Aletho News


Digital Green Certificates Must Be Immediately Rejected

Tracey O’Mahoney

Wake TF UP | March 24, 2021

In Ireland, on the 25th of March 2021, a vote on the examination procedure for the Digital Green Certificate Regulation will take place. It aims to allow the newly jabbed persons of Europe to travel freely within the E.U, while limiting the movement of those who are unvaccinated.

Highly respected Irish barrister Tracey O’Mahoney has conducted an analysis of the proposal to reveal extremely worrying possibilities (or impossibilities) that lay in wait for those who will say no to the jab. In her YouTube presentation, she implores her audience to contact the Members of the European Parliament to demand that they refrain from giving the nod to this Orwellian law. I implore you to do the same.

A vote for this ugly apartheid system, which is currently in place in Israel and is proven to have already created a wave of discrimination and bias, is a vote for the Davos cult and a blow to the sovereignty of Irish people and of individualism. It is a vote against liberal democracy and a further step towards tyranny and oppression. 

This is being addressed presently in Israel, with a law firm taking it towards the International Criminal Court, citing violations of the Nuremberg Code.

It is paramount that all Members of the European Parliament and all politicians in this country and all across Europe are reminded that a piece of paper does not trump the personal autonomy and the inalienable rights of the human being. No certificate anywhere in the world can deny these inherent rights and any attempt to do so is, by its very nature, anti-human. 

Whereas the legislation text aims to take the focus off the real issue, which is the restriction of movement, it is obvious that the passing of this law will result in the greatest threat to liberty in the nation since the days of the colonial occupation. For this reason, it is a blatant and severe abuse of civil rights and an act of war on those who are unwilling or unable to be vaccinated. The idea that this same regulation should be fast-tracked, with little or no discussion, makes it even more egregious and is completely unacceptable. Any politician who votes for this will be historically remembered as one who voted for a law that is only comparable, in the restrictions it places on the select citizens, to the Nuremberg Laws of the 1930s. 

There is no excuse for the passing of this law as it is not in any way proven to be for the benefit or the good health of society – as it is known and acknowledged, even by the WHO and Big Pharma, that the COVID-19 vaccinations do not, under any circumstances, prevent the transmission of the SARS-COV-2 virus. For this reason, it is merely designed as a law to further restrict the freedom of movement of the individual and thus increases the power of a government that is already, in its behaviour and actions, tyrannical and authoritarian. It is a blatant attempt at oppression and vilification of the unvaccinated. It is a Fascistic and human-rights destroying aberration and serves to benefit nobody besides those who gain financially from human capital. 

In a time when government agents in Ireland are threatening church leaders with fines and imprisonment and academics are being pressured and bullied out of their positions in universities due to holding alternative opinions, adding coercion and medical experimentation to the already long list of human rights abuses is not going to be tolerated by those people in this country who value their freedom. 

Allowing those who have made the decision to be vaccinated with an injection that is still in phase three trials to partake in activities such as travel, while prohibiting those who have not, is an intentional attempt at creating a divided society and is deeply malevolent. To use this method against the very people of the nation who pay the salaries of those in power, coercing them to be vaccinated with a product that has already damaged and disabled thousands of individuals, is mendacious and reprehensible. To restrict the movement of those who have not bowed down to pharmaceutical companies, all with track records of dishonestyphysical injury and death, is dishonourable and indicates an absence of integrity, to say the least. 

To even consider implementing such a pointless exercise of oppression on the Irish people in a week, when the Central Statistics Office have revealed that in the first 9 months of 2020, there was a decrease in the number of deaths in Ireland compared with the previous seven years, begs the questions, what is the true purpose of this debacle and what is the agenda? Many of us have surmised, including me, as I have covered in my book, The COVID-19 Illusion; A Cacophony of Lies.

How long will it be before it is impermissible to shop at your local store without a vaccination certificate? How long until the unvaccinated are prohibited from entering restaurants and bars? How long before the so-called refuseniks are cast out of society and considered unworthy of entering sports arenas, concert venues and theatres. How long before your social services are discontinued because you are not vaccinated? How long before the jab is required in order for you to gain employment? How long before unvaccinated students are refused admission to university?

