Kamala to Rogan: No Way!

The head of the World Health Organization has once again insisted that social media and governments work to crush free speech surrounding health and medical mandates. Years after most people have moved on from COVID-19, globalists like WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus are still trying to pressure social media platforms to silence medical discussions. In an Oct. 13 speech, Ghebreyesus asserted without providing any statistical evidence that “falsehoods about masks, vaccines and ‘lockdowns’ spread as fast as the virus itself, and were almost as deadly.” As a solution, he offered un-American Big Tech censorship, which he insisted should be imposed on citizens across the globe.  Big Tech facilitates “disinformation,” the WHO director-general asserted. “[T]hey have also turbo charged the spread of mis- and disinformation, which has contributed to mistrust in vaccines and other health interventions, fuelled stigma and discrimination, and even led to violence against health workers and marginalized groups,” Ghebreyesus hysterically pronounced. Misinformation and disinformation are words often used to refer to free speech with which the left disagrees. Ghebreyesus also whined that pesky free speech is blocking the enforcement of his policies. “Just as mis- and disinformation undermined the response to the pandemic itself, so it continues to undermine negotiations on the WHO Pandemic Agreement,” he said. The enforcement of such a proposed agreementwould supercharge censorship and allow foreign bureaucrats to dictate a U.S. pandemic response. Yet, according to Ghebreyesus, warnings that “national sovereignty” will be destroyed by the WHO treaty are inaccurate and must be targeted online. The WHO director-general insisted that the solution is Big Tech-government censorship collusion. “To be sure, governments and internet and social media companies have a responsibility to prevent the spread of harmful lies and promote access to accurate health information,” he asserted. “WHO is working with a range of companies and researchers and partners to understand how misinformation and disinformation spreads, who is targeted, how they’re influenced, and what we can do to counter this problem.” Ghebreyesus’s anti-free speech attitude has been applied before. During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the U.S. government coordinated with social media to censor medical discussions, according to The Twitter Files, a letter from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and the Murthy v. Missouri lawsuit. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on “hate speech” and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Although nowhere near the ten and a half minutes ABC’s Good Morning America cranked out Wednesday seething over (years-old) claims from former White House chief of staff John Kelly that former President Trump is a fascist and Hitler enthusiast, CBS Mornings (2:57) and NBC’s Today (2:58) still spoonfed their viewers with coverage of the “disturbing,” “startling,” and “stark” allegations. “Startling revelations from a former White House chief of staff who says based on what he witnessed, Donald Trump would rule like a dictator,” announced co-host and Kamala Harris donor Gayle King in the Eye Opener. CBS co-host Tony Dokoupil moments later called Kelly’s claims to The Atlantic and The New York Times “a blunt warning about former President Donald Trump from someone who knows him very well” that “Trump demands loyalty to himself over the Constitution, repeatedly sought to use the U.S. military against American citizens, and even expressed admiration for Hitler on more than one occasion.”     Trump campaign correspondent Nikole Killion bragged that Trump’s schedule included two events in Georgia, but bragged “those comments from John Kelly...are overshadowing his visit.” Killion ran through the major hits about fascism, Hitler, and his response to Trump’s “enemy form within” remark. She at least noted, along with a strong denial by the Trump campaign, that Trump had long soured on Kelly and blasted him in August as “one of the dumbest people I’ve ever met” and “a bully.” The CBS correspondent spent the final moments of her report on Trump’s messaging from Tuesday in North Carolina, encouraging North Carolinians to vote early and slammed Vice President Harris as “unfit.” Just like with ABC, CBS then went to slobbering piece on the Harris-Walz campaign. Senior White House correspondent Weijia Jiang had that piece, boasting Harris as having told NBC “her team is ready to take [Trump] on” if he “tries to declare victory before all the votes are counted” and discussed “abortion access.” Jiang also referenced Eminem campaigning with former President Obama in press release-y fashion (click “expand”): JIANG: In battleground Michigan, rapper Eminem urged voters in his home state to support Harris — EMINEM: Detroit! [CHEERS AND APPLAUSE] JIANG: — and he teed up another superstar surrogate, former President