Dr. Paul Craig Roberts at Global research is reporting that the BAR Association in India has charged a high-ranking World Health Organization figure with mass murder.
“Dr. Swaminathan spoke against the use of Ivermectin in the Tamil Nadu province with the consequence that Ivermectin’s use was blocked and Covid cases skyrocketed with deaths increasing ten-fold. ”
In the provinces where Ivermectin was used—Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Goa— Covid cases declined sharply by 98%, 97%, 94%, and 86%. …
Acting for the Indian Bar Association, Dipali Ojha said the WHO official is accused of misconduct because she used her position as a public health official to further the agenda of special interests to maintain an Emergency Use Authorization for the lucrative vaccine industry.
We could use a bit of this here in the US.
I know that many in the chain of idea custody surrounding the “science” used to cancel our rights have been given immunity, but that does not necessarily protect them from clear cases of fraud.
While hydroxychloroquine continues to be a curse word, Ivermectin is merely shunned and poo-pooed. But the establishment refuses to accept its efficacy. And one of the rules of treatment is that if there is one, then vaccination is unnecessary. Especially forced vaccination with experimental inoculations.
Given that (in New Hampshire) the survival rates are astronomically good for all but the few who are already susceptible to most common colds and flu, any mandated treatment is effectively fascist and must be opposed even if you got vaccinated.
While the so-called vaccine has its own problem and the public health establishment has its own agenda, at the end of the day, the issue is about freedom to choose and the lies piled high to obstruct that right.
The left is about circus politics, so we need people of means to put a few of them into the center ring and see how they like it there.
And while I doubt Dr. Soumya Swaminathan will be found guilty of mass murder, she is guilty of something, and the exercise is its own reward. Before a public health official dares to warn you off a known treatment with a history of success, they’ll have to consider the consequences before they make that move.
It may even encourage them to back off previous statements of so-called scientific fact.
But not if the risk of pressure is not present or applied.