DR. HEFFERNAN: the old free-vaccine community immunity of 95 to 99% for life is out the window.

Dr. Suzanne Humphries Unveils the Unsettling Truth About Measles Vaccine Immunity

In a powerful and detailed presentation, Dr. Suzanne Humphries pulls back the curtain on the long-term realities of measles vaccination, challenging the prevailing narrative of its unassailable… pic.twitter.com/v3g7Jh5UH3

— Camus (@newstart_2024) August 21, 2025

So before the vaccine, recorded measles cases didn't reflect how much measles was in the country.  I already talked about that.  Even the Centers for Disease Control, this is on their website today, says that 4 million annual cases of measles must have occurred in order for their blood surveys, showing that 95% plus immunity, which means that most measles in America were so mild that they never got reported.  Only 1/8 got reported.

Today we have a situation where adolescents and adults are the biggest group who get measles because their vaccine immunity is 23.2 times lower than those induced by natural infection. There's your reference for that.  

Some adolescents and adults susceptible to measles at an age where infection is more dangerous than in toddlers.

Neutralizing (NT) antibody titers induced by vaccination were 23.2 times lower than those induced by natural infection and declined significantly by age 20.

Which includes maternal immunity, so that by 1991 babies were 3 times more vulnerable than they were before the vaccines.  

The attack rate today could be even higher.  

Vaccinated mothers give babies very little immunity via placental transfer or breastfeeding.

Infants whose mothers were born in after 1963 had a measles attack rate of 33%, compared with 12% for infants of older mothers.

Dr. Papania quoted that in his paper only looked at Natural immune mothers in the post vaccine era.  And he underestimated what the protection rate would have been pre-vaccine as I just showed you on that curve, that it's very different, so he was looking pretty much in that middle section. 

1:26. Dr. Peter Orby has pointed out the same trend in Africa, where by 2003, and they were vaccinating heavily, by 2003 in Africa, he said measles was infecting young adults and would infect pregnant women with the worst forms of measles.  

We have already observed an increase in measles incidence among young adults in rural Senegal compared with the pre-vaccination era. This is potentially problematic in areas with high fertility: many young women will get measles while pregnant or they will get measles together with their own children.  These are the worst forms of measles.

And he said, what makes the situation worse is that in the early days of the vaccine's use, immunity was regularly boosted by still circulating wild measles virus, which artificially inflated the efficacy of the vaccine.  

LACK OF NATURAL BOOSTERS

In our earlier study we noted that levels of measles specific antibodies in MMR vaccinated children seem to decline faster in the 1990s suggesting that a lack of natural boosters May modify the protection induced by the vaccine.

By stopping the virus circulating, the presumed protection of the vaccine is no longer as high as they once thought it was.  So in other words, in the beginning when there was still circulating virus and they were vaccinating, it looked like things were going pretty well, because at that point you had all those people in society who were naturally immune for life and you had vaccinated people who were freshly vaccinated and you had them getting boosted by natural viruses circulating. And then that's changed, of course, now we're having those people who are naturally immune are dying off and we have the stoppage of the amount of circulation that we used to have and we have vaccines wearing off as well.  This fact has been . . . analyzed several times by medical researchers who predict that because of shaky vaccine immunity, our future might be somewhat spotty.  

D. L. Levy, "The Future of Measles in Highly Immunized Populations: A Modeling Approach," American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 120, No. 1, July 1984, pp. 39-48.

J.M. Heffernan and M.J. Keeling, "Implication of Vaccination and Waning Immunity," Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol 276, 2009.

The analyses of these authors predicted that in 20 to 30 years' time, herd immunity will be so fragile that should measles come through again we'll be worse off than we would have been had they not introduced the vaccine.  Levy, 1984, PMID, said that by 2050 the number of susceptibles will be higher than pre-vaccine times.  He discussed his predictions based on a one-dose vaccine model which was the model at the time that he wrote the paper.  And this is just kind of a the details of how he worked out his figures.  

*  10.6% of population susceptible to measles in Pre vaccine era.