Not long at all if we let the unelected dictators impose their will on the masses, with the silence of compromised political representatives becoming deafening. The tiptoe towards totalitarianism has become a sprint. The avenue to apartheid is lined with wreaths as the slow suffocation of freedom leaves us limp like lifeless corpses, existing only to acquiesce to the demands of Davos.

These attempts of force by the European institutions and the Irish government are unacceptable. It is in the best interest of the nation that the Digital Green Certificates be avoided, along with any other tool that can be used to stifle liberties. It is highly recommended that this legislation is not passed. It is not conducive to a free and democratic society and should not be even considered.

The proposed New Normal, if this is what it is indicative of, should be rejected and discarded immediately. 

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

A film censor’s role is to police art, NOT to tell parents and children what they should think on trans issues

By Frank Furedi | RT | March 24, 2021

The British Board of Film Classification has stepped into the trans debate by highlighting five films for families to watch and discuss. But it’s not the job of an official censor to promote films that advocate certain ideologies.

Who would have imagined that, one day, that dreaded puritanical institution, the official censor, would assume the role of an educator? 

Recently, the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), the body tasked with censoring and classifying the films released in the UK, announced that it has decided to get involved in educating parents on how to deal with one of the most controversial issues they face.

It has compiled a list of five movies that “explore transgender experiences” which it believes are fit for family discussions. It hopes that as a result of this initiative, it can prompt discussion on this sensitive topic between parents and their children. Although on its website the BBFC presents the initiative as an educational one, its real aim, however, is not so much to educate as to advocate.

In this instance, the objective is to get families to educate themselves about “trans rights and trans people’s journeys”. It uses the term “educate” in the sense that advocacy campaigners use it, which means encouraging families to accept and embrace the gender ideology promoted by the trans activists also involved in this initiative.

The BBFC’s partner All About Trans, a project backed by charity On Road Media, aims to “change how the media understands and portrays transgender people”. It clearly also wants to influence parents and children so their outlook falls into line with its views.

In principle, there is nothing objectionable about groups of private individuals organising and launching an advocacy campaign. In a free and democratic society, advocating for different points of view is an important feature of public life.

But matters are very different when supposedly neutral official institutions take it on themselves to serve as conduits for the agenda and ideology of campaigning groups. There is a problem when the official authority of the BBFC is used to promote the views of one section of the community, particularly on a sensitive and contentious subject such as trans culture.

It is generally accepted that, as far as education is concerned, institutions that are meant to impartially serve the public affirm and promote the values of their community. Yet, in this instance, the BBFC sees its role not as one of affirming long-standing cultural values, but of attempting to socialise parents and children to embrace an outlook not yet integral to their community’s life. Historically, this type of re-education has been referred to as social engineering. In any case, it is worth asking who has decided the institution of censorship should serve as a family educator.

The BBFC is a statutory body for classifying films and video content. It has clearly gone beyond its brief, and even more disturbingly, it has brazenly breached its impartiality. At the moment, there is a fierce debate about how to address the question of gender identity in schools. This discussion, which involves teachers, parents, government officials and trans activists, is far from over. Through its intervention, what the BBFC has done is to imply that the debate has concluded, and that people should be educated in accordance with its version of the issues at stake.

In effect, the BBFC has adopted a mode of operation that can best be described as positive censorship. Unlike normal negative censorship, which suppresses heresy and subversion, positive censorship closes down debate through educating people to embrace values they do not hold. 

When the BBFC and groups advocating the cultural politics of identity demand people ‘educate themselves’, they don’t mean visit a library to read a book or go to a cinema and watch one of the films on its list. What they mean is to learn to accept their ideology of gender.

There was a time when censors were censors. They were in the business of policing literature and art, suppressing speech and other forms of communication. They justified their censorious behaviour on the ground that a particular text was blasphemous, heretical, subversive or obscene. Sadly, the BBFC has decided it is not simply in the business of suppressing what it believes are heretical thoughts, but also that it should dictate the kinds of films that will enlighten parents and their children.

