- Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD – Inventor of Email, Systems Scientist, engineer, educator – has a sit down conversation style interview with El American about the truth about Election Systems Integrity.
- In Massachusetts, it was Republicans who committed Election Fraud against a Republican candidate like Dr.SHIVA, the Massachusetts GOP found a noname to run just to make sure that they would end up with a designated loser.
- In the September primary of 2020 Dr.SHIVA won in the hand counted counties, such as Franklin County, Massachusetts, he won by nearly 10 points and in every other county done by machines, we were robbed with 60/40 60/40 60/40 60/40 across the board – to a guy who nobody knew, who had no campaign, no lawn signs, no bumper stickers, no supporters.
- EchoMail was asked to look at the mail-in ballot envelopes. We found various anomalies and these anomalies need to be explained. We discovered many examples of one individual with the same name, same household, having two Voter IDs, and submitted two envelopes. And both of those two Voter IDs were counted. Now, this is a serious anomaly.
- The most important thing for people to understand is that the Left & Right, Republicans & Democrats have no interest in solving Election Integrity. Just like they have no interest in ever solving immigration. They have no interest in solving racism, because both parties profit from it. They keep the divide & the dialectic going.
Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai: Hello everyone. This is Dr.Shiva Ayyadurai. Welcome. We are going to wait. This is Dr.Shiva direct. We’re in Miami with a great publication called El American with Ben Q. here. And Ben and I are going to have a conversation about all sorts of topics. Yeah, take it away.
Ben: Well, thank you so much, Dr.Shiva, absolute pleasure to be here with this man. MIT PhD, the inventor of email, involved in all kinds of things: politicians, philanthropists, software programmers, all that kind of thing. So, I hope it’ll be a very fascinating conversation.
Now. The purpose of this conversation really is that he’s going to treat me a bit like an idiot, because I am a bit of an idiot on a lot of these topics. And I really want to get to the bottom of a few things, a lot of the questions people ask me about, about politics, about medicine.
So, we’ll get right into it. So, for an idiot like myself, can you explain in the simplest possible terms, how and why, or what we know why, but why on how the election was stolen from Donald Trump?
Dr.SHIVA: Well, then I think the first thing we need to do is talk about what we mean by, you know, stolen, these things called Election Fraud. And I just want to define that very simply for you.
It was when I started getting involved in this, you know, back in September, in my own election, when we saw the absolute stealing that took place in my Massachusetts Republican primary election, that’s when it got me interested from an engineering standpoint to really understand these Election Systems.
And there’s two parts of the Election System. One part of the Election System is where you can count votes, hand counted paper ballots – like we have this paper here, people fill out the paper and then go vote. Human beings, actually review those ballots, etc.
In Massachusetts, for example, it was Republicans who committed Election Fraud against a Republican, which is me, we had 3,000 volunteers on the ground, we were everywhere, the Massachusetts GOP found – a nobody to run – just to make sure that they would end up with a designated loser.
Well, what do we find out there? We found out on September 2020, I win in the hand counted county, predominately all white working class people in Franklin County, Massachusetts, many counties, I win there by by nearly 10 points, Massachusetts, and in every other county, I was running for US Senate, I lose 60-40, 60-40, 60-40, 60-40, 60-40, to a guy who nobody knew who had no campaign, no lawn signs, no bumper stickers, nothing.
We raised 10 times more money than him, everyone knew us. And that’s when I never thought Election Fraud took place in the United States, I thought it was a quote unquote, a third world thing. And that led me to apply all my engineering systems skills.
And you know, my MIT software engineering skills to understand that the entire voting process in the United States is a complex system, people come in to vote, they can vote by paper, hand counted by paper, or when they vote by paper, their ballot gets scanned into something called a image, a Ballot Image.
And a machine looks for all those dots and, you know, circles to count it using its AI. Well, so I quote unquote, lost in all of these counties, we’ve had electronic voting machines. As I learned about this, I found out that in Massachusetts, they deleted those images of the ballots, which are supposed to save for 22 months, according to federal law, that led to me filing lawsuits that led to me doing analysis.
And it’s a whole nother topic, which we can talk about, but fundamentally before Donald Trump’s election, on November 3rd, I had already figured out all the failures in the US systems of elections.
Ben: So image deletion – is Ballot Images that delete, that’s the vote essentially,
Dr.SHIVA: that’s the ballot
Ben: concept for you. They protect it by your name that goes into the machine. And then what you’re saying is that it disappeared.
Dr.SHIVA: In Massachusetts, exactly, in our primary. In fact, when we filed a public records request, and we told the Secretary of State – I want the ballot images, they openly say, “Oh, we deleted them. We don’t have to save it by Massachusetts law.” Well, the law is for a federal election passed 50 years ago by a democrat majority.
Any record in connection with the election will be preserved for 22 months. So, that led to a lawsuit that led to us uncovering that when I shared this on Twitter, I was thrown off by the government contacting Twitter – because what I had uncovered was a systems failure. No different than remembering when the space shuttle blew up, they found that the O ring was wrong. This was many years ago.
So, my conclusion out of this entire thing was that when we talk about fraud or things being stolen, Ben, I look at it in a very simple way. You want me to make things simple, very simply.
Imagine to have a process to make cookies, you have to get the flour, you have to find the chocolate chips, you have to put it together, then you have to make you go through a process, right? Well, typically, in any major industry, the United States airline industry, or any major industry, those processes are very well documented. So, you could replicate them by regulators, etc.
Ben: So, if some poison, let’s say they could, you could go track it, you could say, and it came from this batch from this.
Dr.SHIVA: My dad was a chemical engineer for many years for the largest manufacturing companies like Colgate, Palmolive. When they produce something, if there’s a problem, the manufacturing processes can directly find out where it can’t be. It’s called the Standardized Operating Procedures. What I discovered was, first of all, numbers weren’t matching up. System A is not communicating with system B.
The people are very opaque. They’re not transparent. They delete stuff. And if you challenge them, there’s this culture of who the hell are you to ask me, right? So, by the time Trump’s election took place on November 3, I had figured out the mathematics and I figured out the system’s failures. And when Trump’s election took place, I started seeing anomalies.
I did the math, I was the first guy who did the math in Michigan showed some very interesting anomalies. And then we did stuff in Georgia. And, the work we were doing started going viral. When Arizona came – the audit in Arizona, which I participated in. At that time, we had found out that the numbers didn’t add up. It’s simple math.
That led into the Arizona audit taking place, as you saw recently, and 20 days before that audit was to be completed. I was called in to look at what’s called the images not of the ballots, but the envelopes. So, what are the envelopes? Well, in Arizona, like in Arizona, 92% of the votes in that election took place mail in ballots. So 90-92% of those of the election in Arizona was through mail in ballots, which means people are at home, they filled out an envelope. And they submitted it
Ben: So only 8% of people get it on the day of the election.
