article.
Readers were directed to a “fact check” by Facebook contractor Lead Stories. The editors fired back with an open letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg charging the “fact check” was “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.”
Among other things, they wrote, it failed “to provide any assertions of fact that The BMJ article got wrong.”
In early 2021, Facebook censored WND articles providing evidence to support the theory that the pandemic originated with a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Now, with evidence continuing to mount, Facebook acknowledges it’s a plausible theory, if not the best explanation.
The mockery and censorship of the theory that the world-changing, novel coronavirus was engineered in a Chinese lab was fueled largely by a letter published in the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet by a scientist with a clear conflict of interest, Peter Daszak. The British zoologist received funding from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institutes for Allergy and Infectious Diseases to help the “bat lady” researcher, Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan lab manipulate coronaviruses in animals and make them transmissible to humans.
Daszak’s February 2020 stated: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.”
Two months after Daszak published his letter in The Lancet, he emailed Fauci to thank him for “publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for COVID-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”
“From my perspective, your comments are brave, and coming from your trusted voice, will help dispel the myths being spun around the virus’s origins,” Daszak told Fauci in the April 18, 2020, email.
This week, the editor of The Lancet admitted he knew about Daszak’s links to the Chinese lab for a year before acknowledging the conflict of interests.
‘There is no science without disagreement’
Censorship of medical scientists such as McCullough prompted Hillsdale College to launch a new branch in the nation’s capital called the Academy for Science and Freedom. The aim is to combat “widespread abuses of individual and academic freedom made in the name of science.”
Scholars at the new academy include Drs. Scott W. Atlas of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, Jay Bhattacharya of the Stanford School of Medicine and Martin Kulldorff of the Harvard Medical School.
Atlas, who briefly served as a member of the coronavirus task force during the Trump administration, said in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson that he was astonished at the “lack of knowledge about the data” displayed by Fauci and other members of the team.
“They never cited a scientific study. They never knew a critical assessment. They never gave a refutation of any study, nor a refutation or disagreement of each other. Never. Not once. I mean, that’s unheard of in science,” Atlas said.
“There is no science without disagreement.”
In June, amid growing evidence that the novel coronavirus was leaked from a lab funded by his agency, Fauci declared in an MSNBC interview that criticism of him amounts to attacks on science itself.
In October 2020, Fauci was asked by his boss, Francis Collins, to carry out a “quick and devastating published takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration, according to an email revealed Friday. The declaration — signed by 15,316 medical and public health scientists, and 45,154 medical practitioners — criticized universal lockdowns, calling for focused protection of the vulnerable older population based on data showing they are more than a thousand times more likely to die from COVID infection than the young.
Collins, who is stepping down as director of the National Institutes of Health, said the proposal came from “three fringe epidemiologists,” meaning Dr. Martin Kulldorf of Harvard, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford and Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford.
Collins: We need to figure out how to influence human behavior
In a recent interview with NPR reflecting on his 12 years with NIH, Collins lamented “the 60 million people still holding off of taking advantage of lifesaving vaccines,” which he said “is pretty unexpected.”
“It does make me, at least, realize, ‘Boy, there are things about human behavior that I don’t think we had invested enough into understanding.'”
Collins said the nation “basically have seen the accurate medical information overtaken, all too often, by the inaccurate conspiracies and false information on social media.”
“It’s a whole other world out there. We used to think that if knowledge was made available from credible sources, it would win the day. That’s not happening now,” he said.
NPR’s Selena Simmons-Duffin asked Collins if more money should be invested “in the behavioral research side of things.”
“We’re having serious conversations right now about whether this ought to be a special initiative at NIH to put more research into health communications and how best to frame those [messages] so that they reach people who may otherwise be influenced by information that’s simply not based on evidence,” Collins replied. “Because I don’t think you could look at the current circumstance now and say it’s gone very well.”
NarrowPathMinistries 