TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
How Rockefeller Monopolized Medicine and Created BIG PHARMA
Please read and share, let the truth be known worldwide...
October 13, 2023
post photo preview

Born in 1839, John D. Rockefeller would go on to become one of the great robber barons and industrialist tycoons of American history. By the turn of the 20th century, Rockefeller controlled 90% of the oil refineries in the US through his company Standard Oil, becoming in the process America’s first billionaire.

Of course, in 1911, Standard Oil was ruled by the US Supreme Court to be an illegal monopoly in violation of antitrust laws and forced to break up. Like his father, John D. Rockefeller had built his success on illegality, cons, and scams.

Still, this was not enough for Rockefeller. He wanted more.

 

How Rockefeller Targeted Medicine

At the time, chemicals made from oil, known as ‘petrochemicals,’ were being discovered and developed in the US. This included the discovery that pharmaceutical drugs could be made from oil, which Rockefeller saw as an opportunity to expand his empire. The key was that petrochemicals, unlike natural health remedies, could be patented, presenting an enormous opportunity for Rockefeller profits.

There was only one problem – at the time, natural, herbal, and traditional medicines were very popular in the US. Something like half of the doctors and medical colleges in the country were using holistic medicine, natural remedies, and knowledge taken from Indigenous Native Americans. Rockefeller needed a way to eliminate the competition, to create a monopoly in medicine as he had done with oil.

And so, he went to his good friend Andrew Carnegie, another robber baron who had gotten rich through his monopoly of the steel industry and, incidentally, one of the country’s leading eugenicists. Together, the two men hatched a plan to take over American medicine.


maxresdefault.jpg

 

The Creation of Big Pharma

From the cover of the Carnegie Foundation, they would send a man named Abraham Flexner around the country to report on its medical colleges and hospitals. After visiting all 155 medical schools existing at that time in the US and Canada, he completed the seminal Flexner Report in 1910.

Following the directions of his employers, Flexner called in his report for a total restructuring of the American medical system, most specifically, for the pushing aside of natural and traditional remedies in favor of Rockefeller pharmaceuticals. The report even specifically mentioned the eradication of “dissidents,” appropriately, since this is exactly what happened.

Almost immediately after the report was issued, medical schools teaching things like naturopathy, homeopathy, electromagnetic field therapy, and so on, were told to drop these things or close. More than half of all medical colleges in the country did close, and many non-compliant doctors were demonized and even jailed.

But Rockefeller and Carnegie went further, offering huge grants to medical schools and hospitals so long as they only taught and practiced Rockefeller medicine, and allowed Rockefeller agents on their boards of directors to ensure compliance.

It was the carrot and the stick – those who agreed got funded with big money, those who didn’t were crushed.

In this way, all medical colleges in the country were streamlined and homogenized, with doctors all learning the same thing – how to use and prescribe Rockefeller’s patented drugs.

But, like any good monopolist, Rockefeller went further in seeking to consolidate his control. He took over the AMA and emboldened it as the gatekeeper of scientific thought and witch hunter of alternative medical practices. He took control of the FDA in order to control the approval process for new drugs. He even founded the American Cancer Society in 1913. Within a few short years, Rockefeller was in total control of the American medical system in both thought and action.

The result of this takeover, the product of this monopolist son of a conman and his eugenicist partner, would become known as “Big Pharma.”

That Big Pharma took over and monopolized American medicine, promoting their own patented, profit-making products and suppressing all others, isn’t even a conspiracy theory.

In fact, it was recorded for all to see in 1953 …

 

The Fitzgerald Report

In the early 1950s, US Senator Charles Toby enlisted an investigator with the Interstate Commerce Commission named Benedict Fitzgerald to examine allegations of conspiracy and monopoly in medicine. Toby had become interested in the issue after his own son had gotten cancer and been given less than two years to live by orthodox medicine before pursuing alternative treatments and being cured.

The resulting 1953 report, known as the Fitzgerald Report, was truly shocking. It concluded that Big Pharma had been involved in “a conspiracy of alarming proportions.”

First, there was

“The organized effort to hinder, suppress and restrict the free flow of drugs which allegedly proven successful in cases where clinical records, case history, pathological reports, and x-ray photographic proof, together with the alleged cured patients, are available.”

On top of that,

“Public and private funds have been thrown around like confetti at a country fair to close up and destroy clinics, hospitals, and research laboratories which do not conform to the viewpoint of medical associations.”

The report even noted that Big Pharma had conspired to suppress at least 12 promising cancer treatments, including mentioning Hoxsey Therapy by name.

It was an unfathomably damning report, making clear that the tentacles of a Big Pharma conspiracy to suppress alternative medicine were everywhere.

But as it turns out, the report did not go far enough

 

The Suppression of Laetril as a Cure for Cancer

Oftentimes when a new natural cancer treatment appears, the assertion from the medical establishment is that the new treatment is either unproven, or disproven. There is no better example of what this really means in the era of Big Pharma than the case of a cancer treatment called Laetrile.

In 1952, a year before the Fitzgerald Report, a biochemist named Ernst Krebs proposed that cancer was a deficiency disease which could be cured with a compound called amygdalin, found in over 1,200 plants, and most specifically in the seeds of apricots. By extracting this amygdalin from apricot kernels, Krebs created a product he called Laetrile.

Over the course of many years, Krebs conducted numerous lab experiments on animals which showed that Laetrile was an effective cancer treatment, that somehow, it caused cancer cells to self-destruct.

By the 1960s, a doctor named John Richardson had picked up the research, and had even begun treating human patients with Laetrile. Unsurprisingly, the Rockefeller-controlled FDA launched a massive media campaign against Richardson and Laetrile, claiming that the treatment was toxic and dangerous. By 1971, the FDA officially banned Laetrile, and, in 1972, they stormed Richardson’s clinic and arrested him.