Ben: So basically, November 3 was election day, it was October, September was the election.
Dr.SHIVA: Exactly. Exactly. So it’s 92% of those elections, of that nearly 1.9 million ballots for mail in ballots that came in where people had taken envelopes, and they signed the outside of those envelopes with their name. And then they put their ballot in and they submit it.
So, what happens when that happens, those envelopes come in, and they’re scanned in a facility into images. Those images are then reviewed by human volunteers who look at the signature on that. So if it’s Ben Q. – for signature verification, or they look at the signatures on the image, everything’s, and they look at the signatures on file, if they match, then your ballot is opened, and then it’s counted.
If it’s not, if it doesn’t match, they have a process called curing where people call the person up if their name is on the ballot. Anyway, you can think about the complexity of this process. I would say 99.999% of Arizonans or Americans don’t even know about this process.
I was asked to review the images of those envelopes and see if there was a signature in the signature area, if there was a scribble or if there was a blank. So, that’s what I was hired to do 20 days before and we did a great job. We got everything done.
And what we found out was – the first thing we found out was there were 6545 More ballots than the envelopes. Which isn’t that important. So, every ballot should have an envelope. So we found that they had counted 6000, close to 6500 or more,
Ben: So you could have more envelopes than a ballot basically. We should have to check if you could have more ballots than envelopes.
Dr.SHIVA: Well you should have one ballot for every one envelope.
Ben: Okay. I didn’t know and they didn’t match.
Dr.SHIVA: They had more ballots. So where are the envelopes? That’s one of the anomalies. We never accused anyone of fraud. We said listen, I’m a scientist. Here’s an anomaly please
Ben: In the sum of how many did you say?
Dr.SHIVA: 6545. I remember that the election was lost by 10,000 votes in Arizona. This was just in one county, Maricopa County. So, in one county we see that 6500 More ballots and envelopes in Maricopa County alone 1.9 million mail in ballots came in.
Out of those 1.9 million ballots when they did the signature verification. They said only 587 of those ballots didn’t match up with the signatures, a very low signature rate – three one hundredths of 1%. So, I also said that’s another anomaly. Right?
You know, it’s a very low signature mismatch rate. And like this, we pointed out anomalies. For example, we had found out that there were duplicate envelopes. That was coming literally after election day – nearly 17,000. The key point I want to make here is that we propose different inom not proposed, we found different anomalies.
We presented that to the Senate, we said, Look, we’re not even claiming any fraud took place here. We’re just saying the election officials need to let us know why this is occurring. You follow what I’m saying? And that resulted not in a proper dialogue, the election officials going to their media proxies, and attacking me as a “conspiracy theorist”, as an “anti-vaxxer” as a guy, you know, trying to take away the fact that I did invent email just attacking.
Forget the fact that I four degrees from MIT have spent my entire life as an engineering systems guy who has worked with the largest companies in the world, discrediting. So, then I had to expose them as saying, hey, look, if you want to have a dialogue, why don’t we have a dialogue?
This is not about Election Fraud. This is about in an engineering system, we found anomalies, like we said, with a cookie thing, right? And we just want answers. And the more transparent we can be, it’s gonna strengthen our elections.
And so I want to say, in my definition, as a scientist and an engineer, the real quote, unquote, fraud is the lack of transparency, and the lack of openness, because if you just told us what it is, we could say, Oh, that’s easy. Oh, we understand why that happened. So, that’s what I see as fraud – is a lack of transparency.
Ben: So, you actually contend the idea that the actions from quick on stolen? What you’re saying is that it was a very, the process was lacking transparency. And therefore that needs to be investigated, which is a very different position for saying the action was stolen outright. And that is, that is your state of position?
Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai: Well, what I’m saying is, our election messages, we’ve found clear evidence of the Ballot Images being deleted. Right, that’s fraud. In Arizona, we found these very interesting anomalies.
And without explanation of those anomalies in an open way, the real issue here is why aren’t the election officials just openly having a conversation? I was hired as an auditor by the people of Arizona, let’s sit across the table, let’s just go through the findings. Answer them.
Ben: So here’s my question. In the end, in the aftermath of the 2020 election. In the aftermath of the 2020 election, there were various efforts by generalists, Rudy Giuliani, the whole Trump team, and they took these to courts. And some of these were Republican controlled courts you know, appointed by Republican politicians.
Now, why is it that not a single one of these lawsuits has gained any traction? Why have we not seen anything? Kind of concrete in the sense of, changing the election system or challenging the result of this election? Is it all one big conspiracy, or is it that the courts weren’t convinced by the evidence? Why is it?
Dr.SHIVA: So, it’s a good question. Look, we have two lawsuits in Massachusetts. Our lawsuits, I represented myself. We brought it to historic points, and we can talk more about that. I know many of these people. What’s happened with any issue right now in the United States, be it mandates, be it racism on it, quote, unquote, Election Integrity, it always becomes a Left or Right issue.
And in fact, so one side says racism exists, the other side’s racism doesn’t exist. One side says Election Integrity exists, Election Fraud exists. The other side says it doesn’t. That left, right, that pro & anti stuff has created a condition where we never get to the real issue.
When we expose what occurred in Massachusetts, long before the general election, when we started exposing what occurred at the national level, the campaign for Election Fraud made $400 million.
It became a money making business, not to really solve the issue. People are sending out donations. If you look at the Trump campaign, the RNC made it. They raised a great $300 million. And God knows what happened with that money.
The Election Integrity movement was a movement on the left for many years, nearly 25 years saying votes were being stolen from minorities’ rights. Now the right is involved. But I would argue that both sides do not really want to solve – this may sound antithetical – they do not want to solve the real systemic issues in Election Integrity.
And this is my conclusion having gone into it deeply. The election systems in the United States are very squishy, meaning there’s all different places where you could manipulate it. They’re not tight, like if you fly a plane from San Diego to Boston, right?
The air traffic systems, the airplane systems, I mean, you don’t see planes falling out of the sky every day, right? Because we have Standardized Operating Procedures, you walk into an airplane, you’re not thinking Oh, my God, the plane is gonna fall out of the sky.
But today, 50% of Americans don’t trust the Election Systems.
Ben: And that’s a real real problem,
Dr.SHIVA: It’s a problem because of the lack of transparency. And my conclusion is both parties. Republicans have cheated on Republicans in my case. Democrats have cheated on Democrats, like in Tim Canova’s case, with Debbie Wasserman Democrats steal from Republicans, Republicans and Democrats, they have made the system squishy, has in my view, elections are frankly, selections, and they’ve created an environment that they have, they do not want to, they want to keep it sort of malleable.
