One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
Jul 10, 2024 16:23:08   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
By Bob Unruh

Physicians who were threatened and abused by various tyrannical credentialing boards that sought to suppress anything but the official government story line about C****-** have been given the go-ahead by the courts to sue.

The case was brought by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Education Foundation against the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Board of Family Medicine and the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security over various situations in which those organizations threatened or actually acted against doctors because of what they said about C***D.

Their medical opinions essentially contradicted the government’s talking points about taking various experimental shots, which evidence now shows have been extremely damaging to thousands of people.

The challenge focused on the coordinated campaigns to “censor and chill the speech of physicians,” with special targeting of those who criticized the unfounded positions taken by White House adviser Anthony F***i, lockdowns, masks and more.

A district judge had claimed that the AAPS “lacked standing,” but a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has reversed that dismissal.

It’s headed back to the lower courts for discovery, and potentially a full trial.

A report in the Federalist documented the ruling.

“The AAPS Educational Foundation brought the case because of a series of physicians who were being threatened with loss of their board certification because they had made comments that were either critical of the C***D0 v*****es or that advocated for early treatment with repurposed drugs,” explained AAPS chief Jane Orient.

“Particularly bad were the three defendants of the internal board who were also engaged in threatening physicians who supported the overturning of Roe v. Wade or had anything to say about a******n and its side effects.”


Dr. Ryan Cole, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., and Dr. Peter McCullough at a roundtable in Washington, D.C., on the C****-** v*****es and the link to injuries.

The case also cited the egregious censorship schemes that were being developed by Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board which, Orient explained, “was dev**ed to seeking out and finding ‘disinformation,’ ‘malinformation,’ and, or pressuring people, including those on specialty boards and social media companies, to take action.”

Public outrage that the government would assemble such a force prompted that particular coalition to be disbanded, but that doesn’t mean that scheme has been abandoned.

When physicians made public comments, press comments, testified in hearings – and their statements did not align with the Biden administration’s political agenda – they were threatened with loss of their credentials, which in many cases could mean the loss of their income.

The power structure simply labeled, without evidence, dissenting opinions as “misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation,” the case charged.

One facing punishment was Dr. Peter McCullough, a professor of medicine for decades, who was forced into independent practice over his views after those in “academic practice” refused to allow him free speech.

He questioned, during a state legislative hearing, the experimental shots, and the ABIM later adopted a rule about “misinformation” and retroactively applied it to him, the report said.

McCullough confirmed to The Federalist he provided documentation and evidence regarding his opinions on C***D, but the organization refused to accept it.

The power structure lined up against the dissenting doctors including those credentialing agencies as well as insurance companies that would refuse to provide compensation for treatment if the doctor’s opinion differed from theirs.

Lawyer Andrew Schlafly, litigating for AAPS, said, “Viewpoint-based censorship of freedom of speech is one of the most important issues today, and essential to the future of both our country and the ability of patients to obtain quality medical care. It is vital that we restore freedom of speech and end improper interference with it. Physicians must be able to speak candidly about issues of public concern without fear of retaliation.”

Let’s not forget that hospitals/doctors were paid EXTRA for each “C****-** ” diagnosis they made. Can you say “bribery” boys and girls?

Reply
Jul 10, 2024 18:49:55   #
Ricktloml
 
AuntiE wrote:
Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
By Bob Unruh

Physicians who were threatened and abused by various tyrannical credentialing boards that sought to suppress anything but the official government story line about C****-** have been given the go-ahead by the courts to sue.

The case was brought by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Education Foundation against the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Board of Family Medicine and the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security over various situations in which those organizations threatened or actually acted against doctors because of what they said about C***D.

Their medical opinions essentially contradicted the government’s talking points about taking various experimental shots, which evidence now shows have been extremely damaging to thousands of people.

The challenge focused on the coordinated campaigns to “censor and chill the speech of physicians,” with special targeting of those who criticized the unfounded positions taken by White House adviser Anthony F***i, lockdowns, masks and more.