Old-school censors were bad enough, but the BBFC’s ‘enlightened’ positive censorship is far worse, as it presumes to alter the way we think.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

US Funded Virus Research And Used Outbreak Against Us

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | Principia Scientific | March 20, 2021

While the outrageously conflicted investigative commission put together by the World Health Organization has dismissed the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 being a lab-leaked virus, deciding to pursue the imported frozen food theory instead,1,2,3 the lab-origin story refuses to die, and for good reason.

There’s just too much evidence pointing in that direction. Evidence of U.S. involvement is also mounting, although it hasn’t received quite as much coverage. Two individuals who have been heavily implicated are:

• Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) who rose to national prominence as the leader of the White House Coronavirus Task Force.

• Peter Daszak, Ph.D., president of EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit organization focused on pandemic prevention that has worked closely with bat coronavirus researcher Shi Zhengli and others at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).

Daszak was chosen to be on two separate commissions charged with investigating the origin of SARS-CoV-2, one by the WHO4 and one by The Lancet.5 His inclusion has been widely criticized, as he played a central role in the plot to obscure the lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 from the very beginning by crafting a scientific statement condemning such inquiries as “conspiracy theory.”6,7


In the video above, begining at 5:45, Chris Martenson, Ph.D., reviews Newsweek’s reporting8,9 on NIAID-funded gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at the WIV. Newsweek wrote a series of articles on this in late April 2020.

Read the rest here:

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

China Hit With Sobering Splash of Reality as Alaskan Talks Melt Under Heat of U.S. Belligerence

By Matthew Ehrett | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 24, 2021

They had some reason to make their hopeful assumptions as the U.S. State Department press releases announced that the meetings would “highlight cooperation that promotes peace, security and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region and around the world.”

The Chinese certainly hoped that the sanctions imposed under Trump’s watch might be rolled back by the new administration and that the new team might respect China’s sovereign right to pursue its economic interests without being seen as an opponent to the decaying western empire. They have understandably gotten quite tired of dealing with the constant unipolar intimidation as has been so common since Obama’s Asia Pivot was first announced in 2012. In response to the pressure of a dying empire attempting to insecurely impose its will on a growing nation which will soon find itself as the economic leader of the world, China has responded consistently with class and restraint calling for cooperation and dialogue.

At various times over recent years, China has offered the USA and other western nations desperately in need of real economic development, opportunities to cooperate on the Belt and Road Initiative, space research and other sectors of win-win cooperation citing these domains as being inclusive of all and beneficial to all participants. The fact that the Chinese have made these offers isn’t surprising. The USA is economically bankrupt, sitting upon a derivatives-fueled hyperinflationary bubble ripe to blow, devoid of any significant manufacturing capacities it once enjoyed and militarily over-extended beyond belief. So it isn’t as if cooperating on the BRI isn’t in the interests of the USA… as a sovereign nation.

But the USA isn’t really a sovereign nation state these days. It’s something else.

This sad fact slapped the Chinese delegation across the face moment U.S. representatives Anthony Blinken and Andrew Sullivan opened their mouths during the keynote remarks and spewed nothing but belligerent poison at their Asian counterparts. Blinken began his condescending chastisements of China’s disruptive influence to “international rules-based order”, condemned China for its alleged cyber-attacks and the apparently vicious treatment of Uyghurs, Hong Kong, Tibetans and Taiwan. Sullivan followed suit promoting the importance of the anti-Chinese “Quad” (often dubbed the “NATO of the Pacific) and virtue signalled “American ingenuity” and leadership.

Using the best newspeak available to an American diplomat these days, Blinken condemned the “might makes right” outlook which has caused so much injustice over the years and which apparently guides China thinking, saying: “The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winners take all, and that would be a far more violent and unstable world for all of us.”

Of course, one might be confused by this claim since China has only one foreign military base in Djibouti, has started no new wars in generations and has lifted nearly a billion people out of poverty, but that’s only because you don’t receive quality CIA briefings like Blinken and Sullivan.