So, they can decide who the winner is: the left or the right, Republican or Democrat. So, many of those court cases, many of those lawsuits if you look at them, they’re garbage. The lawsuits were written so poorly, forget even whether the courts liked it or not.
The arguments, the case law was done horribly, in Massachusetts – the stuff I filed, actually made it to much more levels, much more deeper levels. Through the legal system, if you go read those lawsuits, they were poorly done. They didn’t go to the heart of the issue. That’s what’s gone wrong. In your view, it’s not in my view, there are cases and there are people making money off, quote, unquote, Election Fraud.
Ben: That makes sense.
Dr.SHIVA: They don’t want to solve the problem.
Ben: If I’m to kind of summarize this in a simple way, your take is that you’re not saying Joe Biden or Democrats stole X many votes or whatever, what you’re saying is that this was not a transparent election.
And therefore you want to investigate it. And what the mainstream media is saying, Oh, this was the most secure election in history. And someone on the Republican side saying, Biden stole it, they took this X money, X amount of votes. Your take is that things happen that we’re not transparent. And therefore we should investigate.
Dr.SHIVA: And there are serious anomalies that we should investigate, if a plane crash took place. And I was brought in to audit that, I’d say, Hey, I saw this, this this. If you’re running a company, and your customer put out a piece of software, and a customer calls you and says, Hey, Ben, you know, I noticed this in the software, your reaction would be say you’re an idiot, you’re a conspiracy theorist, here’s anti-vaxxer -F off and hang up the phone.
Right? That is the attitude we have among election officials. So, the attitude should be Thank you very much for that idea. Let’s go look at it to understand why they’re 6,545 More ballots than envelopes, we’ll get back to you Dr.Shiva, right. Instead of doing that, “you’re an idiot, you’re an idiot.”
And now in the modern world of engineering systems, which is a world we live in, in the 21st century, you want to welcome people whatever this system is airplane systems, your healthcare systems, when people report something’s wrong, you want to accept it, you want to go find a root cause and address it.
So, neither party wants to do this one party is saying there was absolute fraud da da da, and they’ve actually participated in quote unquote fraud. The other side denies that it’s occurred, because they want to keep the status quo. This is why we need to take a much more practical working man’s approach to this, Hey, there’s a system here. I can’t understand certain things.
Ben: So just to be clear, you were heavily involved in the Arizona audit. And again, I’ve seen mixings on that. I’ve seen people saying or, outlets saying, Oh, well, it proves that Biden won by 300 more votes. My understanding, correct me if I’m wrong, is that, Sure. It said that Biden had won by three hundred or more votes. But that was only based upon the flawed system that you’re
Dr.SHIVA: Because I’m saying the cookie is coming at the end. You’re looking at a process, at the end, and you’re saying everything matches?
Ben: So what did you prove in that audit?
Dr.SHIVA: What we remember there was two sets of auditors. One was one company called Cyber ninjas.
My company’s EchoMail, we were asked to look at the mail-in ballot envelopes. What we quote, unquote, prove or demonstrate – is there are various anomalies and that these anomalies need to be explained. And now that has gone to the Attorney General.
I’m going to give you another anomalyin the Maricopa County Arizona audit. So for example, we discovered many examples of one individual with the same name, same household, having two Voter IDs, and submitted two envelopes. And both of those two Voter IDs were counted. Now, this is a serious anomaly.
Ben: This is something they talk about all the time, dead people voting, et al.
Dr.SHIVA: But this is not even, it doesn’t even go there. It’s the same person, Ben Q, living in, let’s say, one main street. With the name Ben Q, you actually have two Voter IDs. And you actually submitted two different ballots. And both of them were counted.
And we have multiple examples of that. So the issue here is, how could something like that even happen? Why is one individual having two Voter IDs? Why were both ballots counted? So in science, you find interesting anomalies, as engineers, we propose it, maybe there’s a legitimate explanation.
So, we don’t want to make any conclusions here. Because fraud is ultimately determined by the Attorney General, they’re the ones who prosecute stuff, they have to take to the court system.
So, I think the most important thing for people to understand is that the left and the right in my view, Republicans and Democrats have no interest in solving Election Integrity, just like they have no interest in ever solving immigration. Like they have no interest in solving racism, because both parties profit from it. They keep the divide.
Ben: by maintaining the status quo. So tell me, so you, you’ve done the Arizona audit. What are the next steps in terms of because it’s clear to me, anyone who thinks that Trump is coming back by January into office or whatever is completely deluded.
Joe Biden, is for better or worse, the President of the United States? What can be done in this process in terms of finding out more about the 2020 election? What other steps are left to take with what end goal?
Dr.SHIVA: What the end goal is, we were asked in the Maricopa county audit to submit all the evidence to the Attorney General, which we’ve done. We’ve submitted images.
Ben: Is he currently reviewing that?
Dr.SHIVA: That’s what the attorney general’s reviewing. It is up to the Attorney General of Arizona, to decide if he wants to prosecute.
Right, so the Senate, so remember, you have the legislative branch, you have the executive branch, the Attorney General’s under the executive branch, the Arizona Senate is the one that funded the audit.
And we presented our stuff to the Arizona Senate, in a public hearing. The Arizona Senate then went to the Attorney General, to have this said, Hey, we have some anomalies. And then the Attorney General issued a letter I think was on October 6, saying or September 25, I’m sorry, saying that we want Dr.Shiva and the other auditors to submit direct evidence to them, which we did about a week ago.
Ben: Now. It’s really just a waiting game.
Dr.SHIVA: It’s up to the attorney general.
Ben: And you’re gonna do your planning audits elsewhere, I assume
Dr.SHIVA: We may be called in to do other places, and they may do more stuff here based on what the attorney general wants.
Ben: Say you get east swing states, Arizona has never typically been a swing state. But if you take if we take Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, just as two examples, Michigan, those three states, and you do audits and each one, and they all come up serious anomaly and all the Attorney General’s investigate and find that the election was full of anomalies and full of things that needs to be need to be investigated. What happens then? Do they redo the election? Dothey say we just need to fix this for the future elections? What is the step down? What is the end game?
Dr.SHIVA: I’m not sure. So remember, the Attorney General can prosecute people, they can run discovery, they can do various things. That’s under the purview of the attorney general.
Ben: So really, at this point, it’s just about investigation, exposure, exposing what happened, you’re not gonna overturn this election?