But even after Richardson was jailed, people kept asking about Laetrile, writing to government officials, medical journals, and scientific labs demanding answers. At this point, Big Pharma knew they had to put their foot down once and for all. They needed to undertake official testing which proved that Laetrile didn’t work.

The testing would take place at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, and what would happen next would come to be described as “one of the biggest medical cover-ups the world of cancer research has ever seen.”

The tests would be led and directed by Dr. Kanematsu Sugiura, known at that time as “the preeminent cancer researcher in America.” He had over 60 years of experience, publishing hundreds of academic papers on the subject. As one scientist said, “When Dr. Sugiura publishes, we know we don’t have to repeat the study, for we would obtain the same results he has reported.”

In 1972, testing began, with Laetrile being administered to mice with many different types of cancerous tumors. At its completion, Dr. Sugiura concluded that Laetrile stopped the spread of cancer, inhibited the growth of tumors, and acted as a cancer prevention. It even provided relief from pain and improved general health.

This seemed to be incredible news. Except, there were three Rockefellers sitting on the board of Sloan-Kettering, as well as a dozen more people representing companies making big money from Big Pharma. When they caught word of the test results, “all hell broke loose,” and another round of tests was ordered.

Unfortunately for Sloan-Kettering executives, the second round of testing only confirmed the first. Except this time, with two confirmed tests from the legendary Dr. Sugiura in the books, mainstream media was forced to cover it. Had a cure for cancer really been found, they asked?

Sloan-Kettering officials refused to speak with the media, refused to discuss the results or answer any questions, saying only in a prewritten statement that a third round of tests had been ordered in order to “clarify” the results, as if they had not been twice clarified already.

In this third test, a new wrinkle would be introduced – Dr. Sugiura would be blinded. He would not know which half of the mice would be receiving Laetrile, and which half would be given a saline solution, as if this eminently respected scientist was going to somehow manipulate the results.

After four weeks, Dr. Sugiura could see which of the mice were being given Laetrile, since mice in some of the cages had fewer and smaller tumors, while mice in the other cages showed no effects. Sloan-Kettering overseers who were supervising the project confirmed to Dr. Sugiura that he was correct. For a third time, Laetrile’s cancer treating properties were confirmed.

Except, arguing that Dr. Sugiura was no longer blinded since he knew which cages were which, Sloan-Kettering officials shut the tests down.

They would try yet again to get the results they were looking for with a fourth test. This time, not only would Dr. Sugiura be blinded, but the mice who were receiving the treatment would be mixed together with those who weren’t. Dr. Sugiura warned that this was dangerous because there was no dependable way to ensure the lab techs administering the treatment would be able to identify the correct mice every time. And, in fact, this is exactly what happened. Some of the mice who were purportedly only being given a saline solution saw their tumors stop growing.

“There’s something funny here,” Dr. Sugiura professed. The ‘something funny’ was that the treatments had been mixed, with many mice receiving some Laetrile and some saline solution, just as Dr. Sugiura had predicted.

Yet, in this case, the legitimacy of the results wasn’t important to Sloan-Kettering’s Rockefeller board. Immediately, they announced that “results from the experiment do not confirm the earlier positive findings of Sugiura.”

Then, they called a press conference attended by most of mainstream media and declared, “Laetrile was found to possess neither preventive, nor tumor-regressant, nor anti metestatic, nor curative anti-cancer activity” – the exact opposite of what the first three tests had shown.

At the end of the press conference, the floor was opened to questions from the media, which is when things took a dramatic turn.

“Dr. Sugiura,” someone shouted, “Do you stick by your belief that Laetrile stops the spread of cancer?”

The room fell silent as the fabled Dr. Sugiura rose to his feet and replied, “I stick.”

The next month, Sloan-Kettering executives appeared before a Senate subcommittee hearing to decide the fate of Laetrile. While it had been banned by the FDA in 1971, some states were challenging this decision.

At the hearing, Sloan-Kettering executives asserted, “There is not a particle of scientific evidence to suggest that Laetrile possesses any anti-cancer properties at all” totally ignoring the three full lab tests of scientific evidence from “the preeminent cancer researcher in America.” As a result of the testimony, Laetrile was officially banned nationwide by 1980.

Afterwards, Dr. Sugiura was asked why Sloan-Kettering was so against Laetrile. “I don’t know,” he replied, “Maybe the medical profession doesn’t like it because they are making too much money.”

When Big Pharma says an alternative treatment has been disproven, this is what they mean.

 

Is Big Pharma Suppressing Information for Profit?

But what about if tests were not done in a Rockefeller-controlled lab. What if one were to do their own tests, build their own case studies, and present them to the appropriate authorities themselves?

One man provided an answer.

Stanislaw Burzynski was a Doctor of Biochemistry who immigrated to the US from Poland in 1970, where he took up a position as a researcher and assistant professor at Baylor University in Houston, Texas. There, he discovered something which he called antineoplastons – naturally occurring “molecular switches” in the human body which, Burzynski asserted, the body used to control cancer growth.

At first, Burzynski’s discoveries were well received by colleagues. In fact, so impressive was his work that he was offered a tenured position in Baylor’s Department of Pharmacology. He should have been thrilled, yet Burzynski knew that if he accepted, he would lose his independence as a researcher. So, he refused the position, instead choosing to found the Burzynski Research Institute in order to continue his work. On his way out the door at Baylor, his boss warned him, “Just wait, Burzynski. They’re going to kick your ass.”

In short order, Burzynski and his clinic were investigated by local medical authorities for using “unapproved medications,” while the Rockefeller-founded American Cancer Society put antineoplastons on its “unproven methods” list, and those who had been funding his research pulled their support.

In 1983, the FDA filed a lawsuit to get him to shut down his operation, and when this failed, FDA agents and federal marshals simply raided the Burzynski Research Institute and seized over 200,000 confidential documents.

Still Burzynski continued on. He raised millions of dollars through his Institute to pay for clinical trials for antineoplastons, money Big Pharma companies are more than happy to spend since they know they will recoup it when their products are patented. By the mid-90s, he was able to provide the FDA with sixty clinical trials, meeting the requirement for their Phase I testing.