*   All adults immune.

*   Some children not immune.

*   Everyone gained natural, lifelong protection.

By 1982, this susceptibles begin to climb by 0.1% per year as immune die off and vaccines wear off.

Between 220,000 and 300,000, new susceptibles each year to reach pre-vaccine level of 10.6 by 2045 and 10.9 by 2050.  

WHAT ABOUT TODAY'S 2-DOSE MODEL? 

Well, Dr. Heffernan did an analysis, and he didn't really think all that much of that.  He said that 

. . . the dynamic consequences of the interaction between vaccination, waning immunity, and boosting are far more striking.  For high levels of vaccination (greater than 80%) and moderate levels of waning immunity (greater than 30 years), large-scale epidemic cycles can be induced.  

And that's pretty much us.  And his prediction was that, 

We predict that, after a long disease-free period, the introduction of infection will lead to far larger epidemics than that predicted by standard models . . . large-scale epidemics can arise with the first substantial epidemic not arising until 52 years after the vaccination programs began.

Considering that vaccination only really got underway with an effective vaccine in 1980, as this writer described, counting 52 years from there, the year 2032 is a good estimated guess of what more surges of measles cases will become obvious at least in America. 

Some of the first vaccines mass produced in 1963 contained a killed virus.  In 1989, Dr. Feigin of Texas Children's Hospital stated that he believed in 1963 vaccine was "not widely effective" and that the 1967 vaccine was unstable and lost its "effectiveness" if not properly refrigerated.  It was not until 1980 that a stable live measles vaccine became available.

Another medical article put it this way,

that 20 years after two doses of vaccine had been given, 33 to 44% of those recipients would become susceptible to measles again, the old free-vaccine community immunity of 95 to 99% for life is out the window.  

What we see here is the main analysis and these are what are called "confidence intervals," meaning kind of the range of where we could end up.  So what we have over here potentially susceptible people okay and this is based on blood testing on antibody testing actually and this is how many years after people were vaccinated so you can see over here if we go to 20 years out just go to the middle we're looking at 30 approximately 33% of the people being susceptible and when we look at the middle line but if we look at the other line we're up to about 44% and you can see that over time certain percentage of the population after 15 years you're still having about 12 or 13% of people that were vaccinated with two doses not having immunity.  

33% to 44% susceptible after 20 years with a two-dose regimen.  12% susceptible after 15 years. 

MMR VACCINES FOR LIFE?

We know that, and the experts know this.  For this reason, their answer will be more of the same which is to give extra vaccines earlier to babies again to pre-pregnant women, more to us adults who were vaccinated as children, and to make vaccines mandatory by law for everyone from cradle to grave.  They're also researching newer vaccines that may be can be inhaled and given earlier

DIANA WEST:

Why people don't know that when they see "CCCP" on a Russian minister's sweater, they should see 100 million killed is b/c of our corrupt/communist academics and corrupt/communist political leaders, as explained here 👇 (in an essay about my efforts to understand the… https://t.co/ykPWeSbAKM

— @realDianaWest (@realDianaWest) August 15, 2025

Why people don't know that when they see "CCCP" on a Russian minister's sweater, they should see 100 million killed is b/c of our corrupt/communist academics and corrupt/communist political leaders, as explained here (in an essay about my efforts to understand the corruption/communism) by the bravest man in the world, now deceased.

"It is in the nature of a totalitarian regime to try and corrupt not only its own society, but anybody within its reach. This is how they conquer the world. Communism has corrupted greater men than a few arrogant academics. Indeed, the academics turned out to be one of the easier targets. As “Sovietologists” and “Kremlinologists,” their position depended on their ability to travel to Moscow, and therefore, on KGB’s good will. Having now mutated into “Cold War historians,” they are dependent on having such limited access to secret archives as Moscow would choose to grant them. As academics, they are committed to their own theories, true or false. As a ‘community’, they are bound together with their corrupt colleagues, and have to defend their collective monopoly against intruders. It is for a very long time that they have been no more than a self-serving nomenklatura, caring nothing about the truth, but only about their own elevated positions. Like politicians. Like the media. Like the rest of the modern world. American Betrayal is a book about the origins of that corruption. No wonder it has been so popular with thousands of readers who are sick to death of today’s world with all its hypocrisy and lies, and long for an explanation of our moral crisis. Mrs. West sought an answer and found it. As a civilization, we have gone through a major moral disaster. We have been accomplices to mass murders. Moreover, we then tried to cover them up and to live on as if nothing happened. Without a reckoning, without so much as facing the truth about our history, we shall never recover.