Dr.SHIVA: Well, I think the reality is there have been instances up until one of the things I want to make clear is there was a law passed 52 USC 20701 – 50 years ago by democrat majority, that law was a law to encourage audits after an election for 22 months. It’s a very important law. Everyone needs to understand
Ben: and an audit isn’t going to do any harm.
Dr.SHIVA: No, no, no, because I think the lawmakers recognize there could be crap that occurs during an election. So, you have to give a time where you can audit it. So, anyone who says audits are unAmerican – you shouldn’t do this. It would be like saying an airplane crashes, nothing to see here. Move along. So, an audit should be appreciated.
In fact, whether it’s small anomalies or large, and the reason that was done was so you could do an election recall. So, you could do anything possible. You could if fraud is found, and there have been cases of this, where the governor, whoever would appoint or I don’t know, the procedure, in this case, you could appoint someone new. And you could rerun an entire election, there’s many possibilities that weren’t sort of historically virgin ground.
Ben: But that makes a lot of sense. So it’s kind of, it’s the first time that it’s happening.
Dr.SHIVA: Well it has actually happened at different points in American history. In a president time is in the presidential area with something like this. But the important thing is that people should embrace this concept of an audit. The concept, this is the democratic process,
Ben: because the end game is just transparency,
Dr.SHIVA: its transparency, so fair elections and transparency period.
Ben: So tell me, I’ve got two questions here. Well, the first one is, in legislative terms, what can be done to improve Election Integrity? And well, we’ll focus on that one for now, in legislative terms, I mean, what do you think of the laws that have been passed in Florida and Texas?
Dr.SHIVA: Well, the thing is, the legislators need to take an engineering Systems Approach. And what do I mean by that they need to understand from the time someone walks in, to participate in the election process, and there’s a whole bunch of processes till the time their vote is counted.
There’s many different processes the legislature should make, and should pass laws to make sure all of those processes are transparent to the public. If they’re going to use mail in ballots. In my view, what’s happening is with technology, which can centralize voting to one, the votes to one facility, this is not a good thing.
I don’t think the founders of this country wanted centralization. In my view, ultimately, it should be, you go to vote on voting day, you go to a typical place you vote in person, hand counted paper ballots.
Election day should be a national holiday, young kids should participate, our community should participate and votes should be counted. You scan the ballots, put them up on the cloud, because it doesn’t have anyone’s names on it. Full transparency.
Ben: The whole mail-in system has
Dr.SHIVA: too many areas of errors here.
Dr.SHIVA: Yeah, exactly. You forget, there are too many areas for error.
Ben: Now, I was at a conference recently, and I didn’t really understand what the technology was that they were outlining this was in Utah, but I do know that the basis of what they were saying, it’s very exciting. You’re a brilliant man.
Surely we can create a secure system? With all the technological developments, we can put people into space and whatnot. Surely we can create a foolproof Election System, perhaps on the blockchain, using Blockchain technology that is totally transparent. And that can’t be hacked. And, serves as the basis for the integrity of future elections. Is that possible?
Dr.SHIVA: So you’re asking a great question. So we, so if you look at any process, like you use, you said, we can put people up in space. Taking and building a rocket and making sure that goes into space and people back at the complex engineering systems process.
You may read on January 26 1986, there was something called the Challenger space shuttle. The morning of that there were icicles on the space shuttle here in Cape Canaveral. We’re in Miami here today. And I used to love to watch a shuttle launch.
And I saw these icicles, I said, I hope they’re not going to launch that. And several hours later, I got up and I saw the space shuttle blowing up. There was an engineer by the name of Alan McDonald, who was the chief engineer, NASA was pressuring him to sign off so they could do the launch. He goes, I’m not going to do this.
He goes – because the O rings were never tested under this temperature. Anyway, the shuttle blows up. He pointed out a simple anomaly. So, look at election systems. And by the way, engineers know that every little thing matters.
But in election systems, we’ve created this very complex Mail-in ballot process, many things can go wrong. The reason I bring this up is if you want to do something in life, you need to look at what technology you’re going to use.
Would you use a jackhammer to put in a little nail, it would work? But you probably destroyed the entire table too. Right? You would use something called a hammer. I would argue Brexit in England was done with hand counted paper ballots, and they did it.
Ben: All elections are.There’ve been a few questions about kind of sort of ballot dumps and kind of coercing communities to vote. Labour. But generally speaking, my understanding is that the election system in Britain is pretty good.
And what’s more with Brexit, the establishment did not want Brexit to happen. But the votes were counted. They were counted fairly. And there was a majority for Brexit. And that’s, that’s something my own father talks about a lot, which is, he’s not a fan of these electronic voting machines, we just have simple, simple ballots, right? And they’re hand counted.
Dr.SHIVA: So, if you think about a piece of paper, filling in your thing, and a human – two human beings review it, maybe they scan it, and they put it up. Right technology for the right situation. Why do we need these electronic voting machines?
You can do them faster, supposedly. Maybe a hammer is much better. And my argument is that, yes, we want technology. But who benefits? Who made these decisions to use electronic voting machines? What does it actually benefit? And is it the right technology for something where you can use hand count or paper ballots, simpler, decentralized, easier, fully transparent, you do the images. So yeah, we can do blockchain.
But a lot of people don’t understand blockchain. We’re talking about a very simple democratic process. It can’t be that, it shouldn’t be that difficult. Why not just make it hand counted paper ballots, and you get a receipt? You make sure the person is who they are? Yes, there are people who are disabled, elderly people can’t come. For those people – we make accommodations. That’s not
Ben: a very good excuse to say even.
Dr.SHIVA: So I think the right technology for the right situation. But when you live in a world where we can use very complex technology that only five people know how to do, there’s a serious problem there.
You’ve created a democratic conundrum. Very few people know how that works. And you’ve lost democracy. So I think it’s a socio-technical systems problem. It’s not just a technology issue, it is if this technology is good for all of society.
Ben: Final thing, and I should have actually or backtrack a little bit here. But for me, as someone who doesn’t understand technology, and who doesn’t understand these systems, for me, the anomaly in America, the 2020 election was quite clear.
I was watching the election on a zoom call with some friends. And we were saying, oh, Trump’s gonna win this in a landslide. I mean, he’s just storming ahead in all these states. And then around kind of 11pm Eastern.
I turned to my friend. You know, the results were coming in very quickly. And I said, it’s all stopped. I mean, it’s literally just stopped. And it stopped for about half an hour,
Dr.SHIVA: It was around I think about 95%.
Ben: Hi, I thought it was more sort of 7580. It depends on what state. And then it just stopped. And then everything started moving in Biden’s direction, which struck me and maybe there’s an explanation for it. But it struck me as an extremely strange thing to happen in an election.