For another decade he worked, compiling hundreds more clinical trials, meeting the requirements for Phase II of testing on his own at the cost of millions of dollars.

In 2011, Burzynski began Phase III testing, which involves thousands of participants and can last for years, again, at the cost of many millions of dollars. He was closing in on the finish line by 2013, which is when the FDA stepped in and put a stop to the trials. Their reason? They complained that the Burzynski Research Institute was doing all of the testing, when, of course, this is simply how the FDA approval process works. The only difference is usually the testing is being done by a Big Pharma company.

Finally, in 2017, the FDA cancelled antineoplaston clinical trials for good, refusing Burzynski the right to even conduct the tests. Moreover, Burzynski had his medical license revoked and was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for his trouble.

The point made by Burzynski and his antineoplastons, by Sloan-Kettering’s Laetrile trials, is simple. It’s a case of ‘you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.’ If testing is conducted in a Rockefeller Big Pharma laboratory, it will be repeated and repeated and repeated until it gives the desired results, no matter how manipulated these results might be. And if you conduct the tests yourself, spending millions upon millions of dollars, the results will still not be accepted.

03-04-burzynski-02.webp?w=600&q=75&f=aa0b9051be2d61eaa37d43d89e96624f
Over 60 patients defended Dr. Burzynski stating they were cured by him.

Big Pharma controls the testing, they control approval, they control academic thought. But look closer, and it goes even further than that.

Big Pharma employs 1,270 registered lobbyists in the halls of government, more than two Big Pharma lobbyists for every member of congress, at a cost of over $200 million per year. They also spend tens of millions of dollars every year financing political campaigns – nearly every member of congress is funded by Big Pharma. On top of that, Big Pharma lobbyists and executives are repeatedly put in charge of the government bodies tasked with overseeing the pharmaceutical industry, like the FDA. Simply, the production and sale of medicine is tightly regulated by government, and Big Pharma controls the government.

Is it really so hard to believe that Big Pharma would use its control of academia, science, and government, to suppress valuable information for their own profit?

In reality, suppressing truth for profit is as American as apple pie – from the 1950s, when tobacco companies fought to suppress lung cancer knowledge as people died, to modern times, when oil companies insist that the debate around climate change is still ongoing, even as the consequences scientists promised decades ago are all around.

But pharmaceutical companies? Those purportedly tasked with providing health? Would they really suppress a cure for cancer? And kill people?

Actually, that Big Pharma would knowingly and intentionally kill people for profit is not conspiracy, it is established fact, admitted on record in American courts.

 

How Big Pharma Created the American Opioid Crisis

In October of 2020, Big Pharma flagbearer Purdue Pharma pled guilty in court to criminal charges for its role in the American opioid crisis, agreeing to pay some $8.3 billion in the settlement.

Opioids were a new type of synthetic pain medication that emerged in the early-1990s, which Big Pharma companies like Purdue aggressively promoted while suppressing information about the dangers, most specifically, the extreme addictiveness. Today, not only is chronic pain more prevalent than ever in the US, but nearly a million people have died from opioid overdoses, and another 3 million have fallen victim to addiction.

In pleading guilty at trial, Purdue Pharma admitted on record to having supplied drugs “without legitimate medical purpose.” In other words, the purpose of opioids wasn’t medical, it wasn’t to cure pain; it was to get people addicted so they’d buy more. Purdue even admitted to paying off health insurance companies to deny coverage for alternative care, forcing people to take opioids, and paying off doctors to overprescribe their product to patients.

depositphotos_178773006-stock-photo-macro-of-oxycodone-opioid-tablets.jpg

By February of 2022, four more of the largest Big Pharma companies had reached a $26 billion settlement for their own role in the crisis. These, along with Purdue, are the largest and most powerful pharmaceutical companies in the country, the ones who lobby governments and sit on medical boards. And here they are, on the record, poisoning people for profit.

 

Chemotherapy - The Only Legal "Cure" for Cancer

Apply this knowledge to cancer specifically, and think about what chemotherapy is.

The treatment was first conceptualized by doctors examining soldiers who had been exposed to mustard gas during World War II. Noticing that mustard gas had toxic effects on the blood cells of soldiers, doctors surmised that it could be used against cancer cells.

This was how the first version of chemotherapy, and model for all subsequent versions, was created, from a compound used as an agent of chemical warfare. This is what Big Pharma is telling cancer patients to put in their body.

Of course, it is no big secret that chemotherapy is toxic. Cancer patients are warned that side effects can include everything from vomiting and nausea, to infertility, to organ damage, and even death. They are even warned it can lead to a “second cancer.” In other words, patients are told chemotherapy might treat their cancer, but that it might also cause cancer; it might save their life, but it might also kill them. As one former president of the American Chemical Society succinctly put it, “chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”

A bit like opioids …

But that’s the point; there are no profits in the cure. Big Pharma needs people sick, so that people need more and more expensive “treatment.”

In this, the era of Big Pharma is alone in the history of medicine …

Link

The Dinarian On Locals is a labor of love that I pour my heart and soul into during my personal time. Countless hours are dedicated to delivering you the most up-to-date, unfiltered, and authentic news and information. Your support means the world to me, and I invite you to consider making a donation or becoming a dedicated supporter of this project. Any amount of XRP donations can be sent by scanning the QR code below and are greatly appreciated. ~ Namaste🙏🏼The Dinarian

 

 

community logo
Join the TheDinarian Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
1
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
All Tariffs To Remain In Place ✋️

🇺🇸 President Trump imposes 10% global tariff on all countries and says all tariffs will remain in place, despite Supreme Court ruling.

00:00:28
🚨10% GLOBAL TARIFF🚨

"Effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged..."

  • President Donald J. Trump
00:01:30
How Our Reality Is Manifested ✨️ In An Easy To Understand Clip

Filmmaker David Lynch's Diagram for Transcendental Consciousness is one of the greatest, easiest to understand explanations for how our reality is made of MIND first, MATTER second.