"Why Academics Hate Diana West," Vladimir Bukovsky and Pavel Stroilov, Breitbart, September 28, 2013.

And this ought to make history immediate for you.

"The NKVD Labeled J. Robert Oppenheimer a Soviet "Agent." Now What?" Diana West, August 15, 2025.

ROBERT WRIGHT: We've been told that a cancer patient is worth about $1.2 million dollars to allopathic medicine now before they pass

Those are some of the first things, because you need to stop doing things. And people largely don't get that. They say, "Doc, give me a pill." That's why we flock to chemo. It's easy. Doc'll let me eat whatever I want. And I say, "Well, of course, he will," as they're eating their ice cream cone and drinking their soda pop, [while] they're being injected with chemotherapy.  --Robert Wright

Robert Wright is the speaker, founder of the American Anti-Cancer Institute and author of Killing Cancer--Not People, (4th Edition), Robert Wright, 2020.

That this person should do some of the first things are things you should actually stop doing because you need to because you need to stop that cancer in your tracks it is to a degree it is to a degree but if that tumor never grew anymore never grew anymore, if it stayed the way it was, he said, "Well, I feel pretty much okay, Doc. I'm not in a lot of pain."  If it never grew anymore, if it never changed, you could live with it.  That's where people get scared, and, and they and they their doctor says, "We got to get that out of there." Well, you don't really.  You need to stop it from growing is what you need to do.  

. . . And not only do you got to get it out, but you got to do it now, and that's, that's what scares people.

Yes.  Yeah, and I think it's been growing for 5 10 15 20 years why do I have to get it out now and the fact is that in almost all cases unless it's life-threatening, pressing against the blood vessel, blocking the blood vessel, blocking an airway or something.  In almost all instances, you simply do not have to get it out now.  People who do nothing live as long or longer than those who go through the big three.  It's proven in studies.  But I would stop a lot of activities because most people like I said are acidified you got to stop cooking your food to death because there's nothing in cooked food that really does you much good at all if you are cooking any food you need to stop eating the things that are acidic so you need to stop eating out.  You need to start producing your own food, eating organic food whenever possible, drinking the right fluids and water.  You need to juice.  And you need to start seeking out supplements that will help you reverse this cancerous and will help feed your body. If you're diagnosed with a stage 3 or stage 4, you cannot eat 5 lb of cabbage, 5 lb of broccoli, 5 lb of spinach, 5 lb of brussel sprouts a day, and 5 lb of carrots.  You just simply cannot do that.  But, in fact, you probably need the nutrition from that much organic produce and revert that cancer.  So you need to go so you need to go to the supplements along with, in some cases, the ionized water has reverted so many cancers.  So you need to start doing the things that will give nutrition to the body but no sugar.  You got to stop sugar cancer grows and thrives in an acidic but a sugary environment too. Sugar feeds cancer in anaerobic sans oxygen type of situation it ferments sugar to get its energy to perform the angiogenesis so it can go and get more food and more sugar and feed itself.  There's a lot going on in angiogenesis today and of course a lot of drugs are being made now that are supposed to stop that.  They don't work, folks.  They don't work the best chemotherapy you can take is the food you eat.  Here's a good instance, graviola, which was discovered in the Amazon rainforest a lot of years ago, or the American Cancer Society to kill cancer cells was proven to be 10,000 times more effective than Adriamycin, which is a chemotherapy drug.  There's no side effects.  And paw paw is more effective than graviola.  Why wouldn't you take these instead of chemotherapy, which has severe effects?  We have a tendency to call them "side effects," but they're not really "side effects."  They are the effects of the drugs, and all drugs have almost no redeeming qualities or effects.  Period.  They're synthetic.  Your body doesn't like synthetic things.  It likes it likes natural things.  So the best chemo you can take is the food that you eat.  So it's the food.  It's the right supplements.  In an average shower, the equivalent of eight glasses of chlorinated water into your system into your system.  Stop drinking tap water.  The fluoride inhibits 100 enzyme actions within your body.  You actually need those to stay healthy.  