And then you had people in Atlanta going home during these elections, you typically count all right, there were lots of strange things that happened on election day. You just told me about that. If there’s any Yes.
Dr.SHIVA: Yes. So here’s again, the issue with technology, and you’re talking to a guy who’s built technology all of his life. So when you saw and, and that’s a serious anomaly.
Ben: So you’re pointing out, I mean, that doesn’t happen in the UK?
Dr.SHIVA: No, no, but you saw an anomaly. Right? No one’s given an explanation for that. No one has there isn’t been Senate hearings on this. If, again, if an airplane blew up, we call a major hearing, right? You bring out all the stops, you have to answer these questions.
So again, I bring back to the central issue, I just put a little thing called Truth Freedom Health, at the bottom – Get Educated or Be Enslaved, one of the things we need to start recognizing is that the 20th century was a century of relatively simple inventions, right? That was disconnected from others.
The 21st century is a century of interconnected systems of inventions. Your iPhone is not just a little phone, it’s connected to a satellite, it’s connected to apps, this thing is connected to all sorts of things. Driverless cars are connected to other things.
These electronic voting systems have multiple stakeholders, many people are involved in the soup of this technology. It’s not just a paper ballot. So when you create complex systems called engineering systems as to what they are, you need to have an educated public who can understand these systems. And that’s called systems science.
And so the educational paradigm has lagged beyond technological advancements. So you have a broad set of the public, which doesn’t understand the complexity of the systems nor do they have the understanding of how to even understand these systems. So what I started doing was recognizing this and this way, you have this division left and right.
So I started about, you know, many years ago, I started creating a course at MIT then we started offering it to the public. It’s basically a Foundations of Systems course. My view is that the more people Let’s start looking at a problem.
And taking a systems approach, what a Systems Approach is, look at the interconnections don’t just take a position. And when you look at the interconnections of something, you can find what the real problem here is with the real solution.
So, when you take a Systems Approach to electronics, or our election issues, you find out the real issue here is that the systems are not transparent. And everyone I’m sure whether you’re left or right, you want transparent systems.
Ben: And there might be an answer to what happened, and this is a point I’ve always made. There’s no such thing as too much transparency.
Dr.SHIVA: Exactly. So you look at something like
Ben: If you’ve got nothing to fear, then they should. I mean, they could make the argument that it’s a waste of money. But ultimately, if that was the most secure this, the most secure, the fairest, freest election in American history, then they should be all for the audits because they’ve got nothing to lose, they’ve got nothing to hide. And
Dr.SHIVA: if you think about any other processor system in the world, again, for those people are entrepreneurs, you guys run a publishing company, let’s say customers called in and they said, Hey, your website’s slow. Would you say, Hey, you’re a conspiracy theory, an anti-vaxxer?
Shut the hell up. You would say thank you, let me go figure out why you find the root cause, you say, Oh, we’re using a bad server. Let’s replace it. For some reason, these unelected officials who run elections believe that they do not have to share anything, that they’re above the law. And that’s what the real quote unquote fraud is here.
Ben: No, and I thank you for your explanations on this, because it’s really fascinating. And I really like your position, which is that it’s not, you’re not saying, they stole X amount of votes that happened, has happened, you’re saying we need transparency, and transparency can never be a bad thing. Um, I just want to follow onto another topic, obviously, another very, very relevant topic, which is about vaccines.
Dr.SHIVA: And by the way, all these stations, watch what words were saying. And they start flagging us. So I use the word “Jabbines”, Jabbines that’s a code word for Vaccination. So I mean, look, that’s how you get over the Thought police,
Ben: I share them, you know, Anthony Fauci, Dr. Fauci is an extremely sinister, dangerous man who’s pretty drunk on power. However, I don’t I’m not of the view that these vaccines are some kind of plan to exterminate half the world population, half the world’s population. What? And I’m not saying that’s your position, either. What is your position on these vaccines, because I’m just gonna put something out there. In June, I took the Pfizer vaccine. I thought on balance, it’s a nasty, it’s a nasty, nasty virus. Lots of my friends are taking it, it’s going to help me, travel and whatnot. I’ll take the damn thing, which is what I did.
Dr.SHIVA: Which is your right, by the way, it is your right.
Ben: I took it and I had symptoms, but everyone said that was normal. And about three, four days afterwards, I started having weird feelings in my heart. And, to cut a long story short four months after that, and I don’t think the issue is too serious, but my heart has, has had – I’ve had, I felt things that I’ve never held before. Palpitations, heartburn, all this kind of thing. My theory and with the doctors I’ve spoken to, is that it appears to be a case of light/mild myocarditis.
Now, they’ve admitted they say that myocarditis is a side effect and can be a side effect of the vaccine. But the point I’m making is that I know firsthand that the vaccines sure might work to some people, but they also cause some people harm. So you’re, so tell me, what is your position on these vaccines? Why are governments so keen for us to take? Not just two, but 3, 4, 5, 6? What is your take on this rollout? This global rollout?
Dr.SHIVA: So just to set a level with your audience, people should understand that. My PhD is in a field called Biological Engineering, which was a department that MIT created in 2007. One of the professors in that department was a mentor of mine was an undergrad, his guy by the name Bob Langer, who created liposomal technology, who actually made $3 billion off of Moderna.
So, the Department of Biological Engineering was created to take an engineering approach to biology, which was missing, it was in chemistry and was in other fields. I’m considered one of the leading guys on the immune system.
Which you won’t see on Wikipedia in November of 2019. As I was invited to give a prestigious lecture, which is a very big honor by the National Science Foundation, which is the number one science organization in the United States, for that matter in the world, on the modern theory, the immune system, so it was in November 2019.
And in that lecture, I said, look, the modern concept of the Jabbination, is based on a model of the immune system that goes back to 1915, which was all about white blood cells. And you had this two-box model. And I, and then I shared the modern theory of the immune system, it’s not just your innate immune system, and then you’re adaptive which creates antibodies, you have the interferon system, you have the mouth, you have the microbiome, in your gut, you have all these different systems.
It’s a very complex, much more complex systems science, advanced since 1915. And my point I made in that lecture was, medicine is moving starting in 2007, to what is called Precision and Personalized medicine, the right medicine, for the right person, at the right time. So for example, in your case, let’s say your doctor knew you have a history of heart issues. I’m not saying you do.
Ben: I don’t but I do have a family history of heart issues.
Dr.SHIVA: So, if research was done, when we give this indication, or whatever the intervention is a vaccine or anything, right? They would say, Hey, we should be careful here, we should watch this closely.
