ICWA Weekly News 1-22-25
An ICWA wishlist for the new AG Nick Brown; One Health Sends Its Framework to Washington; Skin Disorders following COVID-19 Shots; Great Interviews by John Stockton and Renata Moon.
In this issue: An ICWA wishlist for new Attorney General Nick Brown; One Health Sends Its Framework to Washington; Skin Disorders in Washington following COVID-19 Shots; Please watch/listen to great interviews by John Stockton and Renata Moon.
Before we get into the Weekly News content, please consider opening the following interviews and save them for later viewing:
Two Docs Interview: Dr. James Thorp and Renata Moon talk with attorney Todd Richardson and Dr. Richard Eggleston about their case in Washington state courts.
Grassroots Advocacy in Action: Laura Demaray and Joan Steichen on Fighting Government Overreach: an interview by John Stockton and Ken Ruettgers on their new show The Ultimate Assist.
We are so thankful for all the active voices in Washington State. Be sure to check out their other episodes. We all know something’s wrong with current policies, and we’re trying our best to get the word out there for a better future in Washington.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled programming...;-)
January 17 Episode of Informed Life Radio – notes and links
Health hour: Homeopathy for Complex Kids
Guest: Christie Biesold discusses her child’s severe HPV Vaccine injury and healing journey and her current work as a Certified Intuitive Homeopath, helping recover kids with complex health issues and their families.
Liberty hour: WA News & Legislation
Guest: Pete Serrano of the Silent Majority Foundation joins Bernadette and Lisa to update the threats against the recently-codified Parent’s Bill of Rights (I-2081). One legal threat will be in court on Friday January 24, and other threats come from new bills SB 5181/HB 1296, which are heard in committee on Jan. 21 (TVW Link), and Jan. 23 (TVW Link), respectively. Pete also provides updates on other cases: Dr. Wilkinson case being adjudicated in the WA state court of appeals which will maintain the freedom of doctor’s speech on the context of the State Constitution; Dr. Renata Moon’s case against WSU for firing her – also a free speech case.
For the second half of the show, hosts review the second meeting of the Domestic Extremism and Mass Violence Task Force.
Constitutional Legal Non Profit | Silent Majority Foundation | WA
SMF Update on Parent’s Bill of Rights (Substack)
HB1333 Domestic Violent Extremism Task Force (failed to pass)
Budget bill that established the task force anyway - by funding proviso (p. 56, line 33):
ADL slideshow presented at HB1333 hearing, with slide 12 blaming “anti-vaccine [and other] narratives” for “motivating extremists”
First Task Force meeting recorded by member of the public
Second Task Force meeting recorded by member of the public
Task Force page on Attorney General’s web site —find out how to watch and testify at the next meeting
An ICWA Wishlist for Nick Brown
Last Wednesday, January 15, Nick Brown wrote to his supporters, “Earlier today, I was officially sworn in as the Attorney General of Washington!”
Later on, he wrote about protecting our human rights:
“I will not give a single inch to Trump or any far-right extremist who tries to strip Washingtonians of our nation-leading human rights protections or erode our democracy. As your Attorney General I will do everything in my power to protect you, your loved ones, and our friends and neighbors across our great state — you have my word.” - Nick Brown
He’ll only resist the far right extremists? Not far left? Don’t people of all political stances deserve human rights protections and enjoy the freedom of our republic? And if you ignore or normalize one extreme, doesn’t that effectively intrude upon and trample the rights of everyone in the middle? And where is the middle now, in 2025? Shouldn’t the goal of any AG be to uphold the rule of law and the state and federal Constitutions so that we the people are individually free to live in the manner of our own choosing? Shouldn’t AG’s be able to, or at least strive to, separate fact from social engineering and marketing messaging? Shouldn’t they be able to see the motivation, the profit and power goals behind such messaging?
What about vaccination extremists? Where do they fall on your scale, Mr. Brown?
Do we have Mr. Brown’s word that he’ll protect the rights of those 1,900 Washington state workers who were fired for refusing to take ineffective COVID-19 shots? Are people who believe in “my body, my choice” on the right or the left?
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and President Trump are standing up for the rights of military service members who had refused to take the shots.