SALT

I would get a full spectrum salt.  People now are flocking to sea salt.  They say, "Oh, I eat sea salt now." Folks, all salt is sea salt.  They don't know this and so they are being buffaloed, "Get some sea salt."  And all the manufacturers are renaming their salt, "Sea salt," and they're right, it's all sea salt.  You need a full spectrum salt.  You need one that has color, that has 84 additional minerals that it was born with, that has the consistency, the mineral consistency of your blood and is actually good for you. Not sodium chloride.  Not the white salt that is bleached and blanched, and everything good in it is taken away.  So you need to stop that because, while doctors are right, that that kind of salt will raise your blood pressure pressure is not good for you and is not good for you they're right but the right kind of salt is actually good for you and you almost can't get too much of it.

What is a full spectrum salt? 

Full spectrum salts, which contain a wide range of minerals, include Himalayan pink salt, Celtic sea salt, and Baja Gold mineral sea salt. These salts are less processed and retain their natural mineral content, making them a healthier choice compared to refined table salt.

DuckDuckGo explains that, 

Himalayan crystal salt is a well-known example of full-spectrum salt, containing all 84 trace elements found in the human body. It is unrefined and hand-mined, making it a pure source of essential minerals.

PEPPER

Stop pepper.  Very acidic.  I love it but it's one of the most acidic things on earth. I'm not talking about peppers.  I'm talking about black pepper.  

And so I covered it in my book, the whole gamut of what to do and what not to do.  Those are some of the first things, because you need to stop doing things.  And people largely don't get that.  They say, "Doc, give me a pill." That's why we flock to chemo.  It's easy.  Doc'll let me eat whatever I want.  And I say, "Well, of course, he will," as they're eating their ice cream cone and drinking their soda pop, [while] they're being injected with chemotherapy.  It's just a sad state of affairs what has happened in America today.

WE LIVE UNDER SICK CARE, NOT HEALTHCARE

America today we have no Health Care contrary to popular belief, or very little. We have sick care.  And the sick care isn't really any good either.  And I know the doctors have very little nutritionist, one term or less in medical school.  And then if they had any at all, they're encouraged to jettison it too before they go into prescribing drugs and becoming a member of the American Medical Association.

LISTEN TO THIS.

00:00. We've been told that a cancer patient is worth about $1.2 million dollars to allopathic medicine now before they pass.  And sadly during thay period of time there's no quality of life for most of them.  We know the real statistics and that's that 97% of all cancer patients who undergo chemotherapy are dead within 5 years.  The American public doesn't know those facts.  I interviewed the people that did that study, so I know that it's true.  But we are about education, we are about forwarding treatments and therapies and protocols that really work for people, and have worked for not even decades, for centuries and eons, the things that really work, the things that God gave us to treat the human immune system.  God gave us that immune system, so if we get a cold we don't die.  We get the flu we don't die.  People don't understand that it's also true about cancer and heart disease and diabetes and autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases. We should not die of these but we don't know what to do.  So it is in the final analysis truly all about education.

1:12.  Those genetic effects defects that a few of us have maybe up to 5%, they still have to, as you say, be activated.  Angelina Jolie they told her that she had an 80% greater possibility of getting breast cancer.  That was wrong to begin with because they based it on a bell curve and put her right at the top.  And so it was false to begin with, and she believed a lie, and it cost her sadly.  So if we can say that 

ERIC WEINSTEIN, WEF, & WORLD BANK: Native workers will not support programs which lower their total incomes. Yet, migration can be counted upon to produce a reliable net benefit in host countries only if it is allowed to decrease wages.

