Exclusive — Sam Brownback Calls on Woke Corporations to Pull Advertising Dollars Out of Beijing Winter Olympics

Jordan Dixon-Hamilton11 Dec 2021

Sam Brownback, former U.S. Senator, Kansas Governor, and U.S. Ambassador for international religious freedom, appeared on Breitbart News Saturday and called on woke corporations like Coca-Cola and AirBnb to pull their advertising dollars out of the Beijing Winter Olympics amid China’s numerous human rights violations.

Breitbart News Saturday host Matthew Boyle opened the show noting that Friday, December 10, was the United Nation’s annual Human Rights Day. He asked the former Ambassador to lay out China’s human rights abuses against the Uighur Muslim population.

“What they started against the Tibetan Buddhists, they perfected against the Uighur Muslims. and they got a million of them in concentration camps,” Brownback said. “They have a high tech police state for everybody else. And they’re persecuting them and trying to really drive their faith out.”

“They’ve done that, as I say against the Buddhists, they’re doing it now also against house church Christians, destroying the churches locking people up. They go against human rights lawyers, they are at war with faith, all faiths.”

Brownback warned that China wants its religious freedom violations replicated by other authoritarian regimes worldwide. “80 percent of the world lives in a religiously restricted, heavily restricted atmosphere. And China’s leading the way on how to do it,” he said.

Brownback explained that the Uighur Muslim population in China is under constant surveillance that impacts their day-to-day lives in what he calls a “war on faith.”

“If they don’t like what you’re doing, they give you a low social credit score so you can’t travel. You can’t get into the apartment complexes or the schools that you want to get into, can’t name your child Muhammad, you can’t fast during Ramadan. It’s really basically to try to drive the faith out of the people. And that’s why I call it a war on faith.”

Brownback is optimistic in this war on faith because “ultimately, a person’s soul will win out.”

Boyle then mentioned President Joe Biden’s lackluster “diplomatic boycott” of the Beijing Winter Olympics and asked Brownback what the United States should do to send a message to the Chinese Communist Party.

“What a number of us called for this week was an advertiser’s boycott of the Olympics. Hold the Western companies’ advertising dollars,” he said.

“Coca Cola, Airbnb pull your dollars if the Chinese Communist Party won’t announce a date for the closing of these concentration camps, then pull your advertising dollars so that kind of the Chinese Communists are not enriched by the Olympics.”

“And then I hope our athletes will be as brave as [Enes] Kanter Freedom is, and will walk in the Olympic Stadium with pictures of people that are being held because they’re religious dissidents or Hong Kong activists.”

Brownback suggested that it should be the American athletes who turn the Olympic Games “into an embarrassment for the Chinese Communist Party.”

Boyle mentioned the woke chief executives of top companies and asked Brownback if now is the time for the American people to consider a boycott of certain companies.Notably, Boyle called out Coca-Cola for advertising in China despite attempting to punish Georgia for passing election integrity laws.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/12/11/exclusive-sam-brownback-calls-on-woke-corporations-to-pull-advertising-dollars-out-of-beijing-winter-olympics/

Anon posted this article last bread with linkheres a portion of article

December 12, 2021

They Hate Us, They Really Hate UsBy Clarice Feldman

As unlikely a tale as this was, the number of prominent touters of it was even larger than I recall the Rittenhouse promoters were. I’m sure I will miss some, but here’s a working list which reveals the broad sweep of the race-baiting pols and organizations and their media enablers.

Joe Biden

Kamala Harris

Maxine Waters

Yamiche Alcindor (NPR)

CNN

The Washington Post

NBC

Nancy Pelosi

Don Lemon

Robin Roberts (Good Morning America)

Black Lives Matter

The NAACP

Bernie Sanders

Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez

Cory Booker

Joy-Ann Reid

Rashida Tlaib

Eric Swalwell

Adam Schiff

Pete Buttigieg

I recognize that we all make mistakes now and then, but the story Smollett peddled was so preposterous, only a moron could credibly claim he believed it. Others have offered explanations for why the celebrities, politicians, and media so quickly accepted his account. Those include it was yet another effort to tar Trump and Republicans to drive black voters and gays to the polls. Ana Navarro asserted that the fake hate story was “believable to many people.”

