https://amazon.com/s?k=dmso

"DMSO: The Controversial Miracle Drug"

DMSO - Dr Jacob on 60 Minutes
Duration: 00:15:57

Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) emerged as a highly touted drug, praised for its potential to relieve pain and treat a wide range of conditions, from burns to spinal cord injuries. However, it faced significant skepticism from the medical community and the FDA, which refused to approve it for general use due to insufficient scientific evidence, limiting its legal approval to a rare bladder condition.

Despite this, Oregon and Florida legalized it for prescription, and a black market flourished. Dr. Stanley Jacob, a passionate advocate, has promoted DMSO for 15 years, treating patients with notable anecdotal success, including a paralyzed patient, a quarterback, and an arthritis sufferer.

DMSO is said to work by reducing pain, inflammation, and swelling while aiding healing, and is considered relatively safe, though it causes minor side effects like a garlic odor. Critics argue that its efficacy lacks rigorous clinical proof, partly because its smell hinders double-blind studies, while drug companies show little interest due to its low profit potential. DMSO is used abroad


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XEt0n6LPrk

"Javier Milei Shocks the World: Documents Reveal Hitler's 1945 Escape to Argentina"

https://rumble.com/v6rf75c-javier-milei-just-shocked-the-world-releasing-documents-on-hitlers-escape-t.html


Here are the key points:

1. Hitler's Escape Claim Amplified by Milei’s Actions: The speaker asserts that Javier Milei, by releasing documents, has shocked the world by providing evidence that Adolf Hitler did not die in a Berlin bunker in 1945 but escaped Germany weeks earlier via underground tunnels to an airstrip, then fled to Argentina using U-boats.

2. Life in Argentina Confirmed by Documents: Milei’s document release allegedly substantiates that Hitler lived in Argentina, particularly in Bariloche, for nearly two decades until the mid-1960s, alongside numerous Third Reich members who established a significant operational base there.

3. Milei’s Document Release as Proof: The Argentinian President’s order to declassify all remaining Nazi-related documents is presented as a bombshell revelation, purportedly validating claims of Hitler’s escape and residence in Argentina post-World War II.

4. Intelligence Agencies Implicated: The speaker ties Milei’s released documents to CIA and FBI records, suggesting they confirm U.S. and allied knowledge—and possible facilitation—of Hitler’s survival in Argentina, with references to Operation Paperclip as a related mechanism.

5. Operation Paperclip Expanded: The documents released by Milei are said to reveal that Operation Paperclip not only involved scientists but also intelligence operatives who were recruited from Argentina after escaping there, a process enabled by the U.S.

6. Soviet Evidence Supported: Milei’s shocking release allegedly aligns with findings that the skull in Russia, claimed to be Hitler’s, is female, and includes Stalin’s statements that Hitler survived, reinforcing the escape narrative.

7. Hitler’s Alleged Descendants: The speaker speculates that Milei’s documents might reveal Hitler had two daughters in Argentina, with their descendants’ whereabouts a tantalizing possibility now brought to light by this release.

8. Transparency Era Highlighted: Milei’s action is framed as part of a broader transparency wave, shocking the world by exposing hidden truths, paralleled with mentions of Epstein file investigations under the Trump administration.

9. Intelligence Influence Unveiled: The released documents are suggested to detail how Nazis in Argentina, facilitated by Milei’s revelations, shaped U.S. intelligence’s anti-communist stance, offering a new historical perspective.

10. Cultural Reinforcement: The speaker cites books like "The Gray Wolf" and the show "Hunting Hitler," suggesting Milei’s document release aligns with and amplifies these narratives, with an invitation to Tim Kennedy to discuss further.

11. Rejection of Debunking: The speaker claims Milei’s shocking document release proves the escape story is "bunked" (confirmed), not debunked, challenging mainstream AI and tech narratives like those from Grok or Google.

These points reframe the original narrative to emphasize the sensational claim of Milei’s document release as a world-shocking event, aligning with the conspiracy theory of Hitler’s escape to Argentina, while maintaining the speaker’s original intent and assertions.

"Trump and Netanyahu: Rewriting the Rules of Gaza and Iran in a Battle Against the Old Guard"

https://t.iss.one/twitterrelay/37814

The FDA & Fauci Blocked You From Getting a COVID Cure?

A good mood helps COVID-19 vaccines work better for People who wear masks and burn Teslas 😂

Who believes junks like this?

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-04-good-mood-covid-vaccines.html

Here are the key points from the speech delivered on April 2, 2025, by the President of the United States:

1. Liberation Day Declaration: April 2, 2025, is proclaimed as "Liberation Day," marking the rebirth of American industry and the reclaiming of America’s economic destiny with the goal of making America wealthy again.

2. Reciprocal Tariffs: The President announces a historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries worldwide, effective at midnight. This policy mirrors the tariffs imposed on U.S. goods by other nations, termed a "Declaration of Economic Independence."

3. Economic Rejuvenation: The tariffs aim to bring jobs and factories back to the U.S., supercharge the domestic industrial base, open foreign markets, break down trade barriers, and ultimately lower consumer prices through increased domestic production.

4. Historical Context: The President highlights decades of economic exploitation by foreign nations, citing examples like high tariffs on U.S. motorcycles (e.g., 60-75% in Thailand, India, Vietnam) and automobiles (e.g., 10%+ in the EU, 70% in India) compared to the U.S.'s low tariffs (e.g., 2.4% on motorcycles, 2.5% on cars).

5. Specific Tariff Increases: A 25% tariff will be imposed on all foreign-made automobiles starting at midnight. Tariffs on other nations will be set at approximately half their rates charged to the U.S. (e.g., China: 67% to 34%, EU: 39% to 20%, Vietnam: 90% to 46%).