Yang Jiechi and Wang Yi’s responses provided a sobering sledgehammer of reality as both statesmen took the opportunity to spend 42 minutes laying out in stark terms the scale of hypocritical poison in extolling democracy abroad while not being able to win the support of its own population citing BLM. Jiechi also contrasted the USA’s obsessive use of regime changes and wars across the world in defense of the Washington-run “rules based order” with China’s track record in ending extreme poverty winning the support of its citizens and building great infrastructure projects abroad.

Calling out the disingenuous intention behind the U.S. delegation’s organization of the talks, Jiechi stated:

“isn’t this the intention of the United States – judging from what, or the way that you have made your opening remarks – that it wants to speak to China in a condescending way from a position of strength? So was this carefully all planned and was it carefully orchestrated with all the preparations in place? Is that the way that you had hoped to conduct this dialogue? Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought that the U.S. side will follow the necessary diplomatic protocols.”

Jiechi continued:

“So let me say here that, in front of the Chinese side, the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength. The U.S. side was not even qualified to say such things even 20 years or 30 years back, because this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people. If the United States wants to deal properly with the Chinese side, then let’s follow the necessary protocols and do things the right way.”

In the ensuing days of meetings, it should not come as a surprise that very little in the way of serious conflict resolution occurred. In fact, the only solid points of agreement which the U.S. side would permit involved two joint protocols that fall perfectly into alignment with the Malthusian closed system objectives of the Great Reset agenda attempting to reign in a post-nation state world order in the wake of the oncoming economic meltdown. These included 1) a joint program to coordinate more closely on fighting global warming via green finance and green energy grids and 2) coordinating on COVID-19 vaccination programs.

Nothing which China is doing that relates to actual scientific and technological growth, long term conditionality-free banking or poverty extermination was permitted by the U.S.-side for reasons which should be obvious to the informed reader by now.

While Blinken did announce in the post-conference press release that space cooperation between the two powers was discussed, it is a fact as true as gravity that the imperial technocrats running the Biden White House are so ideologically opposed to the sort of open-system programs which space cooperation creates that Blinken’s remarks are sure to remain dead words.

What is clear coming out of the Alaska meeting is that the Biden Administration is committed to accelerating the worst elements of the “hard imperial” practices of military encirclement of China while building up the QUAD military alliance on the one hand while also advancing the “soft imperial” practices of pulling China into unbreakable de-carbonization treaties and medical health regimes controlled by supranational technocrats on behalf of the Anglo-American oligarchy.

Continue reading

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | 1 Comment

The U.S. Intelligence Community, Flouting Laws, is Increasingly Involving Itself in Domestic Politics

By Glenn Greenwald | March 24, 2021

A report declassified last Wednesday by the Department of Homeland Security is raising serious concerns about the possibly illegal involvement by the intelligence community in U.S. domestic political affairs.

Entitled “Domestic Violent Extremism Poses Heightened Threat in 2021,” the March 1 Report from the Director of National Intelligence states that it was prepared “in consultation with the Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security—and was drafted by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with contributions from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).”

Its primary point is this: “The IC [intelligence community] assesses that domestic violent extremists (DVEs) who are motivated by a range of ideologies and galvanized by recent political and societal events in the United States pose an elevated threat to the Homeland in 2021.” While asserting that “the most lethal” of these threats is posed by “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists (RMVEs) and militia violent extremists (MVEs),” it makes clear that its target encompasses a wide range of groups from the left (Antifa, animal rights and environmental activists, pro-choice extremists and anarchists: “those who oppose capitalism and all forms of globalization”) to the right (sovereign citizen movements, anti-abortion activists and those deemed motivated by racial or ethnic hatreds).

The U.S. security state apparatus regards the agenda of “domestic violent extremists” as “derived from anti-government or anti-authority sentiment,” which includes “opposition to perceived economic, racial or social hierarchies.” In sum, to the Department of Homeland Security, an “extremist” is anyone who opposes the current prevailing ruling class and system for distributing power. Anyone they believe is prepared to use violence, intimidation or coercion in pursuit of these causes then becomes a “domestic violent extremist,” subject to a vast array of surveillance, monitoring and other forms of legal restrictions:

Department of Homeland Security report, Mar.1, 2021

It goes without saying that violence of any kind — including that which is politically motivated — is a serious crime under U.S. law, and it is the proper role of the U.S. Government to investigate and prevent it. But there are real and important legal and institutional limits on the authority of the intelligence community to involve itself in domestic law enforcement, or other forms of domestic political activity, that seem threatened here, if not outright violated.