“Not only will they be reinstated, they will receive an apology, back pay, and rank that they lost because they were forced out due to an experimental vaccine,” - Peter Hegseth during his confirmation hearing.
and from the inaugural speech:
“This week, I will reinstate any service members who were unjustly expelled from our military for objecting to the COVID vaccine mandate with full back pay.” – President Trump January 20, 2025
Brown’s predecessor, Bob Ferguson, successfully defended the firings of Washington state workers in the courts. Interestingly, poor moderation or the latest in X’s artificial intelligence now credits defense of the government employee firings to the new AG Brown instead of Bob Ferguson, even though the posted date is October 18, 2021. (Inaccurate assigning of quotes seems to be a major problem with AI.)
The firings even included ten workers from his own Washington State Office of the Attorney General. Last December 3, the Silent Majority Foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of these ten former employees. SMF writes about it on their Substack: Why Bob Ferguson is Wrong and What SMF is Doing About it.
Where do the vaccine-injured stand in AG Brown’s worldview? Do we have Mr. Brown’s word that he’ll protect the human rights of those who have been injured from the COVID-19 shots? Will he sign onto the December 30, 2024 letter from fourteen state attorney generals to the HHS demanding answers regarding the government’s malfeasance and mistreatment of the COVID-19 vaccine injured and the dead?
From the first paragraph of that letter:
We, the Attorneys General of Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas, write to express our serious concerns with how individuals harmed by COVID-19 vaccines are being treated by the federal government. We seek answers to questions about the administration of the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).
Do we have Mr. Brown’s word that he’ll protect the First Amendment human rights of free speech, for which the Washington Medical Commission (WMC) has harassed doctors such as Michael Turner, Renata Moon, Thomas Siler, Ryan Cole, and Richard Eggleston?
Or how about the free speech of award-winning journalist Alison (Morrow) Westover when she posted an interview with Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, MD on her personal YouTube channel, which she made on her own time with her own resources? The Washington Department of Resources (DNR) fired her for that interview concerning the COVID-19 shots, and the Silent Majority Foundation has filed a lawsuit on her behalf.
Last Friday, Mr. Brown’s office asked the public for their input. The email said, “As Nick begins his term as Washington's Attorney General, it's important that he hears from as many folks as possible about what issues are most important to you, your loved ones, and your communities. — because his work as AG is about all of us.”
The email asked readers to fill out his survey.
Can you take just one or two minutes to let Nick know what issues you and your family are discussing around the kitchen table these days? You can even leave Nick a note just in case there's anything else you'd like him to think about.
Although the check boxes mention nothing about medical freedom, protecting consumers in the second box might a useful reference to ICWA’s Restoring Trust in Public Health bill (HB1610). The two free-form text boxes at the end give Washington residents a chance to mention this bill, voice opinions on mandates, the letter from fourteen state attorney generals, and the First Amendment right of free speech. Let him have it.
One Health Sends Its Framework to Washington
Last Thursday, The Defender published the latest doings of One Health in which the first paragraph read:
The U.S. last week introduced a national framework for One Health to help the country prepare for “the next potential threat” to public health, but critics argue the plan will expand government surveillance and crisis-driven health policies.
Furthermore, a May 8, 2023 Defender article pointed out that critics argue One Health’s vague goals have been “hijacked.” They question the intent of those involved with the development and global rollout of the concept — including the WHO, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Bank.
The following flurry of bubbles from the Barcelona Institute for Global Health show that this hijacking has three prongs:
Human health
Animal health
Environment
As expected, the top big bubble is human health, which we’ve seen hijacked by the biolab COVID-19 leak and its accompanying first DNA-altering gene therapy shot (according to many scientists interviewed by the Expose).
A second big bubble is animal health, which we’ve seen hijacked through accusations of emitting too many greenhouse gases that led to confiscating cows and farmland in the Netherlands so that the government could replace them with apartments for housing.
And now catching the most attention is the bird flu in which Nicolas Hulscher pointed out last Thursday that an outbreak in Georgia occurred just thirty miles from a USDA Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory (SEPRL).
Hulscher wrote, “H5Nx avian influenza serial passage gain-of-function experiments are currently underway at SEPRL.”
Hulscher then wrote, “This isn’t surprising — Our study, Proximal Origin of Epidemic Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza H5N1 Clade 2.3.4.4b and Spread by Migratory Waterfowl, found that the current H5N1 bird flu outbreak is likely a result of an earlier lab leak from SEPRL in late 2021.”