I bet scammers would pay a lot for the list and contact information for the people who truly believed Smollett’s cockamamie story. Others might suggest the media covered the Smollett story without in any way questioning its believability because it was sensational, involved a well-known actor, and drew viewers and listeners. Maybe they just were afraid to stand out from the crowd of their peers.

I have another view with which I consider it fair to tar most, if not all, of the Smollett fantasy promoters: They hate you. They hate normal fellow-citizens. They hate anyone capable of the most rudimentary critical thinking. They consider voters sheep whom they can herd into the slaughter pens at their will and despise any of the flock that spot the pen and refuse to enter it. And, in their usual projection, they assume that those they hate are, in fact, hate-filled when they are not.

Here are some of their statements when the preposterous tale was spun. Read this and tell me I’m wrong.

Nancy Pelosi: "The racist, homophobic attack on Jussie Smollett is an affront to out humanity. No one should be attacked for who they are or whom they love. I pray that Jussie has a speedy recovery & that justice is served. May we all commit to ending this hate once & for all.”

Adam Schiff: “I met Jussie Smollett at the Pride Parade in Los Angeles, and I’ve seen the passion and moral clarity of his activism first hand. This week he was the victim of an horrific attack. We pray for your speedy recovery, Jussie and reject this act of hatred and bigotry.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/12/they_hate_us_they_really_hate_us.html

Money over human life! This is medicine and Science represents today!

Damning’ Ivermectin Tape Exposes Pressure by Big Pharma to Suppress Ivermectin, RFK, Jr.’s New Book Reveals

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s new book, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” includes a revealing transcript — printed here — of a conversation withDr. Andrew Hill, who admitted to caving to pressure to downplay the benefits of ivermectin as a COVID treatment.

By Neville Hodgkinson

Excerpts:

Dr. Andrew Hill, author of a favorable analysis of ivermectin studies.

He had subsequently performed a “neck-wrenching” U-turn on the issue, claiming the studies comprised “low certainty” of value and that more trials were needed.

Lawrie was trying to persuade Hill to participate in and co-author an immediate review of all published ivermectin studies in the medical literature, to be conducted by the eminent Cochrane Network, which uses thousands of volunteers to make high-quality, independent treatment recommendations.

“It was an exciting opportunity,” Kennedy writes. “Under normal circumstances, Hill should have pounced on this chance to serve as lead author with some of the world’s most prestigious researchers. He was nevertheless noncommittal.

The article states that Lawrie spoke to Hill by Zoom and the call was recorded.

“Dr Lawrie asked Hill to explain his U-turn on ivermectin, which his own analysis found overwhelmingly effective. ‘How can you do this?’ she inquired politely. ‘You are causing irreparable harm.’Hill explained that he was in a ‘tricky situation’ because his sponsors had put pressure on him. Hill is a University of Liverpool virologist who serves as an adviser to Bill Gates and the Clinton Foundation. He told me his sponsor was Unitaid.

“Unitaid is a quasi-governmental advocacy organization funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and several countries — France, the United Kingdom, Norway, Brazil, Spain, the Republic of Korea and Chile — to lobby governments to finance the purchase of medicines from pharmaceutical multinationals for distribution to the African poor.

“Its primary purpose seems to be protecting the patent and intellectual property rights of pharmaceutical companies — which, as we shall see, is the priority passion for Bill Gates — and to ensure their prompt and full payment.About 63 percent of its funding comes from a surtax on airline tickets.

“The BMGF holds a board seat and chairs Unitaid’s Executive Committee, and the BMGF has given Unitaid $150 million since 2005. Various Gates-funded surrogate and front organizations also contribute, as does the pharmaceutical industry.

“The BMGF and Gates personally own large stakes in many of the pharmaceutical companies that profit from this boondoggle. Gates also uses Unitaid to fund corrupt science by tame and compromised researchers like Hill that legitimizes his policy directives to the WHO.