I promise this is genuinely worth your time.

It's fantastic. 💯

Learn to meditate free here:
https://heartfulness.org/us/

00:14:55
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

👉 Here’s what you need to know:

💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading
👀 XRP, The Simpsons, 1994 The Man Who Put It All Together 🚀

0:00​ XRP and The Simpsons Plus The Rising Phoenix

2:45​ Dr. Coleman Exposes The Entire System In 1994!

17:40​ Gematria With ISO and Ripple Plus Biblical Significance

25:17​ The Significance of The Original Ripple Logo

28:07​ Institut Montaigne Document Highlights Ripple
.
30:35​ Chatham House Significance Plus Meld Gold and The XRPL
37:32​ Carney and Georgieva of The IMF Speak On The Global Economy
41:49​ The Story of The Committee of 300 Document
44:58​ HSBC and Credit Suisse Significance Plus Otto B and Ripple
49:36​ The Significance of SIGINT Plus Jed McCaleb VAST Quant and Elon
56:09​ Closing Comments

⚠️ Gold reclaims $5,100

Feb-21st Live Webinar ! How To Physically Rewrite Your Internal State Using Ultrasound

On February 21st at 11am PST, Sterling Cooley is revealing the tools the mainstream isn't ready for you to use at home. https://skool.com/vagus/feb-21st-live-webinar-how-to-physically-rewrite-your-internal-state-using-ultrasound

Most people treat the Vagus Nerve like a static biological wire. They are wrong.

It is a dynamic, vibrating gateway that can be re-tuned through Ultrasound Neuromodulation.

Your nervous system is not a machine; it is a symphony that has been played out of tune for decades.

We have been conditioned to believe that healing requires chemical intervention or talk therapy that barely scratches the surface.

What if the master key to your consciousness isn’t a pill, but a precise acoustic frequency?

We are demonstrating how to physically rewrite your internal state using ultrasound.

On February 21st at 11am PST, Sterling Cooley will demonstrate the tools for ultrasound application.
http://Skool.com/vagus

Arrive 30 minutes early for a sonic immersion of new music to ...

post photo preview
🧬VINDICATED! The Epstein Files Connect Gates, Pandemics & Censorship to a Globalist Blueprint for a Biosecurity State🧬

Every warning. Every documentary. Every article. Every post that got us banned. All of it was true. Now what? What can we do? Read on, share this Substack, help us save lives! The Light is shining! ✨

Well, well, well… look what the cat dragged in.

Actually, scratch that. Look what the Department of Justice finally dragged out of Jeffrey Epstein’s email inbox and dumped on the world’s doorstep like a rotting corpse nobody wanted to claim. Yep, that’s right. The Epstein files. It’s hilarious how the “Democratic hoax” and “fantasy” client list we were all told didn’t exist suddenly became a very real, very unsealed document.

For years—years—they called us conspiracy theorists. They slapped “misinformation” labels on our posts faster than Pfizer could print liability waivers. They kicked us off platforms, lied about us in the media, and shadow-banned our reach. Meanwhile, the real conspiracy—the one typed out in black-and-white emails between billionaires, bankers, and a convicted pedophile—was sitting in a government vault, waiting to prove us right.

And now? Now the receipts are public.

The release of Jeffrey Epstein’s files has done far more than expose a network of elite pedophilia and blackmail—it has vindicated truth-tellers like us and countless others who were smeared, censored, de-platformed, and persecuted for warning about the sinister agendas of the globalist elite. The documents reveal shocking connections between Epstein, Bill Gates, pandemic planning, and the systematic suppression of anyone who dared to connect the dots.

We weren’t crazy. We were just early. And they hated us for it.

Epstein, Gates, and the Pandemic “Business Model” They Built Together

One of the most damning revelations from Epstein’s files is his partnership with Bill Gates. Forget the carefully crafted PR spin about “regretting” those meetings. These weren’t casual dinners. These were planning sessions.

Back in 2015, Gates and Epstein exchanged emails about “preparing for pandemics” and strategies to “involve the WHO.” Gates wrote: I hope we can pull this off.”

How’s that for a chill down your spine?

This eerily foreshadowed the 2019 Event 201 simulation—a pandemic exercise hosted by the Gates Foundation, Johns Hopkins, and the World Economic Forum that just happened to model a global coronavirus outbreak… just months before COVID-19 ”mysteriously” emerged in Wuhan. Funny how that works, isn’t it?

But let’s rewind even further, to the real blueprint—the financial architecture that made the pandemic response not just possible, but profitable.

The story crystallizes in a chilling 2011 email exchangeJuliet Pullis, a JPMorgan executive under then-chairman Jes Staley, emailed Jeffrey Epstein with a list of detailed questions. The source? “The JPM team that is putting together some ideas for Gates.

The questions were precise: What are the objectives? Is anonymity key? Who directs the investments and grants? This wasn’t JPMorgan consulting an expert; it was a trillion-dollar bank asking a convicted felon to architect a billion-dollar philanthropic fund for Bill Gates.

This wasn’t JPMorgan consulting a philanthropic expert. This was a trillion-dollar bank asking a convicted felon to architect a billion-dollar philanthropic fund for one of the richest men on Earth. Let that marinate for a moment.

Epstein’s reply was fluent and commanding. He described a donor-advised fund with a “stellar board” and ties to the Gates-Buffett “Giving Pledge.” He noted the billions already pledged and identified the gap: “They all have a tax advisor, but have no real clue on how to give it away.” His solution? JPM would be an integral part. Not advisor… operator, compliance. Staley’s response: We need to talk.

By July 2011, the plan evolved. In an email to Staley, copying Boris Nikolic (Gates’ chief science advisor), Epstein laid out the core pitch: A silo based proposal that will get Bill more money for vaccines.”