In particular, the Report’s acknowledgement that it was compiled by institutions including “the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with contributions from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)” has alarmed numerous members of the House Intelligence Committee. On Thursday, all ten minority members of that Committee wrote a previously unreported letter to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines “to raise serious concerns about the production of this document by the Intelligence Community (IC) and to seek clarification of the facts related to its production.”

Among the issues raised was that the DHS Report was not subject to the standard rigors of an intelligence community finding, yet continually makes sweeping claims that it prefixes with the authoritative phrase “the IC assesses.” The Committee members found this “to be misleading,” adding: we “urge you to clarify which elements in the IC concurred with this judgement and the intelligence basis, if any, for that concurrence.” In other words, Haines claims that these dubious assertions about various threats faced by Americans are the findings of the intelligence community when that is not true: just like the originally false claim widely spread by the media that “all seventeen intelligence agencies” endorsed the 2016 election findings about Russian interference when, in fact, it was only a few which had done so. Haines’ claims have support only from a few agencies as well.

But the more substantive danger is the role played by the CIA and other intelligence agencies in the domestic politics of the U.S., all in the name of fighting “domestic terrorism” (similar dangers were previously created by the Bush and Obama administrations in the name of fighting “international terrorism”). As the committee members’ letter details:

The Intelligence Committee members, citing the fact that the intelligence community is “subject to longstanding prohibitions against domestic activities,” then demanded answers to a series of questions based on this substantive concern:

Involvement of the intelligence community in the domestic activities of U.S. citizens is one of the most dangerous breaches of civil liberties and democratic order the U.S. Government can perpetrate. It was after World War II when the CIA, the NSA and other security state agencies that wield immense and unlimited powers in the dark were created in the name of fighting the Cold War. Legal and institutional prohibitions on wielding that massive machinery against the American public were central to the always-dubious claim that this security behemoth that operates completely in the dark was compatible with democracy. As the ACLU noted, “in its 1947 charter, the CIA was prohibited from spying against Americans, in part because President Truman was afraid that the agency would engage in political abuse.”

Since then, Truman’s fear has been realized over and over. Some of the worst post-WW2 civil liberties abuses have been the result of breaches by the CIA and other agencies of this prohibition. As the ACLU documents, the CIA in the 1960s was caught infiltrating and manipulating numerous domestic political activist groups. Under the auspices of the War on Terror, entire new bureaucracies (such as the Department of Homeland Security) and new legal regimes (such as the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act) were designed to erode these long-standing limitations by dramatically increasing surveillance powers aimed at U.S. citizens. And by design, the infiltration of these security state agencies in U.S. domestic politics has dramatically escalated.

As the first War on Terror was escalating, The Washington Post — under the headline “CIA Is Expanding Domestic Operations” — reported in October, 2002, that “The Central Intelligence Agency is expanding its domestic presence, placing agents with nearly all of the FBI’s 56 terrorism task forces in U.S. cities.” The Post added that in the name of that War on Terror:

FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III recently described the new arrangement as his answer to MI5, Britain’s internal security service. Unlike the CIA, MI5 is empowered to collect intelligence within Britain and to act to disrupt domestic threats to British national security. “It goes some distance to accomplishing what the MI5 does,” Mueller told a House-Senate intelligence panel last week in describing the new CIA role in the FBI task forces.

In the years following, two NSA whistleblowers — William Binney and Edward Snowden — both cited their horror over the turning of the surveillance machinery against American citizens as the reason for their decision to denounce their agency. One of the aspects that most disturbed me about the Russiagate conspiracy theory from the start was that it was created and disseminated by the CIA and related agencies with the intent, first, to alter the outcome of the 2016 election, and then to undermine the elected president with whom they were at war. Shortly before Trump’s inauguration, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) went on The Rachel Maddow Show to warn — or more accurately: threaten — Trump that the CIA would destroy his presidency if he continued to criticize or otherwise oppose them:

It is encouraging to see Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee starting to express serious concerns over the dangers of intelligence community involvement in domestic politics. That is underscored by their approving citation to the mild mid-1970s reforms of the intelligence community ushered in by the Senate’s Church Committee, once primarily a liberal cause. Indeed, many of the same House Republicans who wrote this important letter to the DNI have in the past supported laws that allow greater involvement of the CIA, NSA and other agencies in activities on U.S. soil — including the Patriot Act.