Barack Obama. BARACK OBAMA: I am here today for a very important reason, to ask you to vote. JIANG: Earlier on Tuesday, Obama campaigned with vice presidential nominee, Tim Walz in Wisconsin, where the start of early voting brought out big crowds. GOVERNOR TIM WALZ (D-MN): We need you doorknocking. We need the calls. JIANG:  Recently, Obama has called out black men for hesitating to vote for Harris because she is a woman. Harris said she does not think sexism is a factor in the race. HARRIS: And I will never assume that anyone in our country should elect a leader based on their gender or their race. JIANG: While Obama has already held several events for Harris, tomorrow the two will campaign together for the first time in Atlanta. Then, this weekend, Harris will rally with Michelle Obama in Michigan.  In the new-ish third hour of the show (which was not included in the time count), co-host Adriana Diaz asked anti-Trump author and chief election and campaign correspondent Robert Costa why did Kelly speak out now. Costa conceded the truth that it’s to meddle in the election: On 'CBS Mornings Plus', correspondent and former conservative reporter Robert Costa admits the John Kelly stories are coordinated against Donald Trump to interfere in the election: Adriana Diaz: “Bob, why you think Kelly is speaking of now?” Costa: “Because we are just days… pic.twitter.com/Jg3kdR66gZ — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) October 23, 2024 Over on NBC, co-host Savannah Guthrie (falsely) described Kelly’s claims in a tease as “new, disturbing allegations.” The Kelly segment had to wait since senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson had been granted a day earlier an interview with Harris. Jackson played a number of clips from the cha and sprinkled in other filler about the campaign, including “Obama hitting the campaign trail” with Eminem and delivered a few lines from the latter’s famous track, Lose Yourself. To her credit, Jackson was the only network correspondent to mention President Biden chanting “lock him up” in reference to wanting to see Trump jailed. Eventually, Trump campaign correspondent Garrett Haake got his turn, cheering Kelly’s (rehashed) tales as being on tape and made sure to play up Kelly’s credibility to level this “dire warning” about a “fascist” Trump since he’s a Gold Star father. LOL at NBC. 1. Tulsi Gabbard, Democrat "presidential nominee!" (No.) 2. John Kelly, Trump's "long-serving" chief of staff! (It was 16 months.) 3. Kelly's not endorsing any candidate, but Trump would be a dictator if elected again. (That says Vote Harris.) pic.twitter.com/UdyDQukCsQ — Tim Graham (@TimJGraham) October 23, 2024 “With former President Trump campaigning in battleground North Carolina overnight, his longest-serving chief of staff, John Kelly, delivering a dire warning about a possible second Trump presidency in a series of interviews The New York Times,” Haake stated in part. Haake continued on with more Kelly before noting Trump jokingly wondered at a rally if Harris is intoxicated (click “expand”): HAAKE: Kelly says he was motivated to speak out following Mr. Trump’s comments about using the military against domestic political opponents, who the former President calls the enemy within. TRUMP: Yeah, to me, they are the enemy within. KELLY: Even to say it for political purposes to get elected is a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it. HAAKE: Kelly also discussing Trump’s relationship with veterans, confirming that Trump has called those who died on the battlefield “losers and suckers” and saying the former President did not want to be seen with amputees. KELLY: His not wanting to be seen with amputees, amputees that lost their limbs in defense of this country, that’s — that’s an interesting perspective for the commander in chief to have. HAAKE: Kelly also confirms reports that Mr. Trump repeatedly spoke highly of Adolf Hitler. KELLY: More than once said, you know, Hitler did some good things too. HAAKE: In a statement, the Trump campaign saying “Kelly has totally beclowned himself with these debunked stories he has fabricated.” According to a recent report from The Atlantic not confirmed by NBC News, Mr. Trump made other comments about Hitler during a private conversation in the White House, according to two people who heard him at the time, saying, “I need the kind of generals that Hitler had. People who were totally loyal to him that follow orders.” The Trump campaign says the former President never said it.  Like Jackson, Haake deserves a scintilla of credit for being the only network correspondent Wednesday morning to mention that Trump will appear Friday on perhaps the top podcast in the country, The Joe Rogan Experience. In the second hour, only Jackson returned to summarize both her report as well as Haake’s talking points. On the latter, she only gave 25 seconds to Kelly. To see the relevant transcripts from October 23, click here (for CBS Mornings), here (for CBS Mornings Plus), and here (for NBC).