Eric Weinstein has succeeded in making Americans poor and poorer. 

Weinstein was aware of the damage which economic migration was to do to the native populations in places such as the United States and the United Kingdom. In one part of the document he produced for this nefarious United Nations agenda entitled, “Preference for migrants, undercutting of natives” 

Eric R. Weinstein’s “Great Replacement” by @JohnnyVedmore

At the turn of the millennium, the United Nations was busily trying to encourage economic migration to the Western world. However, encouraging unfettered economic migration as we are experiencing today is highly…

— Johnny Vedmore (@JohnnyVedmore) September 25, 2024

Eric R. Weinstein’s “Great Replacement” by @JohnnyVedmore.  

Full article from Johnny Vedmore here.

At the turn of the millennium, the United Nations was busily trying to encourage economic migration to the Western world. However, encouraging unfettered economic migration as we are experiencing today is highly unpopular with native workers of the target countries. The United Nations International Labor Organization in Geneva set up "the MIGRANT Division" to analyze and find solutions to these issues. To lead the unit, the UN appointed Manolo Abella to be Chief of MIGRANT, who is now linked with the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, the University of Oxford, and others. Their stated challenge was to: “Find a free market solution to let employers reap the productivity benefit from decreasing their costs while boosting the income of native workers to the point where their interests become aligned with their employers.” To achieve this goal they decided on a solution. They wrote: “Native workers will not support programs which lower their total incomes. Yet, migration can be counted upon to produce a reliable net benefit in host countries only if it is allowed to decrease wages. Thus the solution is to realize that total income must rise while wage income is allowed to fall. This suggests that any natural free market solution must involve a natural income stream to host country workers which has previously been obscured or hidden. We then discover that if the (highly valuable) right of host country citizens to block access to labor markets is properly converted into a salable right, workers are made better off (since a salable right is always more financially valuable than a non-salable one). We thus convert the rights to preferential labor market access into rights of workers to license migrant work permits to employers. We find that with a little bit of care the market will now return an efficient solution with all parties being made better off.” Essentially the UN decided that the democratic voters of a nation-state would oppose unfettered economic migration, as we are experiencing today, and the folks at this globalist entity believed they knew better. To achieve their goals, the United Nations needed to subversively introduce this agenda in an undemocratic manner without gaining the consent of the native citizens of the democracies that they were to target. The man they chose to analyse and map out this scheme, which many refer to now as “The Great Replacement” was Eric R. Weinstein, who has since become a central figure in the “Intellectual Dark Web” whose members include Ben Shapiro, David Rubin, Jordan B. Peterson, Sam Harris, Douglas Murray, Joe Rogan, and Eric’s brother Bret Weinstein.