Naturally, the big green bubble in the One Health diagram above is for the environment, and the highest little green bubble expectedly is the one hitting the top of the political playlist: Climate change.
The following two excerpts from the last Thursday’s article in the Defender ties climate change into One Health’s framework:
The framework’s surveillance strategy includes tracking “the effects of social, economic, and environmental determinants of health and upstream drivers such as climate change and land-use on priority, endemic, emerging, and reemerging zoonotic diseases and other priority One Health issues.”
The framework also connects One Health to “environmental and social determinants of health … including climate change and environmental justice,” and proposes the integration of One Health “into curriculums across all relevant disciplines.”
One Health is already in full swing in Washington.
So, it is safe to say that the Department of Health (DOH) is more than ready to receive the launching the Global One Health framework. In fact, the DOH will be hosting another One Health conference this March 26-27 for free at Central Washington University in Ellensburg.
At the last conference, held on August 16, 2023, the overriding concern from the speakers was how to face the climate change crisis. Beth Lipton best summed up the sentiments of the meeting when she said, “The need to align climate change approaches with one health approaches was very clear today, and that really resonated a lot with me as well.”
So, how did we end up with all this climate change frenzy? Let’s connect some dots.
Let’s say it all started on August 15, 1971 when President Richard Nixon decoupled gold from the dollar, thereby allowing the U.S. Dollar to be considered, technically, as a fiat currency. With the dollar no longer redeemable in gold and there being no physical assets backing it up, David Rockefeller, chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, then the third-largest bank in the world, saw the only tangible way to securely back up his wealth was to directly own and/or control the physical resources of the world.
The same year that Rockefeller and Columbia University Professor Zbigniew Brzezinski, who later became President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, formed the Trilateral Commission, the Rockefellers Brothers Fund released a book called The Use of Land.
Patrick Wood’s book The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism details this series of events, and he uses footnote number seven to show that The Use of Land was the outcome of the “Task Force on Land Use and Urban Growth” that had been started in the summer of 1972 by the Citizens’ Advisory Committee on Environmental Quality.
Wood puts forth that The Use of Land led to massive changes in land use policy in the United States. It also paved the way for global land use policies that the United Nations would embed in its Sustainable Development doctrines in the 1990s.
Using footnote number eight, Wood writes, “The Rockefellers subsumed the once-legitimate environmental movement because they needed an excuse to promote changes in land use policies.”
Wood then listed numerous quotes to that effect from The Use of Land. Here are just a few of them:
Laurance S. Rockefeller [David’s older brother], then chairman of the committee, saw the environmental movement as a force of great vigor and excitement which, if it were to broaden its vision and direct its energies to urban growth problems with equal commitment, could achieve impressive results. (p. 1)
Unlike other movements, the environmental one is here to stay. The beauty of it is, it’s the first issue that cuts across all lines – race, religion, class. Land is a very basic thing. (p. 38)
To protect critical environmental and cultural areas, tough restrictions will have to be placed on the use of privately owned land (p. 23)
The land market, as it operated today, is the principal obstacle to effective protection of private open space. (p. 21)
Governments at all levels should actively solicit open space donations and should facilitate the work of responsible private organizations, such as the Nature Conservancy. (p. 20)
Citizen suits appealing from local regulatory decisions should be permitted by any local resident or civic organization in the public interest, without regard to property ownership or other financial interest. (p. 27)[footnote #9]
Wood eventually shows how The Use of Land leads to the old buzzword “global warming” and then to the current buzzword “climate crisis.”
The UN’s unambiguous declaration of war on capitalism received very little attention at the time, but it should have—for two reasons.
First, it came at a time when Figueres was in the process of organizing the December 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris. The conference would draw 196 nations, whose representatives would sign a treaty agreeing to limit global warming—preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial levels. This so-called Paris Agreement was the first time in history that all the nations of the world were lined up to be force-fed a steady diet of sustainable development dogma. The crux of the dogma was that nothing short of total economic and social transformation would save the world.[footnote #5]
Second, the sustainable development dogma was based on a two-pronged lie—namely, that there was a need to overhaul the entire economic system and that this need was precipitated by global warming (now called “climate change”). In fact, there was no such need and no such causal connection between the two.