Not “more research for pandemics.” Not “better public health infrastructure.” More money for vaccines.” This is the unambiguous language of capital formation, not charity. It reveals the structure’s intended output planning reached the highest levels.

In August 2011, Mary Erdoes, CEO of JPMorgan’s $2+ trillion Asset & Wealth Management division, emailed Epstein (while on vacation) with additional operational questions.

Epstein’s reply was breathtaking in scope:

  • Scale: “Billions of dollars” in two years, “tens of billions by year 4.”

  • Structure: Donors choose from “silos” like mutual funds.

  • The Kicker: However, we should be ready with an offshore arm — especially for vaccines.”

An offshore arm. For vaccines. For a charitable vehicle. Let that sink in.

So, by the time the world was panicking in March 2020, the financial machinery was already built. The investment vehicles, the donor-advised funds, the reinsurance products at places like Swiss Re, and even the simulation playbooks were dusted off and ready to go.

The pandemic wasn’t an interruption to their business—it was the Grand Opening.

Epstein’s role extended far beyond trafficking; he was a facilitator and blackmail operative for the global elite. The same forces that orchestrated the COVID-19 power grab—the mask mandates, lockdowns, censorship, and coercive mRNA push—are the ones who silenced critics like us.

Gates, despite his documented ties to Epstein (multiple flights on the “Lolita Express” after Epstein’s 2008 conviction), walks freely. He’s on TV. He’s advising governments. He’s still funding “global health initiatives” and pushing digital IDs, vaccine passports, and climate lockdowns.

Meanwhile, people like our friend, Joby Weeks, are under house arrest without charges, and voices like ours were de-platformed, demonetized, and destroyed for saying this very thing.

We told you. You knew it in your gut. Now you have the emails.

Censorship: The Elite’s “Misinformation” Label to Cover Their Crimes

The Epstein files expose not just criminal behavior, but the playbook for the systematic suppression of truth. While Epstein’s powerful friends were being protected by the FBI, the DOJ, and the media, platforms like Facebook (Meta), YouTube (Google), and Twitter went to war against anyone talking about it.

Think about the sheer audacity.

We were banned from social media for calling COVID-19 a “fake pandemic” and exposing the vaccine injury data that’s now undeniable.

Below is a screenshot of the first Facebook post that was taken down and then used as “Exhibit A” in their “reports” about how bad we were, naming us the 3rd most dangerous people on earth after Dr Joseph Mercola and Bobby Kennedy in the digital hit list they called the “Disinformation Dozen.” They attacked us, lied about us, and pressured the media, social media, and population at large to do the same: attack, threaten, and cast us out.

We were labeled “dangerous” for sharing emails, documents, and research that the DOJ and the CDC have now confirmed.

It was never about “safety.” It was about narrative control.

The same institutions that turned a blind eye to Epstein’s crimes for decades—the same ones that let him “commit suicide” in a maximum-security prison with cameras conveniently malfunctioning—suddenly became the ruthless hall monitors of “acceptable discourse,” ensuring only their approved stories could be told.

Big Tech, Big Media, and Big Government are all part of the same protection racket. They shielded Epstein’s client list, and now they shield the architects of the pandemic debacle. Independent journalists, researchers, and health advocates like us, who connected these dots, were systematically de-platformed, demonetized, and destroyed.

Why? Because we were right, and that was the greatest threat of all.

When you’re over the target, that’s when the flak gets heaviest. And brothers and sisters, we were getting shelled.

They Lied About Us While Protecting the Real Criminals

Let’s be crystal clear about what happened here.

We have spent decades exposing the cancer industry, Big Pharma’s corruption, and the suppression of natural health solutions. We produced The Truth About Cancer docu-series, reaching millions worldwide. We warned about vaccine injuries, censorship, and the coming medical tyranny years before COVID-19.

And what did they do? They called us “Conspiracy Theorists,” “Anti-Vaxxers,” and “Killers.” Dangerous.

They said we were killing people with “misinformation.”

Facebook banned us. YouTube deleted our videos. Legacy media ran hit pieces. PayPal froze our accounts.

All while Bill Gates—a man with documented ties to Jeffrey Epstein, who flew on his plane multiple times after Epstein’s conviction, who got STDs from Russian girls Epstein provided for him for which Gates asked Epstein’s help getting him antibiotics to slip secretly to his then wife, Melinda, so that she would not know about his inexcusable and perverted escapades—yes, THAT Bill Gates—was at the same time, being platformed on every major news network as the world’s health oracle.

All while Anthony Fauci—who funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan through Peter Daszak and EcoHealth Alliance, who lied under oath to Congress, who flip-flopped on masks, lockdowns, and vaccines—was treated like a saint. Time Magazine’s “Guardian of the Year.”

All while Pfizer—a company with a $2.3 billion criminal fine for fraudulent marketing, bribery, and kickbacks—was given blanket immunity from liability and billions in taxpayer dollars to produce a vaccine in record time with no long-term safety data.

Were we the dangerous ones?

No.

We were the truthful ones. And that made us the enemy.

The Weaponized Institutions: From Epstein’s Blackmail to Your Digital ID

Epstein’s operation was never just about blackmail for perversion; it was blackmail for control. The files show his cozy ties to intelligence agencies (Mossad, CIA), financial giants like JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank, and political leaders across the globe.

This is the same cabal now pushing:

  • The Great Reset

  • Digital IDs

  • Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs)

  • 15-minute cities

  • Carbon credit social scoring

  • Vaccine passports

Let’s connect the dots they desperately don’t want you to see:

Financial Control:

JPMorgan banked Epstein for years despite clear red flags—over $1 billion in suspicious transactions flagged internally and ignored. They knew. They didn’t care. They paid a $290 million fine and moved on.

Now, banks like Bank of America, Chase, and PayPal de-bank conservatives, truckers, health freedom advocates, and anyone who questions the narrative. Canadian truckers. Gun shops. Crypto entrepreneurs. The goal is the same: punish dissent and control economic life.