The head of the Church Committee, Sen. Frank Church (D-ID), made clear in his iconic quote on Meet the Press in 1975 that those reforms were primarily motivated by fears that the U.S. Government would one day turn its vast intelligence powers onto the American people, rendering core civil liberties an illusion:

In the need to develop a capacity to know what potential enemies are doing, the United States government has perfected a technological capability that enables us to monitor the messages that go through the air. (…) We must know, at the same time, that capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left: such is the capability to monitor everything—telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.

(That quote from Sen. Church was the first one that appeared in my 2014 book on the NSA reporting I did with Edward Snowden, and the title of that book, No Place to Hide, was a nod toward Church’s chilling warning, now come true).

As I have been repeatedly noting over the last two months, the Biden administration, along with leading Democrats such as Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), have been stating explicitly that one of their top priorities is the adoption of new laws designed to import the Bush/Cheney/Obama War on Terror onto U.S. soil for domestic purposes. As recently as February 14, The Washington Post — under the headline: “The agency founded because of 9/11 is shifting to face the threat of domestic terrorism” —noted that Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, is now demanding that homeland security resources be re-directed toward domestic extremists, and “lawmakers of both parties spoke favorably of new legislation to specifically address domestic terrorism.”

Nobody from the Biden administration or Congressional members demanding enactment of Schiff’s proposed new “domestic terrorism” law can identify any activities that are not now criminal that they believe ought to be. Unless it is to permit intelligence agencies to start policing constitutionally protected speech and associational activities among U.S. citizens, why are any new laws needed? Unless it is to empower them to escalate their already-aggressive use of War on Terror tactics against U.S. citizens, what do they want security state agencies to be able to do on U.S. soil that they cannot now do?

But just as the fear of international terrorism was constantly inflated to place such questions off limits when it came to the War on Terror, and just as critics of the excesses of the first War on Terror were constantly accused of downplaying the threat of Islamic extremism if not harboring outright sympathy for it, the same tactics are being used now. Anyone raising civil liberties concerns about what is being done in the name of combating “domestic extremism” is vilified as ignoring and even supporting such domestic extremism.

No matter: there are few dangers more acute than the weaponization of these security state instruments against U.S. citizens for political ends. The DNI should provide full, complete and truthful answers to the important questions posed by these Intelligence Committee members, and should do so promptly. The evidence of growing incursions by the intelligence community in U.S. domestic politics is already strong and ample, and further incursions would be both dangerous and illegal.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Timeless or most popular | 1 Comment

Boulder Shooter Threatened Fake Hate Crime Charges Against Classmates He Attacked

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | March 24, 2021

The gunman in Boulder who killed 10 people at a supermarket would routinely threaten his classmates with threats of filing fake hate crime charges after violently attacking them, eyewitnesses told the media.

As we highlighted yesterday, Ahmad Al-Issa would typically be described as an “anti-racist activist,” with his Facebook page having featured criticism of Donald Trump, advocacy for refugees and Muslim immigrants.

Despite the gunman’s family telling the Daily Beast that the reason for his rampage was as a result of him being the victim of “bullying” in high school, Al-Issa’s classmates say the opposite is true.

Fox 31 report reveals that Al-Issa once punched a classmate and continued to hit him as he lay on the ground.

Al-Issa tried to justify the attack by claiming the victim “had made fun of him and called him racial names weeks earlier,” although no other classmates could corroborate this.

The shooter’s wrestling team classmate Dayton Marvel also told the Denver Post that in Al Issa’s senior year, “during the wrestle-offs to see who makes varsity, he actually lost his match and quit the team and yelled out in the wrestling room that he was like going to kill everybody.”

“Nobody believed him. We were just all kind of freaked out by it, but nobody did anything about it,” said Marvel.