“Unitaid gave $40 million to Andrew Hill’s employer, the University of Liverpool, four days before the publication of Hill’s study. Hill, a Ph.D., confessed that the sponsors were pressuring him to influence his conclusion. When Dr. Lawrie asked who was trying to influence him, Hill said, ‘I mean, I, I think I’m in a very sensitive position here …’”

Please take the time to read the article in the top link. You won’t regret it. It’s all right there. Conflicts of interest and researchers cow-towing to ‘the powers that be.’ In this case everyone’s genuflecting to Unitaid.

Best quote:

“Yeah. Well, I don’t know how you sleep at night, honestly.” – Dr. Tess Lawrie

https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2021/12/07/damning-ivermectin-tape-laws-needed-now-patients-speak-ivermectin-for-covid-works/

>>15180762

Here’s a portion transcript of the conversation between Lawrie and Hill: read full transcript at link below

Lawrie: Lots of people are in sensitive positions; they’re in hospital, in ICUs dying, and they need this medicine.

Hill: Well …

Lawrie: This is what I don’t get, you know, because you’re not a clinician. You’re not seeing people dying every day. And this medicine prevents deaths by 80 percent.So 80 percent of those people who are dying today don’t need to die because there’s ivermectin.

Hill: There are a lot, as I said, there are a lot of different opinions about this. As I say, some people simply …

Lawrie: We are looking at the data; it doesn’t matter what other people say. We are the ones who are tasked with looking at the data and reassuring everybody that this cheap and effective treatment will save lives. It’s clear. You don’t have to say, well, so-and-so says this, and so-and-so says that. It’s absolutely crystal clear. We can save lives today. If we can get the government to buy ivermectin.

Hill: Well, I don’t think it’s as simple as that, because you’ve got trials …

Lawrie: It is as simple as that. We don’t have to wait for studies … we have enough evidence now that shows that ivermectin saves lives, it prevents hospitalization. It saves the clinical staff going to work every day and being exposed. And frankly, I’m shocked at how you are not taking responsibility for that decision.

And you still haven’t told me who is [influencing you]? Who is giving you that opinion?Because you keep saying you’re in a sensitive position. I appreciate you are in a sensitive position, if you’re being paid for something and you’re being told [to support] a certain narrative … that is a sensitive position.

So, then you kind of have to decide, well, do I take this payment? Because in actual fact, [you] can see [your false] conclusions are going to harm people. So maybe you need to say, I’m not going to be paid for this.

I can see the evidence, and I will join the Cochrane team as a volunteer, like everybody on the Cochrane team is a volunteer. Nobody’s being paid for this work.

Hill: I think fundamentally, we’re reaching the [same] conclusion about the survival benefit. We’re both finding a significant effect on survival.

Lawrie: No, I’m grading my evidence. I’m saying I’m sure of this evidence. I’m saying I’m absolutely sure it prevents deaths. There is nothing as effective as this treatment. What is your reluctance? Whose conclusion is that?

Hill complains again that outsiders are influencing him.

Lawrie: You keep referring to other people. It’s like you don’t trust yourself. If you were to trust yourself, you would know that you have made an error and you need to correct it because you know, in your heart, that this treatment prevents death.

Hill: Well, I know, I know for a fact that the data right now is not going to get the drug approved.

Lawrie: But, Andy — know this will come out. It will come out that there were all these barriers to the truth being told to the public and to the evidence being presented. So please, this is your opportunity just to acknowledge [the truth] in your review, change your conclusions, and come on board with this Cochrane Review, which will be definitive. It will be the review that shows the evidence and gives the proof. This was the consensus on Wednesday night’s meeting with 20 experts.

Hill protests that the U.S. National Institutes of Health will not agree to recommend ivermectin.

Lawrie: Yeah, because the NIH is owned by the vaccine lobby.

Hill: That’s not something I know about.

Lawrie: Well, all I’m saying is this smacks of corruption and you are being played.

Hill: I don’t think so.