CBDCs are the endgame—a digital leash on every citizen. Programmable money that can be turned off, restricted, or expired. Social credit by another name.

Medical Tyranny:

The FDA, CDC, and WHO—utterly captured by Big Pharma—lied about:

  • COVID origins (Wuhan lab leak dismissed as conspiracy theory)

  • Vaccine efficacy (”95% effective” turned into “you need boosters forever”)

  • Natural immunity (ignored despite being superior)

  • Early treatments (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamin D censored and mocked)

They attacked natural health advocates just as they’ve done for decades with cancer cures, detox protocols, and anything that threatens Big Pharma profits. They are not health agencies; they are profit-enforcement arms dressed in lab coats.

Political Corruption:

Epstein’s blackmail ensured elite immunity. His client list includes presidents, princes, CEOs, scientists, and media moguls.

Meanwhile, true dissidents—Julian Assange (tortured in prison for journalism), Edward Snowden (exiled for exposing mass surveillance), and journalists like us—face persecution, imprisonment, debanking, slanderous hit pieces, and/or constant character assassination.

Two systems of justice: one for them, one for you. One for Epstein’s friends, one for truth-tellers.

The Way Forward: They’re Exposed. Now It’s Time to Build.

The Epstein files are more than proof; they are a declaration that the system is rotten to its core. But here’s the beautiful part: they vindicate us completely.

Every warning. Every documentary. Every article. Every post that got us banned. All of it was true.

The globalists’ grip is weakening. The truth—the real, ugly, documented truth—is erupting from the very files they tried to hide. They labeled us liars, but the emails show they were the architects. They silenced us, they censored us, but that only made our voices more necessary.

Epstein did not kill himself. COVID-19 was not natural. The vaccines were not safe or effective. The censorship was not about protecting you—it was about protecting them.

And now? Now it’s time to use this vindication as fuel. Not for revenge, but for revolution. A revolution of truth, health, freedom, and justice.

They tried to bury us. They didn’t know we were seeds.

The Epstein files are a smoking gun. A paper trail. A confession written in emails, financial structures, and offshore accounts.

They prove what we’ve been saying all along:

  • The system is rigged.

  • The elites are criminals.

  • The pandemic was planned.

  • The censorship was coordinated.

And we were right. 👍

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted, Thank You For Your Support 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 Stripe:
1) or visit http://thedinarian.locals.com/donate

💳 PayPal: 
2) Simply scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here


🔗 Crypto Donations Graciously Accepted👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
💳Citi’s Strategy to Dominate Institutional Payments💳

Citi's Institutional Payments Strategy

Citi’s Strategy to Dominate Institutional Payments is built on a foundation of technological innovation, strategic simplification, and a laser focus on institutional clients. The bank has transitioned from a fragmented global retail bank to a streamlined provider of high-margin institutional services, with its Treasury and Trade Solutions (TTS) and Securities Services segments now considered its "crown jewel." This shift, led by CEO Jane Fraser, involved exiting 14 international consumer markets and slashing decades of "tech debt" through a multi-billion-dollar partnership with **Google Cloud**, creating a modern, unified data and cloud infrastructure.

At the core of Citi’s dominance in institutional payments is Citi Token Services, a blockchain-powered platform launched in September 2023. This service converts client deposits into digital tokens, enabling 24/7, real-time cross-border payments, automated trade finance, and just-in-time liquidity management. By using private blockchain technology managed entirely by Citi, clients avoid the need to host their own nodes. The solution has been successfully piloted with Maersk and a canal authority, demonstrating how smart contracts can reduce transaction times from days to minutes—mirroring the functions of traditional bank guarantees and letters of credit.

Citi is further strengthening its position through strategic partnerships, such as its collaboration with Coinbase to expand digital asset payment solutions for institutional clients, enabling seamless fiat-to-crypto transitions. The bank is also leveraging generative AI to automate regulatory compliance, improve cash forecasting by 50%, and reduce operational case times by 90%, directly enhancing the efficiency and reliability of its payment services.

With a global network spanning 95 countries and a focus on real-time, transparent, and programmable financial services, Citi is redefining the institutional payments landscape. Its strategy—centered on infrastructure modernization, digital asset innovation, and client-centric automation—positions it to capture market share from both traditional banks and fintechs, particularly as cross-border instant payments become the norm by 2028.

As blockchain infrastructure inches closer to the core of global finance, a consequential debate is taking shape inside banks and among institutional investors.

What form of digital money will ultimately dominate on-chain settlement?

Stablecoins have so far captured the spotlight, buoyed by rapid adoption and growing regulatory attention. But a different shift is underway inside the banking sector, where executives are increasingly confident that tokenized bank deposits, and not privately issued stablecoins, could become the preferred on-chain dollar for institutional and wholesale use.

“We don’t start with the asset,” Biswarup Chatterjee, global head of partnerships and innovation, Citi Services at Citi, told PYMNTS. “We typically start with our client need, and then we look at the pros and cons of each type of asset or financing instrument.”

For institutional money, innovation can often begin with constraint.

“When you’re dealing with money as a financial institution, you’re acting in a fiduciary capacity,” Chatterjee said, framing why safety and soundness dominate early conversations with clients.

From that perspective, the critical questions around new digital instruments are regulatory and operational before they are technological. Are these assets well-regulated? Do they operate within clearly defined legal frameworks? Can they be governed with the same rigor as traditional deposits or securities?

For institutions that manage systemic liquidity, and their clients, those questions are becoming non-negotiable. Within that context, tokenized deposits are what is emerging as a natural evolution of existing bank money.

“Within the bank’s network, tokenized deposits are an efficient way for our clients to be able to get that 24/7, always-on availability,” Chatterjee said.

The Race to Define the On-Chain Dollar for Institutional Use

By anchoring decisions in client economics and workflows, banks are positioning themselves less as promoters of specific technologies and more as integrators tasked with assembling the right mix of tools for each use case. Institutional clients are not simply looking for digital replicas of existing money; they are grappling with the friction of moving funds across use cases and jurisdictions.