Famed Hollywood actor Michael Keaton catapulted himself into the political arena in a video on Instagram trying to dissuade voters, especially males, from going to see Elon Musk at Trump rallies. 'They don’t want to hang out with you. They have nothing in common with you. They’re not your bros.' Keaton claimed that both the billionaire entrepreneur and the billionaire former president had condescending views about their supporters and fans. “For some of you folks, guys mostly , who are thinking of attending a rally with Musk and Trump, they don’t really respect you, they laugh at you behind your back, they think you’re stupid. They don’t want to hang out with you. They have nothing in common with you. They’re not your bros," he said. “When Trump years ago said, ‘I could shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue and they’d still vote for me,’ basically what he is saying is that these people are so dumb and so stupid they’d still vote for him," he added. "They have no respect for you, trust me.” Democrats have been panicking over poll results showing that the massive gender gap is pushing former President Donald Trump's campaign closer to the victory column. In response, the Harris campaign issued last-minute policies meant to bolster support among black men and Latino men, but those efforts were mocked and ridiculed as racist pandering by many. Keaton is best known for portraying the comic book hero Batman in a series of movies in the '80s, but he most recently revived his popular "Beetlejuice" character in a Tim Burton-directed sequel. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Since Richard Nixon declared war on cancer in 1971, the National Cancer Institute has spent nearly $160 billion on research and treatment for this deadly disease. In addition to this, the convoluted Medicare, Medicaid, and insurance systems collectively pay out hundreds of billions annually for the same treatments, perpetuating the status quo. Despite spending far more than any other country, we are not seeing better results. Cancer rates are skyrocketing, including among young adults. With promising, cheaper alternatives available, why aren’t major medical journals and the government giving them the attention they deserve? Maybe the question answers itself. Deep down, we all understand why chronic illnesses seem to be rising alongside the use of costly treatments that don’t offer long-term solutions. A handful of heroic doctors who led the way on innovative COVID treatments have now published a peer-reviewed paper proposing a promising protocol for aggressive cancers. This protocol, published in the Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine, combines several antiparasitic drugs that are much safer and cheaper than typical cancer treatments: ivermectin, fenbendazole, and mebendazole. These same antiparasitic agents, which showed promise against COVID, also seem effective against many cancers by targeting the mitochondrial-stem cell connection, believed to be a key factor in the aggressive growth of cancer. Dr. William Makis, a Canadian oncologist and one of the lead authors, announced the publication on social media earlier this month. “The future of cancer treatment starts NOW,” Makis excitedly shared on behalf of the 15 authors from six countries. “My thanks to lead authors Ilyes Baghli and Pierrick Martinez for their incredibly inspired work, FLCCC’s Dr. Paul Marik for his extensive research on repurposed drugs, and every co-author who worked hard to bring this paper to life.” While obviously everyone undergoing cancer treatment must do their own research and speak to medical professionals they trust, here is the core of the Makis-Marik protocol in the paper: Ivermectin Low-grade cancers: Dose of 0.5 mg/kg, 3x per week (Guzzo, et al., 2002). Intermediate-grade cancers: Dose of 1 mg/kg, 3x per week (Guzzo, et al., 2002). High-grade cancers: Dose from 1 mg/kg/day (de Castro, et al., 2020) to 2 mg/kg/day (Guzzo, et al., 2002). All these doses have been established as tolerable for humans (Guzzo, et al., 2002). Benzimidazoles and DON Low-grade cancers: Mebendazole: Dose of 200 mg/day (Dobrosotskaya, et al., 2011). Intermediate-grade cancers: Mebendazole: Dose of 400 mg/day (Chai, et al., 2021). High-grade cancers: Mebendazole dose of 1,500 mg/day (Son, et al., 2020) or fenbendazole dose of 1,000 mg 3x per week (Chiang, et al., 2021). The protocol recommends these drugs alongside intravenous vitamin C, high-dose