Lawrie: Well then, you have no excuse because your work in that review is flawed. It’s rushed. It is not properly put together.

Lawrie points out that Hill’s study ignores a host of clinical outcomes that affect patients. She scolds Hill for ignoring the beneficial effects of ivermectin as prophylaxis, its effect on speed to testing negative for the virus, on the need for mechanical ventilation, on reduced admissions to intensive care, and other outcomes that are clinically meaningful.

This is bad research … bad research. So, at this point, I don’t know … you seem like a nice guy, but I am really, really worried about you.

Hill: Okay. Yeah. I mean, it’s, it’s a difficult situation.

Lawrie: No, you might be in a difficult situation. I’m not, because I have no paymaster. I can tell the truth. How can you deliberately try and mess it up … you know?

Hill: It’s not messing it up. It’s saying that we need, we need a short time to look at some more studies.

Lawrie: So, how long are you going to let people carry on dying unnecessarily – up to you? What is, what is the timeline that you’ve allowed for this, then?…

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/ivermectin-big-pharma-rfk-jr-the-real-anthony-fauci/

>>15180963

2nd portion conversation between Lawrie and Hill:

Hill: Well, I think . . . I think that it goes to WHO [World Health Organization]and the NIH [National Institutes of Health]and the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] and the EMA [European Medicines Agency]. And they’ve got to decide when they think enough’s enough.

Lawrie: How do they decide? Because there’s nobody giving them good evidence synthesis, because yours is certainly not good.

Hill: Well, when yours comes out, which will be in the very near future … at the same time, there’ll be other trials producing results, which will nail it with a bit of luck. And we’ll be there.

Lawrie: It’s already nailed.

Hill: No, that’s, that’s not the view of the WHO and the FDA.

Lawrie: You’d rather risk loads of people’s lives. Do you know if you and I stood together on this, we could present a united front and we could get this thing. We could make it happen. We could save lives; we could prevent [British National Health Service doctors and nurses] people from getting infected. We could prevent the elderly from dying.

These are studies conducted around the world in several different countries. And they’re all saying the same thing. Plus there’s all sorts of other evidence to show that it works. Randomized controlled trials do not need to be the be-all and end-all. But [even] based on the randomized controlled trials, it is clear that ivermectin works. It prevents deaths and it prevents harms and it improves outcomes for people …

I can see we’re getting nowhere because you have an agenda, whether you like it or not, whether you admit to it or not, you have an agenda. And the agenda is to kick this down the road as far as you can. So … we are trying to save lives. That’s what we do.

I’m a doctor and I’m going to save as many lives as I can. And I’m going to do that through getting the message [out] on ivermectin. Okay. Unfortunately, your work is going to impair that, and you seem to be able to bear the burden of many, many deaths, which I cannot do.

Lawrie then asks again: Would you tell me? I would like to know who pays you as a consultant through WHO?

Hill: It’s Unitaid.

Lawrie: All right. So who helped to … Whose conclusions are those on the review that you’ve done? Who is not listed as an author? Who’s actually contributed?

Hill: Well, I mean, I don’t really want to get into, I mean, it … Unitaid …

Lawrie: I think that . . . it needs to be clear. I would like to know who, who are these other voices that are in your paper that are not acknowledged? Does Unitaid have a say? Do they influence what you write?

Hill: Unitaid has a say in the conclusions of the paper. Yeah.

Lawrie: Okay. So, who is it in Unitaid, then? Who is giving you opinions on your evidence?

Hill: Well, it’s just the people there. I don’t …

Lawrie: So they have a say in your conclusions.

Hill: Yeah.

Lawrie: Could you please give me a name of someone in Unitaid I could speak to, so that I can share my evidence and hope to try and persuade them to understand it?

Hill: Oh, I’ll have a think about who to, to offer you with a name … but I mean, this is very difficult because I’m, you know, I’ve, I’ve got this role where I’m supposed to produce this paper and we’re in a very difficult, delicate balance …

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/ivermectin-big-pharma-rfk-jr-the-real-anthony-fauci/

>>15180975

3rd portion conversation between Lawrie and Hil:

Lawrie: Who are these people? Who are these people saying this?