Maybe we shouldn’t do that intervention, we should do this. The right medicine, for the right person, at the right time. That’s called precision and personalized medicine. And that is where medicine in 2007 started moving after the Genome Project ended, because we realized that we have the same number of genes as a worm, we thought we had more genes.
So biology had a revolution in 2003-2007. We need to move towards finding the right medicine for the right person. Alright, so why do I bring this up? So in 2019, I just gave my lecture and I see this quote unquote, Coronavirus pandemic.
And when I saw that, and having been in the field, Fauci promoting everyone should be getting the same medicine for everyone. I said, This guy’s a complete fraud. And I was the first one to bring that up, because I know Fauci and how that entire NIH system runs and that he trolls massive amounts of research dollars to all the major universities.
Ben: The digital news coming out, about the beagles yesterday.
Dr.SHIVA: Right. Like I said this back in 2020. And, I said that this guy has enormous power over all of these scientists. I happen to be a scientist who’s not dependent on NIH funding. I created my own companies.
I was the first one who said this, quote, unquote, “pandemic” will go down in history as one of the most powerful advertising campaigns intended to depress economies, destroy, dissent, and destroy our health that went viral. No medical doctor said anything.
Rand Paul didn’t say anything. None of these people, James O’Keefe, none of them, right? They watched until a year later when it became convenient now to talk about this because they watched which way the wind was blowing.
This comes back to Alan McDonald, who said, you have to say the right thing, at the right time. Had more scientists come out and called out Fauci, who’s basically a career bureaucrat who is really not a scientist, pushing forward a 100 year old science, when science has advanced, we would have had the problem solved.
In fact, after I did that first tweet, and I did a first video educating the public on the immune system, a senior White House economist called me and he said, Dr.SHIVA, I saw your video, please do more videos. Trump is not listening to The Economist. He is listening to Fauci blindly to The Economist, the economist called me up.
Ben: It’s quite a while because he was making arguments about the economy, shut down the economy like it down and then health. Yes, but when you kill an economy, you also kill health. So the two things are, well, interconnected
Dr.SHIVA: It’s based on a false – so if you just go back to March of 2020, I started doing videos on educating people on natural immunity, the immune system, vitamin d3, they started going viral before people started shutting me down. And I wrote a letter to Trump. I said, please do not shut down the economy.
If you want to follow the principles of personalized medicine, it is still up there. I said take all the people who are truly ill – if they have Coronavirus, you know like we do with any flu, they should be quarantined. They should stay home and get better. The people who are testing who are elderly or sick, they may get it.
Please put them on high dose vitamin d3, vitamin A, quercetin, zinc and I gave a protocol. These are not even my ideas. 20,000 articles have been written on this. I said if people are critically ill please give them high dose vitamin C – 100 grams, you know, titrated. That letter was eventually delivered to Trump but he didn’t do jack.
He kept Fauci, and didn’t do anything. We are the ones who sponsored the #FireFauci campaign. We raised over 200,000 Close to 200,000 signatures delivered to him. Now Rand Paul is on the bandwagon Fire Fauci, but he says cha-ching give me money, cha-ching give me money. The point is that Fauci is really not a scientist. He’s a bureaucrat.
Now you link back to the fact over the last 10 years, pharmaceutical companies have been burning and crying, their pharmaceutical drugs are losing money, it takes a very long time for pharmaceutical drug to come to market, it takes 15 years and $5 billion, and you can sue a pharmaceutical drug company if their drug fails. Now go over to vaccines, the jabbines are growing at 17%.
You can’t, they’re not regulated, really, they’re called a biologic, you don’t need to go through as much testing and thanks to Operation Warp Speed by Trump, they can get them through like that.
So, what we have right now, is that pharmaceutical companies, Pfizer, most people don’t know this lost $25 billion in the last seven years, $25 billion in pharmaceutical drugs, they’re gonna make up that much money in just the next year and a half, with the Jabbine.
You see, the big elephant in the room is jabbines as the Savior for Big Pharma, which is failing. Follow the money.
Ben: And Big Pharma has always been known to be one of those powerful corporate entities.
Dr.SHIVA: Trump did Big Pharma what Obama did for Big Banks.
Ben: But I mean, I’m just gonna,
Dr.SHIVA: that’s that’s my position,
Ben: make this point to a lot of people that Trump you said Trump did nothing. And I’m afraid a lot of people don’t like it when I say this. But Trump did nothing on a lot of things. And the big thing, he did nothing with Big Tech, and he would have won that election in a landslide if he taken on the issue of Big Tech. And he didn’t do that. So that’s really unfortunate.
Well, that’s that, that’s very interesting. And you’ve provided again, really kind of credible and easy to understand arguments about both the vaccine and the election, which were actually two of the biggest questions facing us today.
Dr.SHIVA: While the other is, well, you just brought up censorship. We had the censorship, mandates, you have elections becoming selections, and then you have censorship. And the real issue of censorship. Our lawsuit in Massachusetts discovered where we were the ones I didn’t when I ran for Senate unexposed ballot images were deleted. The Secretary of State of Massachusetts contacted Twitter and threw me off, our lawsuit showed.
Ben: Are you on Twitter now days?
Dr.SHIVA: No no, we were taken – thrown off
Dr.SHIVA: Permanently. And it was when I exposed but our lawsuit is a historic lawsuit because it exposed that the government of the United States, all governments have created a partnership with Big Tech.
And we figured out all the mechanics of it, we figured it out and it’s all published. We found that the government has, for example, Twitter, a “Trusted Twitter Partnership (TTP).
It started in England, the Partnership Support Portal was developed first by Twitter in England and it was deployed in India, then Australia and Taiwan and brought here, government and Big Tech are one.
Where the government begins and Big Tech ends nobody knows. Government launders censorship of American citizens to Big Tech. That is what our lawsuit showed, we don’t have the First Amendment in this country.
Ben: And this is one of the things I’ve found funny, which is that some people say, Oh, well, the big, bipartisan consensus on Big Tech, you know, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, they don’t like Big Tech.
And it’s like, well, no, the only difference between the Democrats who don’t like Big Tech and the Republicans who don’t like Big Tech, is that the Democrats who don’t like Big Tech don’t think they are censoring enough, they say they need more censorship. So it’s a complete non-starter, that’s the whole thing.
Dr.SHIVA: One of the things we need to understand is that the government of the United States starting after 911 created the Patriot Act, which allows – and then Trump extended the Patriot Act.
We gotta remember this, CISA, the cyber security infrastructure security agency, was an organization spun out of the Department of Homeland Security’s which was authorized to create a way to circumvent the First Amendment.
That’s what our lawsuit exposed and they created an infrastructure where state election officials can report a US citizen to this nonprofit infrastructure, which will do the censorship.