vitamin D, zinc, a ketogenic diet, fasting, and other lifestyle changes. Several studies support the use of ivermectin in treating cancer for helping cancer cells to die. It has shown promising results, especially in very deadly cancers like pancreatic cancer. Although the doses for cancer treatment (0.5 to 1 milligram per kilogram of body weight) are higher than those used for COVID, doctors point to studies that show these doses are safe for cancer patients. In one study, patients took one milligram per kilogram daily for 180 days without any harmful side effects. Mebendazole, along with its animal-use counterpart, fenbendazole, is another antiparasitic drug. It induces apoptosis in cancer cells by blocking microtubule formation and starving their growth by inhibiting glucose metabolism. The doctors mention several studies in which patients went into complete remission after following this regimen for several weeks. Between 2020 and 2022, 59% of peer reviewers received at least one payment from the pharmaceutical industry. So why aren’t the government, major pharmaceutical companies, and prestigious medical journals seizing this opportunity? These breakthroughs are often dismissed as being too new or lacking large sample sizes. Fine. Then why not fund a placebo-controlled clinical trial? We’re willing to spend billions on expensive therapies that often have extreme, life-altering side effects. These drugs, by contrast, are much cheaper and cause no harm. If even a 1% chance exists that this protocol could treat more cancers, why has this effort been left to a handful of independent doctors and low-profile medical journals? The questions, once again, answer themselves. A new research letter, surprisingly published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, revealed that between 2020 and 2022 (during the pandemic), 59% of peer reviewers received at least one payment from the pharmaceutical industry. Among 1,155 supposedly impartial reviewers, the total payments amounted to $1.06 billion — lining their pockets and potentially influencing their research. Now, consider competing products on the market for various ailments like Parkinson’s, cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. On one side, you have potential treatments from cheap repurposed drugs; on the other, expensive new drugs that ravage the body with side effects but enrich the pharmaceutical industry. These expensive drugs create a cycle of chronic illness, failed treatments, and side effects, each reinforcing the need for more drugs. Given this conflict of interest, which treatment do you think will make it past the gatekeepers in major medical journals?Deep down, we all understand why chronic illnesses seem to be rising alongside the use of costly treatments that don’t offer long-term solutions. In 2022, Yale researchers analyzed the association between cancer care expenditures and age-standardized cancer mortality rates across 22 wealthy Western countries in 2020. Their findings, published in JAMA, showed that despite America spending $584 per capita on cancer care — more than any other nation and double the median spending of the other 21 countries — “cancer care spending was not associated with age-standardized cancer mortality rates.” Cancer rates are now skyrocketing in America and other Western countries, including aggressive, hard-to-treat cancers in young adults. From 2019 to 2023, cancers have surged among individuals ages 15-44 in the following categories: uterine cancer (up 37%), colorectal cancer (up 17%), liver cancer (up 8%), and unspecified metastatic cancer (up 14%). Earlier this year, the American Cancer Society noted that in the late 1990s, colorectal cancer was the fourth-leading cause of cancer deaths among men and women younger than 50. Today, it has become the No. 1 killer of men under 50. In Great Britain, cancer rates hit a record high in 2022, with prostate cancer being the most diagnosed and particularly deadly. Why aren’t alarm bells sounding in the oncology field, recognizing that current approaches clearly aren’t working? We don’t yet know how broadly successful an ivermectin/mebendazole-based cancer treatment protocol could be for the general population. The trouble is we may never find out. If such a protocol were to emerge from the gatekeeping medical journals, the very entities funding those journals would stand to lose billions in revenue. That moral hazard is one humanity cannot afford to ignore.