A district judge had claimed that the AAPS “lacked standing,” but a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has reversed that dismissal.

It’s headed back to the lower courts for discovery, and potentially a full trial.

A report in the Federalist documented the ruling.

“The AAPS Educational Foundation brought the case because of a series of physicians who were being threatened with loss of their board certification because they had made comments that were either critical of the C***D0 v*****es or that advocated for early treatment with repurposed drugs,” explained AAPS chief Jane Orient.

“Particularly bad were the three defendants of the internal board who were also engaged in threatening physicians who supported the overturning of Roe v. Wade or had anything to say about a******n and its side effects.”


Dr. Ryan Cole, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., and Dr. Peter McCullough at a roundtable in Washington, D.C., on the C****-** v*****es and the link to injuries.

The case also cited the egregious censorship schemes that were being developed by Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board which, Orient explained, “was dev**ed to seeking out and finding ‘disinformation,’ ‘malinformation,’ and, or pressuring people, including those on specialty boards and social media companies, to take action.”

Public outrage that the government would assemble such a force prompted that particular coalition to be disbanded, but that doesn’t mean that scheme has been abandoned.

When physicians made public comments, press comments, testified in hearings – and their statements did not align with the Biden administration’s political agenda – they were threatened with loss of their credentials, which in many cases could mean the loss of their income.

The power structure simply labeled, without evidence, dissenting opinions as “misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation,” the case charged.

One facing punishment was Dr. Peter McCullough, a professor of medicine for decades, who was forced into independent practice over his views after those in “academic practice” refused to allow him free speech.

He questioned, during a state legislative hearing, the experimental shots, and the ABIM later adopted a rule about “misinformation” and retroactively applied it to him, the report said.

McCullough confirmed to The Federalist he provided documentation and evidence regarding his opinions on C***D, but the organization refused to accept it.

The power structure lined up against the dissenting doctors including those credentialing agencies as well as insurance companies that would refuse to provide compensation for treatment if the doctor’s opinion differed from theirs.

Lawyer Andrew Schlafly, litigating for AAPS, said, “Viewpoint-based censorship of freedom of speech is one of the most important issues today, and essential to the future of both our country and the ability of patients to obtain quality medical care. It is vital that we restore freedom of speech and end improper interference with it. Physicians must be able to speak candidly about issues of public concern without fear of retaliation.”

Let’s not forget that hospitals/doctors were paid EXTRA for each “C****-** ” diagnosis they made. Can you say “bribery” boys and girls?
b Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the ... (show quote)


My doctor "mildly" pressured me to get the C***d ** shot. I stood my ground, and after 3-4 "reminders" and one firm "I'm not getting the shot" he finally gave up.

Reply
Jul 10, 2024 19:03:32   #
Lily
 
AuntiE wrote:
Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
By Bob Unruh

Physicians who were threatened and abused by various tyrannical credentialing boards that sought to suppress anything but the official government story line about C****-** have been given the go-ahead by the courts to sue.

The case was brought by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Education Foundation against the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Board of Family Medicine and the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security over various situations in which those organizations threatened or actually acted against doctors because of what they said about C***D.

Their medical opinions essentially contradicted the government’s talking points about taking various experimental shots, which evidence now shows have been extremely damaging to thousands of people.

The challenge focused on the coordinated campaigns to “censor and chill the speech of physicians,” with special targeting of those who criticized the unfounded positions taken by White House adviser Anthony F***i, lockdowns, masks and more.

A district judge had claimed that the AAPS “lacked standing,” but a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has reversed that dismissal.

It’s headed back to the lower courts for discovery, and potentially a full trial.

A report in the Federalist documented the ruling.

“The AAPS Educational Foundation brought the case because of a series of physicians who were being threatened with loss of their board certification because they had made comments that were either critical of the C***D0 v*****es or that advocated for early treatment with repurposed drugs,” explained AAPS chief Jane Orient.