Hill: Yeah … it’s a very strong lobby …

Lawrie: Okay. Look, I think I can see kind of a dead end, because you seem to have a whole lot of excuses, but, um, you know, that to, to justify bad research practice. So I’m really, really sorry about this, Andy.

I really, really wish, and you’ve explained quite clearly to me, in both what you’ve been saying and in your body language that you’re not entirely comfortable with your conclusions, and that you’re in a tricky position because of whatever influence people are having on you, and including the people who have paid you and who have basically written that conclusion for you.

Hill: You’ve just got to understand I’m in a difficult position. I’m trying to steer a middle ground and it’s extremely hard.

Lawrie: Yeah. Middle ground. The middle ground is not a middle ground … You’ve taken a position right to the other extreme calling for further trials that are going to kill people. So this will come out, and you will be culpable.

And I can’t understand why you don’t see that, because the evidence is there and you are not just denying it, but your work’s actually actively obfuscating the truth. And this will come out. So I’m really sorry … As I say, you seem like a nice guy, but I think you’ve just kind of been misled somehow.

Hill promises he will do everything in his power to get ivermectin approved if she will give him six weeks.

Hill: Well, what I hope is that this, this stalemate that we’re in doesn’t last very long. It lasts a matter of weeks. And I guarantee I will push for this to last for as short amount of time as possible.

Lawrie: So, how long do you think the stalemate will go on for? How long do you think you will be paid to [make] the stalemate go on?

Hill: From my side. Okay … I think end of February, we will be there, six weeks.’

Lawrie: How many people die every day?

Hill: Oh, sure. I mean, you know, 15,000 people a day.

Lawrie: Fifteen thousand people a day times six weeks … because at this rate, all other countries are getting ivermectin except the UK and the USA, because the UK and the USA and Europe are owned by the vaccine lobby.

Hill: My goal is to get the drug approved and to do everything I can to get it approved so that it reaches the maximum …

Lawrie: You’re not doing everything you can, because everything you can would involve saying to those people who are paying you, “I can see this prevents deaths. So I’m not going to support this conclusion any more, and I’m going to tell the truth.”

Hill: What, I’ve got to do my responsibilities to get as much support as I can to get this drug approved as quickly as possible.

Lawrie: Well, you’re not going to get it approved the way you’ve written that conclusion. You’ve actually shot yourself in the foot, and you’ve shot us all in the foot. All of … everybody trying to do something good. You have actually completely destroyed it.

Hill: Okay. Well, that’s where we’ll, I guess we’ll have to agree to differ.

Lawrie: Yeah. Well, I don’t know how you sleep at night, honestly.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/ivermectin-big-pharma-rfk-jr-the-real-anthony-fauci/

>>15180813

Yes it is and we all are funding Pharma to kill all of us

>>15180820

Anon please post the link to twitter thread

>>15180815

He must have a dire need to leave money for his family

>>15181104

Oh, is this in relationship to Cuomo being fired, is he getting ahead of the arrest? That would be fun to see, MSM decimated by arrests

>>15181096

Interesting link anon, Thx

>https://twitter.com/KirbySommers/status/1469976701140619267?s=20

Kirby Sommers author, feminist, sex slave survivor

·4h

Ghislaine Maxwell "worked" for the "prosecution".

Let that sink in.

Kirby Sommers author, feminist, sex slave survivor

·5h

Not one person who has read my book "The Billionaire's Woman: Memoir of a Sex Slave" has connected a chapter I wrote to the PROMIS software.

I did not name the software but it has been in my memoir since 2012.

That is 9 years.

Again: Epstein/Maxwell didn't "start the fire".

https://mobile.twitter.com/KirbySommers

>>15181169

I still don’t understand why US gives Israel billions of dollars annually when Jews represent the most billionaires in the world. What is the reason for this? And dont tell me allies, I don’t believe it

>>15181270

Can you call the charity services, is Red Cross there, FEMA they give put motel vouchers.

God bless anons, prayers with you