Gone are the days when blue cities volunteer to be sanctuaries for immigrants. Gone are the days of Kamala Harris saying she wants to decriminalize illegal border crossings (although she probably still believes in it). At this point, everyone is in agreement that the open border is one of America’s most glaring problems. Even DEI-loving, unigender-dressing Mark Cuban thinks the border under the Biden-Harris administration has been problematic, but his reasoning for why it got that way is where Cuban, once again, becomes a laughingstock. Dave Rubin plays the clip of Cuban telling CNN’s Erin Burnett why border crossing got out of hand under the Biden administration and why Kamala will be better for the border than Donald Trump. “So when it comes to criminalizing and not criminalizing crossing the border, I mean, that is just so stark, but you view that as an evolution?” said Burnett. “Here’s my opinion … I thought their hearts were too big when Joe came into office,” Cuban began. “They didn't know how many people would cross the border, and it got away from them, but they figured it out; they learned.” “[Biden] put together an executive order and now the number of border crossings is down to where they were in the Trump [administration], maybe a little lower. [Harris] says she's going to sign the border bill, which is very clear where she stands now,” he continued. Already, his answer is absurd. But then, as is the norm with Democrats, he pointed the finger at Donald Trump. “But let me tell you the most important thing that has not been discussed – Donald Trump and Kamala both have said when it comes to illegals that are in the country that have violated the law, that are criminals, they're going to deport them. Donald Trump hasn't said what he's going to do to deport anybody else,” said Cuban. Dave points out that Cuban’s answer is the perfect example of “the modern liberal mind.” Co-host Elizabeth Pipko adds, “To reach [Cuban’s] success level you have to be smart, so he probably knows as well as I do that no politician on that level suffers from a heart that's just too darn big. That just doesn’t happen.” Want more from Dave Rubin?To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

A Ring doorbell video is going viral on social media after an unhinged woman was captured screaming profanities outside a home over the family's pro-Trump lawn signs. 'You are voting for the devil, don't you know that?!' The unidentified woman accosted the residents of the house and berated them for posting the lawn signs before walking away. "I'd like to know how you can vote for!" she yelled at the door. "Are you the one that always walks by here screaming at people?" the homeowner responded via the camera. "Because a lot of people walk by and scream." "You are voting for the devil, don't you know that?" she asked emphatically. "Why are you voting for him?" "Because I believe he is the moral candidate," the homeowner responded. "Oh, my God, f*** you for that one!" the woman yelled. "That's moral?!" "That's how your side acts," the homeowner said. "Oh, my God! He is the most immoral person. Oh, wow!" the woman replied. "Oh, f*** you, yeah!" she added while stomping away. "I'm sorry! Have a nice day!" the homeowner said. "F*** you!" she shouted back. The video was posted to social media by the popular Libs of TikTok account, where it quickly garnered over 3.8 million views. Many of the responses mocked and ridiculed the bizarre interaction. "That is a mentally disturbed person egged on by a deceptive, immoral media. They have been programmed by deceit. They’ll never be normal again," read one response. A recent poll found that 70% of Americans were concerned that violence may erupt after the election, and over half said they were worried that the election may signal the end of democracy. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The most complex kinds of games are MMOs. You can’t really change anything in an MMO without reaping huge, unexpected issues, all of which need to be accounted for and dealt with every time. Throne and Liberty is currently experiencing one of those kinds of issues, as its upcoming Halloween-themed update has been delayed at the last minute thanks to a “critical” problem. Continue reading Throne and Liberty uncovers “critical” issue, immediately delays major update MORE FROM PCGAMESN: Best MMORPGs, Throne and Liberty codes, Throne and Liberty weapons

We're Gonna Need a Bunch of Padded Rooms, 'Cause Lefties Are Not Gonna Cope Well If Trump Wins (WATCH)

SUUUURE! Keir Starmer, Who Jails People for Memes, Says It's Normal for U.K. to Meddle in U.S. Elections