@EricRWeinstein

was employed by the UN to produce a document entitled, "Migration for the Benefit of All: Towards a New Paradigm of Economic Immigration." Weinstein was aware of the damage which economic migration was to do to the native populations in places such as the United States and the United Kingdom. In one part of the document he produced for this nefarious United Nations agenda entitled, “Preference for migrants, undercutting of natives”, Weinstein wrote: “When migrant and native workers of comparable value to an employer are asked to compete, it is to be expected that the employer will take the applicant who costs him/her less. If, however, the respective terms of employment of the native and the migrant workers differ considerably, the employer may develop a preference between otherwise equal candidates. If migrant workers are not permitted to seek alternative work in the host country, then their “company loyalty” is reduced to a matter of law and regulation. In such circumstances, employers know that they will not have to earn migrant worker loyalty with the expenditure of resources that would be needed in the case of native workers. Thus it is to be expected that in systems tethering migrant workers to their employer-sponsors, some migrants will out-compete natives of comparable or greater value simply by virtue of the terms of employment set by the MWP. Since this is precipitated by a rational market response on the part of native employers, this consequence must be seen as a natural, if unfortunate, by-product of direct migrant sponsorship.” The Weinstein plan was always going to cost the government money, as we see unfolding today. A meticulous and proactive plan would have to be enacted by the nation-state in question to deal with the impact of large-scale migration and the author makes this clear in the document, with Eric R. Weinstein stating: “In effect, the government would assume all the administrative and transport costs for a group of migrants, as well as calculating the additional external impacts of hosting them. To indicate these costs, the government would calculate the expected migrant impact cost as a function of the number of migrants. Such a function would be expected not only to grow as the number of migrants increased, but also to do so in accelerating fashion, because of concern for the environment, monitoring costs, societal stress, and security risks.” The plan which was set out by Eric Weinstein predisposes the necessity of what he describes as “a much larger redistribution of native income”. The influx of migrants will always take wealth and opportunities away from the native population and this has a knock-on effect on how the “self-interested electorate” of the nation-state involved will vote. “In the first instance, the tethering of migrants to employer-sponsors creates a non-market system with a host of inefficiencies, as well as the potential for human rights violations. Second, naively opening markets to migrants from lower-income countries can act as a kind of “tax”, redistributing native income away from workers and towards employers. Of course, it can be argued that any proposed redistribution is intrinsically neither good nor bad, yet such transfers can make it nearly impossible to reach broad consensus on many important migration issues within the host country electorate: rationality indicates that proposals which threaten to harm the majority of individuals are unlikely to be approved by a self-interested electorate.” While comparing and analysing different methods of controlling the influx of migrants, Weinstein also studies the “Borjas Model” of economic migration and the predictable effect of its implementation on native workers, stating: “Native workers in the sector concerned may experience none of the economic benefits of the migration program. In fact, in the absence of any compensation measures, they may experience a substantial loss of income, as the benefit to the host society stems from the ability to lower wages while simultaneously increasing the number of workers employed.”

The problems of “ghettoization” and issues relating to “long-term native shortages” are brought up by Weinstein as known consequences of the redistribution of income away from native populations, but at no point are these problems expressed as reasons not to force economic migration upon target populations. In this United Nations document, Eric Weinstein specifically pushes Marxist ideology concerning the redistribution of income and wealth which benefits economic migrants at the expense of the native populations. Eric Weinstein proudly advertised his work for the United Nations on his website at the time, as well as posing himself as an expert on the subject. Under the title of “International Migration”, Weinstein even had a special email address for issues concerning migration where it was written: “If you are interested in the creation of efficient markets for facilitating increased international labor migration, please contact me at migration@eric-weinstein.net regarding the article 'Migration for the Benefit of All' to appear in 2002 in the International Labor Review. It is a pleasure to thank the MIGRANT division of the United Nations ILO in Geneva for sponsoring this work.” Whether you like him or not, Eric Weinstein has not been honest about his part in designing the failed Globalist system of economic migration which many people today refer to as the “Great Replacement”. He also hasn’t advertised his previous involvement with the United Nations, and his connection to Edge while it was fully funded by Jeffrey Epstein. During this time, Weinstein was also producing models for JP Morgan, one of Epstein’s keenest employers. Find this article with source material at https://newspaste.com/2024/09/25/eric-r-weinsteins-great-replacement/… I have also linked the original UN sponsored document produced by Eric Weinstein, entitled: "Migration for the Benefit of All: Towards a New Paradigm of Economic Immigration." in PDF format.

Finish reading.

"Thousands of businesses owned and operated by Negroes it would be difficult to name a business or profession in which the Negro has failed to find opportunity."

A lot of these young folk abandoned the journey and the trajectory laid forth by their fathers and grandfathers.  While their fathers and grandfathers were entrepreneurs, who had bus lines, who had stores, who had dentist offices and doctor's offices.  Rather than going the way of their fathers and grandfathers, they chose to become militants.  They chose to let their hand off of the proverbial plow and instead pick up a picket sign, because they thought that that ticket sign would get them the success that they so craved. 

“Nobody can deny that something happened in the 60s with the civil rights movement; with the civil rights act, something happened. How do we go from accelerating in a pace greater than white people to decelerating at a pace greater than any other race?”