In both cases—the 2015 pretense that global warming was a threat and the 2020 pretense that the pandemic was a threat—the objective was to destroy capitalism and replace it with sustainable development, aka technocracy. The UN’s self-declared crisis, followed five years later by the WEF’s self-declared crisis, pushed a confused and fearful worldwide populace into going along with the globalists’ preconceived agenda. There was never any other agenda or “fix” offered. It was their way or the highway.
The world had been conned by two false fears and one false solution.
All of the above illustrates that atop of this globalist preconceived agenda would be the Rockefeller family. In his book, Wood uses a quote from David Rockefeller’s memoir to verify this:
Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.[footnote #5]
ICAN Releases New V-Safe Analysis; Skin Disorders in Washington following COVID-19 Shots
On the same day that Congress certified the votes for Donald Trump to become president of the United States—January 6, 2025—the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) released its latest analysis of the “free text” from the CDC’s V-safe data.
This analysis found over 160,000 entries concerning skin issues that V-safe users developed after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.
When the COVID-19 vaccines rolled out, CDC provided a V-safe app where people could record their symptoms. The attorneys who represent ICAN sued CDC to release this data. The V-safe data revealed over 124,000 reports of rashes; 22,000 reports of hives; 11,000 reports of blisters; 3,000 reports of eczema; 2,500 reports of psoriasis; and 1,500 reports of lesions.
ICAN provided some examples in the vaccine recipients’ own words:
“Severe hives. Started the morning of 1/11 went to urgent care 1/12 at 3am. Raised and red hives. Started on thighs and arms. Eventually covered 90% of my body.”
“Bullous lesions on hands. Slow healing process. Had a biopsy of one of the lesions.”
“6 silver dollar sized psoriasis like patches on my chest and ive [sic] never had any skin issues in my life”
“Had very unusual rapid growing lesion, biopsy done 1/15/21. Suspecting autoimmune process. Requires topical and systemic pain meds.”
“Painful blisters on my hands, feet, wrists and elbows as well as in my nostril.”
“Ulcers on roof of mouth and down throat (not something that has ever happened to me before)”
“Rash all over, hive like bumps on palms of feet and hands, back, stomach, legs, arms, its every where [sic] and very itchy.”
ICAN then noted the following:
Scientific literature includes many reports of cutaneous (skin) reactions after COVID-19 vaccination. Most skin reactions to drugs are considered to be a hypersensitive immune response involving mast cells, and the preferred treatment is to discontinue the drug.
How does CDC treat these reactions? It blithely instructs people that even if they develop a “red, itchy, swollen, or painful rash” that they can “likely receive another dose” of the vaccine. The only rash it considers to be a concern is one that “required hospitalization.”
ICAN’s analysis does not break down the data for each state, but the VAERS reports for Washington are in line with those V-safe reports. Let’s look at each one in the order that ICAN has discussed.
For the 27 types of rashes, Washington reports 1,791 cases following the COVID-19 shots.
The hives adverse event is not listed on Med Alerts, but for 20 types of blisters, there were 94 cases following the COVID-19 shots here in Washington are listed.
As for eczema, 24 cases have been found here in Washington following the COVID-19 shot.
The most recent case was reported on January 20, 2023 of a 71-year-old female who has taken five Pfizer shots.
VAERS ID: 2564613. The submitted write-up reads as follows:
I have had the same reaction after each vaccine with a fever, hurt all over my body but this one was the worst. I was in bed for three days after each one. After all, three boosters within four weeks, I get a rash on my face itches, burns and hurts. I still have the rash from my last booster. I use a cortisone cream to help with the rash. My allergist believes that I have eczema. If I stop using cortisone, the rash returns.
As for psoriasis, Washington reports 26 cases following the COVID-19 shots.
The most recent case was of a 68-year-old female who had taken a sixth dose of the Pfizer shot.
VAERS ID: 2796273. The submitted write-up reads “Plaque psoriasis with extensive scalp involvement.”
VAERS shows no reports of lesions here in Washington following the COVID-19 shots.
For most of the skin conditions, the ages of those reporting reactions are pretty evenly matched the general uptake of the shots of 30 years and older. The more serious conditions like psoriasis appear to occur to a higher percentage in the 60-79 year age range.
Thank you once again for all your hard work and information.