“There’s this constant need to transform money across its various forms and shapes,” Chatterjee said, adding that payments, working capital and financing increasingly overlap, and inefficiencies emerge when money cannot move fluidly between those roles.

By representing deposits on distributed ledgers, banks can offer real-time movement of money across accounts, entities and geographies without leaving the regulated perimeter. For enterprises and institutions, this promises faster settlement, improved liquidity management and reduced operational friction, all without introducing new balance sheet or counterparty risks.

In this sense, tokenized deposits may turn out to be less disruptive than they appear. They modernize the plumbing of banking rather than bypassing it, extending familiar money into programmable environments.

Regulation, Interoperability and the Velocity of Money

The moment money exits a bank’s direct network, however, the strengths of tokenized deposits begin to fade. Cross-border payments, underbanked regions and counterparties outside major financial institutions can expose gaps in reach and efficiency when it comes to tokenized deposits.

This is where Chatterjee said he sees a role for stablecoins, not as competitors to banks, but as connective tissue.

“When money leaves the bank’s network and goes out into the external ecosystem, that’s where we see the role of stablecoins coming in,” he said, assuming they operate in a “very safe and sound and regulated manner.”

The result is likely to represent not a binary choice but a continuum. Just as checks, wires, cash and instant payments coexist today, digital money is likely to fragment into specialized forms optimized for different environments.

At the heart of the impact financial blockchain is having on digital money’s evolution lies a deceptively simple question: What makes money “good”?

For Chatterjee, the answer hinges on universal acceptance and trust.

“What makes a currency strong … has a lot to do with universal acceptance,” he said.

Assets that cannot be readily transferred or accepted risk becoming stranded, unable to circulate productively; while trust is fundamental to the value and stability of money, no matter its form. That logic applies equally to tokenized deposits and stablecoins. Without trust and transferability, neither is likely to function as a true institutional settlement asset.

Despite the focus on tokens and technology, Chatterjee was clear about where long-term value resides. It is not in the token itself, but in service.

“Client service and the client experience is what is going to drive the winning proposition,” he said.

Source 1

Source 2

🙏 Donations Accepted, Thank You For Your Support 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 Stripe:
1) or visit http://thedinarian.locals.com/donate

💳 PayPal: 
2) Simply scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?business=8K3TZ2YFZ7SMU&no_recurring=0&item_name=Support+Crypto+Michael+%E2%9A%A1+Dinarian+on+Locals+Blog&currency_code=USD


🔗 Crypto Donations Graciously Accepted👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

 

Read full Article
post photo preview
New Allegations Link Former National Intelligence Leaders Clapper and O’Sullivan to UFO Shoot-Down and Retrieval Program

Written by Christopher Sharp - 24 January 2026

Multiple sources have told Liberation Times that, during the Obama administration, senior intelligence figures James Clapper and Stephanie O’Sullivan oversaw a program relating to Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. 

The sources allege the effort involved the shootdown and recovery of exotic vehicles thought to be of non-human origin.

Three separate sources told Liberation Times that Clapper allegedly ran the program alongside O’Sullivan, dating back to his tenure as Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence from 2007 to 2010

During that period, O’Sullivan led the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology before being promoted in 2009 to become the agency’s third-most senior officer.

One source alleged to Liberation Times that Clapper and O’Sullivan oversaw a program codenamed ‘Golden Domes,’ which the source claimed was jointly run by the CIA and the United States Air Force (USAF), where Clapper previously served.

The source further alleged that the program could detect and track UAP even when ‘cloaked’ and as they physically manifested.

The same source claimed the program employed a mix of electronic and laser-based capabilities intended to bring down what the source described as ‘exotic non-human vehicles.’

Sources were unable to offer Liberation Times a clear explanation for why the U.S. government would choose to engage UAP, including whether any such actions were taken routinely, in specific circumstances, or in relation to any potential understandings or rules of engagement involving other purported non-human factions.

In the recently released documentary ‘The Age of Disclosure’, James Clapper alleged that a secretive USAF program had been actively monitoring UAP, particularly over the highly classified Area 51 facility in Nevada - an epicentre of cutting-edge military development and testing.

Clapper, a former Chief of USAF Intelligence, stated:

“When I served in the Air Force, there was an active program to track anomalous activities that we couldn’t otherwise explain - many of them connected with ranges out west, notably Area 51.”

In a recent interview with journalist Megyn Kelly, former intelligence official, USAF veteran, and UAP whistleblower David Grusch claimed that James Clapper managed a UAP program, stating:

“I'm a little bit disappointed as a fellow Air Force officer…. That's all he said in the documentary: that there was a program he was aware of. 

 

“In fact, without being inappropriate, I will say that General Clapper was well aware of the crash retrieval issue, managed the crash retrieval issue, and, when he was a DNI [Director of National Intelligence], USDI [Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security], DIA [Defense Intelligence Agency], he placed people in critical roles to manage this issue, both publicly - and I'll just say not publicly as well - and I'll allow the audience to distill what I'm saying at the, at the risk of being inappropriate or going too far with my discussion. 

 

“So General Clapper, Stephanie O’Sullivan, other folks in the IC [Intelligence Community] that are well aware of this issue, that were in rooms discussing this issue, I ask you to be greater leaders on this. I should not be the only former military officer and intelligence official that is being completely candid with the information that they were exposed to.”

Grusch’s lawyer, Charles McCullough III served as the Intelligence Community Inspector General, reporting directly to then–Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

In that role, according to his biography, McCullough ‘oversaw intelligence officers responsible for audits, inspections, and investigations. Furthermore, he was responsible for inquiries involving the Office of the Director of National Intelligence as well as the entire Intelligence Community.’

                            Above: Charles McCullough, III and James Clapper

Grusch, in that same interview, also alleged that former Vice President Dick Cheney, who has since died, was the “closest person” to a “mob boss,” exerting “central leadership” over UAP-related activities.