So governments can have plausible deniability, and they’re so the term we call it as laundering censorship, laundering censorship, government launders.
So there’s a cozy arrangement with the government and Big Tech.
Ben: And one thing I find fascinating, so I sort of go off on a tangent here, but is that you know, Jack Dorsey – He likes to characterize himself as a bit of a libertarian and pushing cryptocurrency and he says, banning Trump sets a bad precedent, which, raises the question is he even really in control of Twitter? I don’t know.
Dr.SHIVA: He isn’t. So Jack Dorsey, you know, most of these guys are puppets. Jack Dorsey, for example, went all the way to India, you know, and met with lower caste women saying how he’s against the caste system in India, right?
Well, he just threw off a low caste me, dark skin, me – Republican who ran for office who exposed state election officials his Twitter collaborated with the government. Jack Dorsey’s is essentially a puppet. You know, everything he does is – the guy is a hypocrite, like most liberal elites are.
The liberal elites are typically the racist, the liberal elites, that real racism, not the fake race. Perpetuate it, there’s a real racism.
Ben: like when they throw their thing at Larry elder, with the gorilla, right?
Dr.SHIVA: Right. So we have a multi racial aristocracy now in the world, black, white, yellow, the Obamas are the ones who unleashed this multiracial aristocracy of liberal racism. And what I mean by that is, if you’re a white guy from the south, you must hate black people.
If you’re an Indian guy, you must move your head left or right, and you must be ready to take a good beating, you won’t defend yourself, you will surely not tell the truth. And if you’re beaten up, you’ll say, Okay, I agree with you.
So the idea is if the goal of this liberal racism is to put people in a box, and when you step out of it, to publicly lynch you. So that’s what’s actually going on. So the liberal elites are the racist. So Jack Dorsey is a racist. Elizabeth Warren is racist. She uses race for her advancement.
Ben: And they, if racial minorities don’t agree with them, and their agenda then they get, then that’s when their racism really starts. So, what you just said, talking about India, actually perfectly dovetails them to my final question. So, I’m gonna ask because I think it’s interesting. It’s a separate topic, but I believe you’re a vocal supporter of Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi. Is that correct?
Dr.SHIVA: My experience is that I was born in India. I came here in 1970. I grew up in the United States. And I used to go back to India once a year. In 2008, 9 and 10. I went back to India after I finished my PhD at MIT, to do a Fulbright, because I was very interested in the Indian Systems of Medicine.
And so I took three years off to really make a major discovery linking Indian systems of medicine, modern engineering theory, but anyone when I was getting ready to leave India, was recruited by the Prime Minister of India before Modi, a guy called Manmohan Singh to run one of the largest scientific research center initiatives on innovation.
I took that job as a two year job. But before I could even do anything, I discovered massive corruption in the Indian science infrastructure, which hired me. Me being me, I wrote an article and didn’t keep my mouth shut, it got me fired, terminated, evicted. And I got chased out of India under death threats that was in 2010 had to make my way, up to the Nepal border and out.
It’s a very interesting story. Three years after I exposed all this, Modi was elected and he invited me back. The reason Modi’s election was quite revolutionary, is that India never, you know, white men with crowns left India, and brown men with white hats took over.
Gandhi was really not; he was basically an agent of the British, of British colonialism. Gandhi was brought in because there was a truly revolutionary movement brewing in India that wanted to have a good revolution.
And Gandhi was essentially brought to tell the Indian masses, it’s good to get your head bashed in, and speak some nonviolent philosophical nonsense. And what he did was he essentially transferred power.
The British were planning to get out of India anyway, because it’s such a wonderful administrative elite. And he transferred power from the British elite to the Indian elite. And India went through massive multiple decades of Nehru, who was the first prime minister of India.
Then he gave power to his daughter, Indira who gave power to her son, Rajiv, who gave power to her daughter in law. So India basically had a dynasty. So Modi did not come from that dynastic rule. He came bottoms-up. He came in on a landslide – so many ways. Even beyond Trump, Modi didn’t come from wealth. He wasn’t a billionaire.
So Modi, I like because he had kept a number of his values. He was truly a person who came from nothing. And in many ways his election really threw a wrench in for the elites of India. So I consider that a major movement forward.
Ben: And he’s, I mean, it was interesting to me because I remember when he got elected, when Trump took office. Steve Bannon was one of the people saying, you know, he was a big fan of Modi. I mean, so what you just said it sounds like he does have a very strong anti corruption line. And my main question was, why is he good for the West? Why should I care about Modi? Obviously, it’s a country of more than a billion people. So, India is going to be more and more important, but I just don’t understand it well. Why is he a force of good?
Dr.SHIVA: Well, broadly, what we need to understand is that that is also good. The force, so if you go from a philosophical position, if you go back to the enlightenment, and you go back to the period of the Renaissance, one of the fundamental theories here is that it’s about freedom, the individual being able to pursue their dreams.
And if you go back to that core philosophy, it was always about the individual, being happy to have a direct connection with their Creator, whatever that wasn’t to pursue their dreams. That was really the founding of the American Revolutionary Movement.
In many ways, much of the Indian spirituality. If you look at it, Hinduism, which is a very disorganized religion, by the way, well, it’s massive, but it’s very, totally disorganized. No one even knows what Hinduism, the foundations of Hinduism is, it’s about you and your relationship with the divine. It’s about you, and figuring that out.
So Modi’s election, in many ways, was valuable, because India never had an opportunity to express its own nationalism. And to the extent, if you want to talk about internationalism, globalism, whatever you want to call, let’s talk about perhaps the official international cooperation. I don’t believe that you can talk about internationalism, until you define your own nationhood. India ever had an opportunity to do that, for the last 70 years.
Gandhi basically screwed over Indians, he told him being an Indian man getting yourself beaten up. That was in the Indian psyche. Indians never stand up, you know, strong and be I’m an Indian.
Ben: So Modiis really sort of a good beginning of Indian nationalism. And, well,
Dr.SHIVA: Yes, but India, so remember, nationalism can have two sides to it, cultural nationalism, let’s go back to the good old days, and put everyone in chains. And, the elites run. Or you know, a progressive nationalism. So, you have to watch both elements of it.
I’m not for cultural nationalism, I’m for the type of progressive nationalism – where people get to define themselves. India never had that opportunity fully, thanks to Gandhi, thanks to the fact that the revolutionary sentiments of the broad mass of Indian people was never expressed, He basically curtailed that.
So to that extent, is why I like Modi, because at least you start seeing that expression doesn’t mean it’s fully come into being – and what’s advantageous is whether you’re in the west or anywhere else, it gives an opportunity for people to start really understanding what this Indian person is.