Chad is nearing the… https://t.co/ODXh6kzClL

— Liberty Belle (@ArmisDei) June 23, 2025

Let me tell you something man, if you don't want me to eat in your store or eat in your restaurant, just let me know.

MLK.  Because of this system, they would have to eat up front and we would have to eat in the back.  We can't even communicate.  We have some dear white friends here, who are with us, and we want to eat together.

I'm not gonna be beggin' to give you my money.

00:20. I'm far more concerned about the good, the decent people who quietly pack their bags and move away.  And this it seems to me is more damaging to our cause and more dangerous to the total cause of integration.

Under Martin Luther King's tutelage, you saw this pathetic proliferation of black intellectuals coming out speaking in such a way as if their dignity and self-worth as men depends upon how many white people let black people into their spaces.

The people who will say, "I'm with you," "I am for you," but what about property values and the man's right to run his business?

Their objective was to use the arm of the federal government to force even private owned companies to serve and to hire who they, the Civil Rights activists, said they should serve and hire.

MLK.  We have asked for upgrading in employment in the stores so that you have negro clerks and negro sales men and women.

01:18.  I believe that we should call upon the federal government and I'm happy that the federal government is now working on . . . 

The negro college student is destined to be leaders of their race . . .

Because they went to the university is where they received Marx's sociology training, these black intellectuals just assume the position of speaking on behalf of black Americans at large.

Segregation to the average negro means being held back.  He's looking for progress, he wants to move forward and the American mainstream segregation holds him back.

01:49.  All of the training they received was in the vein of activism in the soft sciences.  None of them have ever run a business before.  None of them actually knew what it was like to work with your hands, and so they completely disregarded the fact that blacks actually owned businesses, that blacks were actually entrepreneurial. 

"Thousands of businesses owned and operated by Negroes it would be difficult to name a business or profession in which the Negro has failed to find opportunity."

This is what they did.  I was born in the Jim Crow South.  My people were part of that. They had towns like that all the way through the South where black people run these towns, where they have their own schools, where they have their own sheriffs, their own police departments, own municipalities, and there were safe places for black people to go.

02:41.  I look at it and I think it through.  Nobody can deny what you're saying. Nobody can deny that something happened in the sixties with the Civil Rights movement and Civil Rights Act.  Something happened. How do we go from accelerating in a pace greater than white people to decelerating at a pace greater than any other race?

Many of the students work with Dr. Martin Luther King's Southern Christian Leadership Conference.  

We have utterly pushed aside the old "stymated" adult leadership in the South and we have organized ourselves into student groups, into student protests, nonviolent protest groups.

A lot of these young folk abandoned the journey and the trajectory laid forth by their fathers and grandfathers.  While their fathers and grandfathers were entrepreneurs, who had bus lines, who had stores, who had dentist offices and doctor's offices.  Rather than going the way of their fathers and grandfathers, they chose to become militants.  They chose to let their hand off of the proverbial plow and instead pick up a picket sign, because they thought that that ticket sign would get them the success that they so craved.

BE SURE TO CHECK OUT THIS VIDEO where at the 00:39 minute mark it is noted that 

The presumptive head of the Civil Rights Movement happened to be a black man, Martin Luther King.  Stanley Levinson was always in his ear, always in his ear.  Levison was a secular Jew who was committed to the idea of social justice.  He wrote everything that MLK said publicly.  Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story, Martin Luther King, 1958, and Strength to Love, 1963.  [Levison] ghostwrote every book and article published under King's name.  Dr. King knew that Stanley was a communist, but since he too shared Levison's Marxist sensibilities, he was all too willing to accept the leadership of Levison.  

Marxists wrote King's speeches so well that even conservatives were duped. 

02:18  Giving the Negro an equal break is not enough.  

I'm going to bring the government down and have them put a gun to your head. 