6. Minimum Tariff Baseline: A 10% minimum tariff will apply to all countries to rebuild the economy and prevent cheating, with strict penalties (e.g., 10-year jail sentences) for those facilitating tariff evasion.

7. Corporate Investment: Major companies (e.g., Apple, SoftBank, Nvidia, TSMC, Meta) have committed billions (totaling ~$6 trillion) to build plants in the U.S., driven by the election outcome and tariff policies, reversing decades of outsourcing.

8. Support from Workers: Autoworkers, Teamsters, and unions like the UAW express strong support, anticipating job growth and plant revitalization, particularly in states like Michigan.

9. Agricultural Protection: Tariffs address unfair treatment of U.S. farmers, such as Canada’s 250-300% tariffs on dairy, the EU’s poultry bans, and high tariffs on rice by China (65%), South Korea (50-513%), and Japan (700%).

10. Economic History Lesson: The U.S. thrived as a tariff-backed nation from 1789-1913, amassing wealth until the income tax replaced tariffs in 1913, leading to economic vulnerabilities like the Great Depression.

11. National Security: Chronic trade deficits are framed as a national emergency, threatening security by outsourcing critical goods (e.g., antibiotics, electronics, ships), which the tariffs aim to reverse.

12. Legislative Agenda: The President calls for Congress to pass the "One Big, Beautiful Bill," including the largest tax cuts in history, permanent tax cuts, spending cuts, energy investments, defense enhancements, and an interest deduction for loans on American-made cars.

13. Border and Inflation Success: Claims of achieving the safest U.S. border ever, reducing egg prices by 59%, lowering grocery and energy costs, and creating 10,000 manufacturing jobs in weeks, contrasting with high inflation under the previous administration.

14. Global Response: Foreign leaders are expected to seek exemptions, but the President urges them to drop their own tariffs and buy American goods instead, emphasizing fair trade over economic surrender.

15. Vision for America: The policy promises a "Golden Age of America," transforming the nation into an industrial powerhouse with American-made products, reducing national debt, and prioritizing American workers and families.

16. Additional Executive Action: Alongside the tariff order, an executive order closes the "de minimis loophole" for imports from China, further tightening trade controls.

These points encapsulate the President’s narrative of economic nationalism, industrial revival, and a strategic shift in U.S. trade policy.

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


1 of 8

Claim: Tariffs are a "major blow" to the global economy

Counterargument: Tariffs don’t inherently destroy economies; they redirect them. Historical examples, like the U.S. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, are often cited as disastrous, but studies (e.g., Irwin, 1998) suggest their role in deepening the Great Depression was overstated compared to monetary policy failures. Trump’s tariffs could boost U.S. domestic production by shielding it from foreign competition, potentially offsetting global losses with localized gains. The "major blow" assumes a net-negative outcome without considering adaptive responses like reshoring or new trade alliances.

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


2 of 8

Claim: Consumers will face immediate higher costs (groceries, medication, transportation)

Counterargument: Price increases aren’t guaranteed or uniform. Businesses often absorb some tariff costs to stay competitive, or source alternatives from non-tariffed regions. For instance, if EU goods face U.S. tariffs, American consumers might shift to domestic or Asian suppliers, mitigating price spikes. Von der Leyen’s assertion also ignores potential U.S. policy offsets (e.g., tax cuts or subsidies) that Trump might pair with tariffs, as he did in 2018-2019, softening consumer impact.

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


3 of 8

Claim: Vulnerable countries and citizens will suffer most

Counterargument: Vulnerable countries often rely on exports to the U.S., but they’re also agile in finding new markets. Post-2018 U.S.-China trade war, nations like Vietnam and Mexico pivoted to fill gaps, gaining economically. The "most vulnerable" narrative assumes static trade patterns, not resilience or diversification. For citizens, inflation fears may be overstated—U.S. inflation post-2018 tariffs rose modestly (2-3%), not catastrophically, per Federal Reserve data.

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


4 of 8

Claim: Businesses will suffer from uncertainty, supply chain disruptions, and bureaucracy

Counterargument: Uncertainty cuts both ways—businesses adapt. Post-2018 tariffs, U.S. firms shifted supply chains (e.g., from China to Southeast Asia) within months, per the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Bureaucracy exists in any trade regime; EU red tape already burdens its own firms. Tariffs might even streamline U.S.-centric supply chains, reducing reliance on complex global networks vulnerable to disruptions like pandemics or shipping crises (e.g., Suez Canal 2021).

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


5 of 8

Claim: 80 years of EU-U.S. trade prosperity is at risk

Counterargument: Past prosperity doesn’t mean current trade is optimal. The U.S. has long argued the EU benefits disproportionately (e.g., $150B trade deficit in 2022), with subsidized sectors like Airbus skewing competition. Tariffs could force a rebalance, not a collapse. Nostalgia for transatlantic trade ignores how it’s evolved—digital and service economies now dwarf traditional goods in value, per OECD stats, and tariffs target the latter, not the former.

"Unpacking the Alarm: A Critical Take on von der Leyen’s Tariff Warnings"


6 of 8

Claim: Tariffs won’t fix global trade flaws; negotiation is better

Counterargument: Negotiations often stall—look at decades of WTO gridlock. Tariffs, while blunt, have historically pressured concessions (e.g., China’s 2019 trade talks with Trump). Von der Leyen’s readiness to negotiate assumes U.S. goodwill, but Trump’s strategy thrives on leverage, not dialogue. Tariffs might accelerate reform by forcing action, not just words.