Whereas the true origin of the culture of India, not the culture of moving your head left to right, and saying beat me up. And it’s okay to do that. And keep doing that to me. That’s what Gandhi really did. If Gandhi really is the father of India, where there’s a lot of bastards running around, in my view.
Ben: So we’ve had a great conversation. I’ve just got one one final question. Which is, your guys are doing a lot of things. As we’ve said, you’re an academic, you’re a politician, you’re a commentator, a scientist. All these number of things. But you run for office against Elizabeth Warren and 2018. As a Republican candidate?
Dr.SHIVA: No, we ran, ran in 2018. I was an independent. To give you the background, I was always a ground activist. I never believed that either party. I never voted until 2016. I was inspired to run because of Trump, and ran as an independent because the Republican Party in Massachusetts is one with the Democrats.
They never even wanted me to run. So we ran as an independent, under the slogan Only the Real Indian Can Defeat the Fake Indian. It was a great ad campaign. We were the ones who forced her to take the DNA test and just sprinkle in Mexican genes even to get up to the 1 out of 1024.
Ben: Now that absolutely finished her for and will finish that. I mean, she will never again because of that..
Dr.SHIVA: Yea we did that. Our campaign exposed that.
Ben: Or even the nominee. That’s disappointing for her because she’s ambitious.
I mean, you seem to me the kind of person the Republicans need – the Republican Party needs. Which is, a true immigration success story and supports the American dream. And a guy who understands issues and understands these issues and can connect with the grass roots. So, do you intend to be running for office?
Dr.SHIVA: Well remember, since 1981, since a 17 year old kid, an activist, which is to encourage people to think beyond left and right. So if you consider that running for politics, I’ve been doing that for nearly 39 years. Electoral politics was relatively new in 2018.
And now in 2020. Right now, what we’re doing is we took our set campaign because it was so productive, we engaged people worldwide, and we have moved that to a movement called Truth Freedom Health. And what that movement says is number one freedom.
If you’re not willing to defend freedom, the United States has this thing called the First Amendment or did have it, you have nothing because freedom is a basis for movement of people, matter, information and energy, which means movement of knowledge, movement of ideas.
And once you suppress freedom, and get it something more fundamental, called the search for truth, because you can’t express the scientific method. So that’s the truth part of it. So what’s going on in the world right now is three major tech companies and collusion with governments have controlled freedom, which means once you control freedom, Google, Twitter, and Facebook.
And because of that, you can’t really practice the scientific method, which is you take all sorts of wacky ideas. All ideas are supported conspiracies, non conspiracy, but they put them to the test of the scientific method. As Richard Feynman said, you have an idea. You have to go do the experiment to gather data and validate it.
If the data doesn’t support your best, you’re just wrong. Doesn’t matter how good looking you are, your family you come from, that’s a scientific method, right? So we don’t have the scientific method anymore. We have scientific consensus. If enough people say yes, jab everyone, jab everyone with the exact same thing. Every scientist agrees because it’s pay to play scientific consensus.
Ben: Scientific consensus. That is a term. You know, yes.
Dr.SHIVA: Which is opposite to the scientific method.
Ben: Well, you know, this group of people said it’s right. So it’s right. And it’s right forever.
Dr.SHIVA: That’s right. And the and definitely the, the sun goes around the Earth. Remember that? The sun goes around the Earth, the Vatican said that it must be so forget this little guy over here. Galileo who has evidence, you know, step aside, nothing to see here.
So that’s where we’re at right now. And once you don’t have truth and freedom – you don’t get health, infrastructure, health, your economic health, your physical health, and you don’t have the strength to fight for truth or freedom. So our movement – what we’ve done is – we started to educate people on this System’s Approach to looking at the world.
It’s called System Science. And let me just remind you, whether you may know this Ben, but the elite institutions trained their theoreticians, their advisors in System Science, about 8-10,000 people who run the world today, know Systems Science. And my view is we need to train about 50,000 everyday people in System Science.
Every Monday night, I started doing that. We’ve created an infrastructure, people can go to TruthFreedomHealth.com. And the idea is to bring the world together, not on just some bogus thing called Unity, but on a way to look at the world Beyond Left & Right. And if anything, that is the right way to look at the world.
Ben: also make sure to go to ElAmerican.com
Dr.SHIVA: it’s E L A M E R I C A N
Ben: Yeah, go to El American we’re trying to build a conservative views outlet, a media outlet aimed at the Hispanic population, where we’re open to ideas and giving an alternative to Hispanic media, which generally just pushes the liberal consensus, not just the scientific consensus, but the liberal consensus. So Dr.Shiva, thank you so much.
Dr.SHIVA: Thank you very much. So anyway, ElAmerican.com. That’s what Ben is going to also do a write up of an interview, and there’ll be excerpts of this up there, but we gave everyone a preview here. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Ben. Should be well, have a good evening, or good afternoon.
The original research in this video is made possible by generous contributions from supporters of the Dr.SHIVA Truth Freedom Health® movement. Please contribute so we may continue to bring you such original research, valuable education, and innovative solutions.
Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD in Biological Engineering, the Inventor of Email, Scientist, Engineer, Educator shares El American Interview in Miami – A Conversation
It’s time we move beyond the Left vs. Right, Republican vs. Democrat. It’s time YOU learn how to apply a systems approach to get the Truth Freedom Health you need and deserve. Become a Truth Freedom Health® Warrior.
Join the VASHIVA community – an integrated EDUCATIONAL, COMMUNICATIONS – independent of Big Tech -, and LOCAL ACTIVISM platform to empower YOU to actualize Truth Freedom Health in your local communities by employing a SYSTEMS APPROACH.
The platform we are building for Truth Freedom Health® provides the infrastructure to take on Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Academia. Many of you have asked how you can help. You can contribute whatever you can. Based on your level of commitment to get educated, I have also created some wonderful educational gifts to thank you for your contribution.
To get the education you need and deserve, join Dr.SHIVA on his Foundations of Systems course. This course will provide you three pillars of knowledge with the Foundation of Systems Thinking. The three pillars include: 1) The System Dynamics of Truth Freedom Health, 2) The Power of a Bottom’s Up Movement, and 3) The Not So Obvious Establishment. In this course, you will also learn fundamental principles of all systems including your body.
Course registration includes access to his LIVE Monday training, access to the Your Body, Your System tool, four (4) eBooks including the bestselling System and Revolution, access to the Systems Health portal and communications tools – independent of Big Tech – including a forum and social media for you to build community with other Truth Freedom Health Warriors.
This course is available online for you to study at your own pace.
It’s time to Get Educated, or Be Enslaved.