 

BISHOP RICHARD WIILIAMSON: Multiculturalism was the invention of the Jews

Why is no one surprised to hear this?

pic.twitter.com/nFGukdq4IZ

— sLOVEnia (@occultni) May 18, 2025

The meaning of episcopal:

 

Episcopal, a mid-15c. word, means "belonging to or characteristic of bishops," from Late Latin episcopalis, from Latin episcopus "an overseer" (see bishop). Reference to a church governed by bishops is 1752. With a capital E-, the ordinary designation of the Anglican church in the U.S. and Scotland, so called because its bishops are superior to other clergy.  Chambers' "Cyclopaedia" (1751) has episcopicide "the murdering of a bishop."

Bishop Richard Williamson, 1940-2025.  Bishop Williamson definitely held some interesting views. 

Williamson was viewed as being located towards the hardline end of the traditionalist spectrum, though he did not go quite so far as to espouse sedevacantism.

Williamson held strong views regarding gender roles. He opposed women wearing trousers or shorts, attending college or university, or having careers. He urged greater "manliness" in men. He denounced the film The Sound of Music as "soul-rotting slush" and said that, by putting "friendliness and fun in the place of authority and rules, it invites disorder between parents and children." He was dismissive of Mother Teresa because of her supposedly 'liberal' views.

TRANSCRIPT FROM THE VIDEO CLIPS

The Israelis of today are direct . . . not at all the Servants of God.  With some noble exceptions, there are always noble exceptions, but when you're talking about the Jews in general, in general, they go along with their leaders who want the New World Order and who want to get rid of the old Christian World Order.  

This brings us to Islamization, what part do you think they'll have in the New World Order, in other words mass immigration in the promotion of Islam.  

Islam is, has also been a . . . it came into existence in the 600s of the 7th century.  It was very possibly or probably created by Jews as an instrument against Christendom.  And then sure enough, the Arabs swept through North Africa and destroyed a whole chunk of, a whole part of Christianity in North Africa.  They swept into Spain thanks to the help of the Jews.  It's well known that the Jews opened the cities to the Mohammadens.  They took over Spain, and it took hundreds of years to get rid of them again, to get them back out.  They went up into France until they got beaten at the Battle of Poitiers in 732.  Again and again in European history, the Saracens, the Turks, the Arabs, the Muslims, there are various names for them they kept trying to get into their enemies into Christendom enemies of Christian Europe and they've tried to get into Europe again and again, and the Jews will each time most likely, most likely the Jews will have helped them, would have organized it, would have financed it.  That's exactly what we see.  This time it's George Soros who's been financing the Arab invasion.  They've been organized, and you have that famous clip on TV of Barbara Spectre, this Swedish Jewish.  It's a very famous clip with good reason, and she's apparently ignorant that she let saying she says, "We Jews need to organize the invasion of Europe by non-Christians so that Europe will become multicultural."  Multiculty is an invention of the Jews surely.  And therefore that will act dissolve the identity and the vestigial Christianity of the once Christian nations and of the once the dilution of the once Christian white race and once the Jews can dissolve the once Christian nations and can dilute the once White race by mysogination by mixing of the races by marriage with other races once they can do that they are going to be a significant Step Closer to achieving there New World Order.

1:00.  You make a really interesting point about Islam being tailored to the Arab temperament.  So what you just said indicates that it's possible that Islam was created you said they could have been created by Jews.

Yes.

To control and manipulate Arabs is that what you mean by that?

1:23.  I think that their purpose is more than just to control the Arabs.  The enmity between Jews and Arabs goes along way back, goes all the way back to the children of Abraham if you read the Old Testament, and it's very difficult to overcome that.  Christianity, the Catholicism, could overcome it if Catholicism is allowed to Catholicize the Arabs and to Casholicize the Jews.  Then even Jews and Arabs would join together in Jesus Christ.  If they don't become Catholics, then it's very difficult, the enmity is too old and too deep.  But I don't think the Jews did that, created Islam . . . I would think they did create Islam, but I don't think they created Islam in order to dominate the Arabs.  I think they created Islam as an instrument against the Church and against Christianity.  That's what I would think.