Notably, Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynne Cheney, served on Lockheed Corporation’s board of directors from 1994 to 2001.

Against that backdrop, in written testimony to Congress, Lue Elizondo, the former director of the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program, claimed that Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland was among the sites prepared in connection with an alleged transfer of UAP materials to Bigelow Aerospace from Lockheed Martin - an organisation long accused of involvement in an alleged UAP reverse-engineering program.

In a 2013 Fox News interview, Dick Cheney said he first met James Clapper around 25 years earlier, when Clapper was serving as a USAF intelligence officer in Korea.

James Clapper served as the fourth Director of National Intelligence under President Obama from August 2010 to January 2017. Before that, he was Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence from 2007 to 2010 under President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Clapper also previously served as Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency

In his book Facts and Fears, he recounts how he was assigned as the USAF senior resident officer at the National Security Agency (NSA) to represent Air Force interests. In February 1980, then-NSA Director Vice Admiral Bobby Inman presided over Clapper’s promotion to colonel, as he assumed responsibility for all Air Force personnel stationed at the NSA.

Clapper writes in his book that he served as an intermediary for Vice Admiral Bobby Inman, whom he describes as “an icon and a legend” and who has also been alleged to be a UAP gatekeeper.

Inman was clearly aware of the link between O’Sullivan’s former office and UAP-related matters. In a now-public phone call with NASA engineer Bob Oechsler, Inman said that Everett Hineman, then Deputy Director of the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology, would be “the best person” to ask whether any recovered UAP vehicles might be made available for technological research outside military channels.

Notably, former NSA administrator Mike Rogers has recalled in an interview that, while serving as Director of National Intelligence, Clapper unexpectedly ordered him and his team to review the NSA’s files and provide everything relating to UFOs.

Upon being nominated as Director of National Intelligence by President Obama in 2010, Clapper was described as having developed close ties to the intelligence community during his long career and is particularly close to senior managers at the CIA.

In 2011, Clapper recommended that President Obama nominate Stephanie O’Sullivan as Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence (PDDNI). 

Before her nomination, O’Sullivan served as the CIA’s Associate Deputy Director from December 2009 to February 2011, working alongside the Director and Deputy Director to provide overall leadership of the agency, with a particular focus on day-to-day management. 

                                                Above: Stephanie O’Sullivan

Before that, she served as the CIA’s Deputy Director of Science and Technology for 4 years. According to Liberation Times sources, the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology has and continues to be involved in coordinating UAP retrieval missions and safeguarding technologies derived from UAP-related research carried out by the Department of War (DoW) and its contractors.

Based on the best available open source information, previous Deputy Directors of the CIA’s Directorate of Science and Technology include:

  • Albert Wheelon 1963-1966

  • Carl Duckett 1966-1967

  • Leslie Dirks 1967-1982

  • R. Evan Hineman 1982-1989

  • James Hirsch 1989-1995

  • Ruth David 1995-1998

  • Gary Smith 1999-1999

  • Joanne Isham 1999-2001

  • Donald Kerr 2001-2005

  • Stephanie O’Sullivan 2005-2009

  • Glenn Gaffney 2009-2015

  • Dawn Meyerriecks 2015-2021

  • Todd Lowery 2021-present

In his book, ‘Facts and Fears’, Clapper writes that he knew O’Sullivan by reputation as a brilliant technical engineer, and that then-CIA Director Leon Panetta put her forward to him as his deputy - someone who could help cover his blind spots when CIA-related issues arose

Clapper describes the day of O’Sullivan’s confirmation to PDDNI - a title O’Sullivan jokingly referred to as ‘P-Diddy’ - as ‘an extremely happy one’. Their working relationship within the ODNI was extremely close, and Clapper has written that he learned to adopt the line “Stephanie speaks for me, even when we haven’t spoken.”

O’Sullivan entered the intelligence world after responding to a cryptic newspaper classified advert seeking an “ocean engineer”. That move led her to TRW, the defense contractor absorbed into Northrop Grumman, and later the Office of Naval Intelligence. Liberation Times sources allege that Northrop Grumman’s Tejon Ranch Radar Cross Section Facility in southern California is a site where UAPs are routinely retrieved.

Since her retirement from government in 2017, O’Sullivan now serves as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Aerospace Corporation and is on the Board of Directors of Battelle Memorial Institute. 

Battelle and The Aerospace Corporation have both been referenced publicly in connection with UAP programs

Sources also note that O’Sullivan sits on the board of HRL Laboratories, formerly Hughes Research Laboratories, part of the wider Hughes corporate legacy that is closely associated with the Hughes Glomar Explorer, the vessel later linked to the CIA’s effort to recover a sunken Soviet submarine.

Sources told Liberation Times that Stephanie O’Sullivan has been questioned by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about her alleged role in a UAP program

The sources further allege that she misled committee members, including then Senator Marco Rubio, now Secretary of State, by nervously claiming that she had no involvement.

Allegations of kinetic engagement have surfaced in other contexts. 

In written testimony submitted to Congress, journalist George Knapp relayed what he said he was told by figures linked to a former Russian Ministry of Defense UAP program: that Russian fighter aircraft were dispatched to intercept UAP on numerous occasions and, in a small number of cases, were ordered to fire. 

Knapp wrote that after several alleged incidents in which aircraft subsequently crashed, a standing order was issued instructing pilots to disengage and ‘leave the UFOs alone because, quote, “they could have incredible capacities for retaliation.”’ 

Source

  🙏 Donations Accepted, Thank You For Your Support 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 Stripe:
1) or visit http://thedinarian.locals.com/donate

💳 PayPal: 
2) Simply scan the QR code below 📲 or Click Here: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?business=8K3TZ2YFZ7SMU&no_recurring=0&item_name=Support+Crypto+Michael+%E2%9A%A1+Dinarian+on+Locals+Blog&currency_code=USD


🔗 Crypto Donations Graciously Accepted👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals