As many of you know, Daniel Smith was found “guilty” of 5 out of 6 charges brought by the Justice Department for selling the product known as “MMS.” Here is the link to the News Release that they issued a few days ago. (Click here.)
It’s really difficult to read the allegations that were so purposefully fabricated and diligently pursued in order to “send a dissuasive message” to the public, and anyone who sells MMS, to “steer a wide berth” around this product. The message they are also sending, however, is that they are not concerned about public health, because they flat-out suggest that the “claims” associated with the use of MMS, are impossible, when reality says, they are true.
This isn’t an MMS thing, as I have said before. Balance is the basis of all health. In medicine, the state of natural balance is referred to homeostasis.
A balanced mind, emotions, and body chemistry are all interconnected and interrelated. Yet, Standard Medical Practice calls for an attack on the balance of body chemistry on or even before birth, through the use of drugs and vaccines, and no one who is a “non-professional” that disagrees is supposed to object. Even medical professionals, such as “Dr. Oz,” have come under attack by other doctors, for not being in sync with the standard medical mantra that “vaccines are good.”
The public is not supposed to notice the source of the travesty that is going on to them, and in front of their eyes.
Since “everybody does it”, and is told to do it, the practice of vaccinations not only continues; the frequency intensifies. Pressures to remove parent’s volitional options have been on the increase, while “incentivised professionals” continue to push the potion at every turn.
Are you okay with this?
I don’t proclaim to know why these people are doing this, not just to Daniel Smith, but to you and your children, and me and mine. These policies increase the likelihood of disease, but they are pushed on the premise that they decrease certain pathologies. Medical science acts as though each pathology is unrelated to any other. It condones giving a patient a multiplicity of toxic chemicals, each with their own “side-effects,” but has trumpeted its “success” at convicting Daniel Smith for attempting to defraud a defrauder, by giving the public something that was shown to help them, and can be explained simply enough that a 10-year old can understand.
Their published reasoning for “stopping” Daniel was and is filled with holes. The jury never heard Daniel Smith’s defense, nor did the Court appear interested, for a hint of “fairness” or impartiality. I was not present, but the record of documents that I have read, including motions that were issued and denied, would be statistically impossible with an impartial judge in an impartial setting.
I have been on the road for almost one month, but took time to share these thoughts on camera.