“Particularly bad were the three defendants of the internal board who were also engaged in threatening physicians who supported the overturning of Roe v. Wade or had anything to say about a******n and its side effects.”


Dr. Ryan Cole, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., and Dr. Peter McCullough at a roundtable in Washington, D.C., on the C****-** v*****es and the link to injuries.

The case also cited the egregious censorship schemes that were being developed by Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board which, Orient explained, “was dev**ed to seeking out and finding ‘disinformation,’ ‘malinformation,’ and, or pressuring people, including those on specialty boards and social media companies, to take action.”

Public outrage that the government would assemble such a force prompted that particular coalition to be disbanded, but that doesn’t mean that scheme has been abandoned.

When physicians made public comments, press comments, testified in hearings – and their statements did not align with the Biden administration’s political agenda – they were threatened with loss of their credentials, which in many cases could mean the loss of their income.

The power structure simply labeled, without evidence, dissenting opinions as “misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation,” the case charged.

One facing punishment was Dr. Peter McCullough, a professor of medicine for decades, who was forced into independent practice over his views after those in “academic practice” refused to allow him free speech.

He questioned, during a state legislative hearing, the experimental shots, and the ABIM later adopted a rule about “misinformation” and retroactively applied it to him, the report said.

McCullough confirmed to The Federalist he provided documentation and evidence regarding his opinions on C***D, but the organization refused to accept it.

The power structure lined up against the dissenting doctors including those credentialing agencies as well as insurance companies that would refuse to provide compensation for treatment if the doctor’s opinion differed from theirs.

Lawyer Andrew Schlafly, litigating for AAPS, said, “Viewpoint-based censorship of freedom of speech is one of the most important issues today, and essential to the future of both our country and the ability of patients to obtain quality medical care. It is vital that we restore freedom of speech and end improper interference with it. Physicians must be able to speak candidly about issues of public concern without fear of retaliation.”

Let’s not forget that hospitals/doctors were paid EXTRA for each “C****-** ” diagnosis they made. Can you say “bribery” boys and girls?
b Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the ... (show quote)


Just look at P****r’s profit line with the v*****e and you have the answer.

Reply
 
 
Jul 10, 2024 20:39:47   #
DAV
 
Ricktloml wrote:
My doctor "mildly" pressured me to get the C***d ** shot. I stood my ground, and after 3-4 "reminders" and one firm "I'm not getting the shot" he finally gave up.


I had the same experience with our 'doctor'.

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 11:35:49   #
ExperienceCounts
 
Neither of us took the shot, both of us are heart patients, and both of us have had C***d more than once. Except for 2019, we took over-the-counter meds. We reluctantly wore masks when required.

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 17:10:09   #
Ricktloml
 
DAV wrote:
I had the same experience with our 'doctor'.


I am very thankful I have a Dr. who had the courage to just "mildly" pressure me...then followed my wishes and left it go. I know "they" were pressuring him

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 18:12:39   #
publican
 
ExperienceCounts wrote:
Neither of us took the shot, both of us are heart patients, and both of us have had C***d more than once. Except for 2019, we took over-the-counter meds. We reluctantly wore masks when required.


Well, that proves it.

Reply
 
 
Jul 11, 2024 18:21:54   #
AuH20
 
AuntiE wrote:
Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
By Bob Unruh

Physicians who were threatened and abused by various tyrannical credentialing boards that sought to suppress anything but the official government story line about C****-** have been given the go-ahead by the courts to sue.

The case was brought by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons Education Foundation against the American Board of Internal Medicine, the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Board of Family Medicine and the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security over various situations in which those organizations threatened or actually acted against doctors because of what they said about C***D.

Their medical opinions essentially contradicted the government’s talking points about taking various experimental shots, which evidence now shows have been extremely damaging to thousands of people.

