01/16/2023 / By Ethan Huff
To keep its corporate handlers happy and flush with ill-gotten profits, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is calling for backup in the fight against online free speech.
At the recent 2023 Innovations in Regulatory Science Summit, an event organized by the UCSF-Stanford Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI), several former and current FDA commissioners were singing the same tune about the threat of “misinformation” on social media.
“I actually believe that misinformation is the leading cause of death right now in the U.S. because whether we’re looking at covid or chronic disease – people are making bad choices driven by the information that they get,” whined current FDA commissioner Robert Califf.
“We were just not prepared for what broad access to the internet would do to communication channels.”
Califf’s use of the word we, in this context, is of course referring to the globalist powers that be who are apparently clueless about Americans’ love for the First Amendment, which up until fairly recently was freely exercised online.
Prior to the advent of the Big Tech cabal, the internet was the Wild West of free speech. People could say whatever they wanted, and they got used to doing that before the establishment embedded spooks within all the major platforms to squelch free speech.
Those efforts were partially successful, but there is still a whole lot of free speech going on that Califf wants to see silenced. He maintains that the FDA, with the help of heavy reinforcements, is up to the task of driving a nail into the coffin of the First Amendment.
“As a public agency, we need to be critiqued but I think often the people that are doing the critiquing assume that the agency’s going to be there in the future in the way that they expect it to be there,” Califf further stated at the event.
“So, they’re critiquing it to make it better. But to a lot of unsuspecting people that hear it, it just completely erodes their belief in the institution.” (Related: Every single vaccine corporation peddling a covid “vaccine” employs at least one former FDA commissioner.)
Mark McClellan, a former FDA commissioner who worked at the agency from 2002 to 2004, parroted Califf’s statements. He declared that, “realistically, FDA needs help,” warning that public trust in the FDA is declining in direct proportion to the spread of free speech.
McClellan believes that the deep state’s control over the narrative can still be maintained, though, as many people still trust their doctors, community leaders, and others who are “close to their experience” – though that is waning, too, as more truth spreads.
Then we have Scott Gottlieb, a career criminal and former FDA commissioner from 2017 to 2019 who now sits on the board of Pfizer. Gottlieb believes that it is not the FDA’s job to police misinformation directly, but rather to manage censorship through “sponsors,” meaning pharmaceutical companies.
“We’ve seen FDA weigh in, admirably, around some dangerous disinformation on specific products, but that can’t be the business of the FDA,” Gottlieb said at the event.
“I think sponsors need to have the ability to defend their products in the marketplace of ideas when there’s true misinformation.”
Gottlieb’s statements were made a week after he was exposed for flagging tweets on Twitter for censorship or removal – this while being paid by Pfizer to essentially do its dirty work online.
“This is the kind of stuff that’s corrosive,” complained Gottlieb to an executive at Twitter about a tweet from Dr. Brett Giroir about the superiority of natural immunity versus “vaccine” immunity.
The latest news about the corrupt and ready-to-be-dismantled FDA can be found at FDA.news.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under:
big government, Censorship, Collusion, conspiracy, COVID, deep state, fascism, FDA, First Amendment, free press, free speech, freedom, insanity, Liberty, misinformation, outrage, Pfizer, speech police, thought police, Twitter, Tyranny, vaccines
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author