The challenge focused on the coordinated campaigns to “censor and chill the speech of physicians,” with special targeting of those who criticized the unfounded positions taken by White House adviser Anthony F***i, lockdowns, masks and more.

A district judge had claimed that the AAPS “lacked standing,” but a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has reversed that dismissal.

It’s headed back to the lower courts for discovery, and potentially a full trial.

A report in the Federalist documented the ruling.

“The AAPS Educational Foundation brought the case because of a series of physicians who were being threatened with loss of their board certification because they had made comments that were either critical of the C***D0 v*****es or that advocated for early treatment with repurposed drugs,” explained AAPS chief Jane Orient.

“Particularly bad were the three defendants of the internal board who were also engaged in threatening physicians who supported the overturning of Roe v. Wade or had anything to say about a******n and its side effects.”


Dr. Ryan Cole, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., and Dr. Peter McCullough at a roundtable in Washington, D.C., on the C****-** v*****es and the link to injuries.

The case also cited the egregious censorship schemes that were being developed by Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board which, Orient explained, “was dev**ed to seeking out and finding ‘disinformation,’ ‘malinformation,’ and, or pressuring people, including those on specialty boards and social media companies, to take action.”

Public outrage that the government would assemble such a force prompted that particular coalition to be disbanded, but that doesn’t mean that scheme has been abandoned.

When physicians made public comments, press comments, testified in hearings – and their statements did not align with the Biden administration’s political agenda – they were threatened with loss of their credentials, which in many cases could mean the loss of their income.

The power structure simply labeled, without evidence, dissenting opinions as “misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation,” the case charged.

One facing punishment was Dr. Peter McCullough, a professor of medicine for decades, who was forced into independent practice over his views after those in “academic practice” refused to allow him free speech.

He questioned, during a state legislative hearing, the experimental shots, and the ABIM later adopted a rule about “misinformation” and retroactively applied it to him, the report said.

McCullough confirmed to The Federalist he provided documentation and evidence regarding his opinions on C***D, but the organization refused to accept it.

The power structure lined up against the dissenting doctors including those credentialing agencies as well as insurance companies that would refuse to provide compensation for treatment if the doctor’s opinion differed from theirs.

Lawyer Andrew Schlafly, litigating for AAPS, said, “Viewpoint-based censorship of freedom of speech is one of the most important issues today, and essential to the future of both our country and the ability of patients to obtain quality medical care. It is vital that we restore freedom of speech and end improper interference with it. Physicians must be able to speak candidly about issues of public concern without fear of retaliation.”

Let’s not forget that hospitals/doctors were paid EXTRA for each “C****-** ” diagnosis they made. Can you say “bribery” boys and girls?
b Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the ... (show quote)


This is not a surprise. President Trump made an error, during C***D, in depending upon individuals who had zero direct patient care experience. The CDC allowed the public to see how seriously inept they are. NIH’s réputation is in shreds as a direct result of Dr. F***i and Director Collins.

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 18:24:23   #
AuH20
 
Ricktloml wrote:
I am very thankful I have a Dr. who had the courage to just "mildly" pressure me...then followed my wishes and left it go. I know "they" were pressuring him


My “grannies” physician, not once pushed the experimental shot on them. It was mentioned as being available. That was the totality of the conversation. They elected not to have it.

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 19:51:57   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
[quote=AuntiE]Coordinated campaigns to ‘censor and chill the speech of physicians’
By Bob Unruh


My doctor asked me once, I replied no.
Then he asked, aren't you scared, my reply. No.
No flu shots or shots of any kind.
I traveled in a car with a friend for several days that had C***D.
I went for testing, the result was no contact and a negative infection.

Reply
Jul 11, 2024 20:32:54   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
AuH20 wrote:
My “grannies” physician, not once pushed the experimental shot on them. It was mentioned as being available. That was the totality of the conversation. They elected not to have it.


How are the senior control pod, still out of control?

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.