“He would talk about him being Muslim and how if anybody tried anything, he would file a hate crime and say they were making it up,” he added.

Given this history and the fact that Al-Issa was an avid reader of mainstream media, questions now must be asked about his real motivation given that all the gunman’s victims were white and whether he was radicalized by anti-white racism that has been institutionalized by the press.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

Dark New Dem Bill Uses “Counter American Intelligence” To Wage War on MAGA

revolver | March 23, 2021

Last week, HBO released Part 1 of its 6-part docuseries “Q: Into The Storm.” It’s the latest douse of lighter fluid on a growing pyre of Regime Media agitprop against “conspiracy theories tearing democracy apart.” 

Not to be outdone, CNN Clockwork Orange’d the country’s airport terminal captives with another round of “She’s losing her parents to QAnon. Listen to her plea”:

Evidently, “When parents become strangers: How QAnon is tearing families apart” and “’They’re unrecognizable’: One woman reflects on losing her parents to QAnon” were such box office blockbusters the industry keeps churning out sequels.

In turn, the right-wing internet trended the meme “Blue Anon,” a counter-concept designed to mock left-wing conspiracy theories. The results were predictable: Google banned the term Blue Anon from the front page of its search results. Internet slang repository Urban Dictionary banned the entry for the term “BlueAnon” altogether. … continue

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

11 Million School-Age Children To Be Vaccinated By Autumn

By Richie Allen | March 24, 2021

The Telegraph claims that it has seen provisional government plans to begin vaccinating children as early as August. Two sources told the paper, that August is the earliest that children under-18 could receive a vaccine.

Oxford University is currently trialling covid vaccines on children. Safety data is expected sometime in June or July. If the data is positive, the government will roll-out the jabs for children.

It has been estimated that at the current vaccination rate, roughly three million jabs a week, most of the country’s 11 million schoolchildren could be vaccinated before the Autumn term.

Government advisers are keen to vaccinate every child in the country, claiming it’s the best way to limit the spread of infection. Critics point to the fact that the virus barely brushes children. Kids are unlikely to contract covid-19 and those who do, rarely fall ill.

In fact, the government admitted last week, that children returning to school has not led to a rise in infections. Of the 2,762,775 lateral flow tests that were carried out on secondary pupils since they went back, just 1,324 were positive, according to the first official figures.

That’s right. Millions of tests were given to secondary school children and only 0.05 per cent of them tested positive for the virus. Kids don’t get it. Kids don’t carry it. Kids don’t pass it on.

So why vaccinate them? Why vaccinate anyone? UK Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty admitted last night that most people who get covid have mild or no symptoms. “It’s very difficult to find” he said.

No sane parent would allow their child receive an experimental treatment for an illness that presents no risk whatsoever to children.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | Leave a comment

Professor: Britain Can’t Be Held To Ransom By Vaccine Refuseniks

By Richie Allen | March 24, 2021

Writing in the Daily Mail today, Brendan Wren, Professor of Vaccinology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said that “a third wave caused by vaccine refuseniks would devastate our return to normality.” He also said that “there is no excuse” for not having a vaccine. He writes:

… a worryingly high proportion of British people will continue to refuse the jab — preventing us reaching the crucial ‘herd immunity’, whereby the virus cannot spread because it cannot find enough people to infect.

We know, for example, that more than three million over-55s — including half a million over-65s — have still not been vaccinated, even though all are eligible and could surely have had the vaccine if they wanted it.

In both Britain and Europe, the costs of this vaccine hesitancy are now all too clear. France’s history of ‘anti-vax’ thinking — up to 60 per cent of French people have previously said they wouldn’t take a Covid jab — is now surely playing its part in the country’s third wave.

Here, we know, sadly, that vaccine hesitancy is particularly high in certain sections of the black, Asian and minority ethnic [BAME] communities.

Wren goes on to say that while he “ordinarily baulks” at the idea of compulsory vaccination, he does support making covid jabs mandatory for care workers. He then writes that Britain cannot be held to ransom by refuseniks:

Though I do not believe we are there yet, a third wave caused by vaccine refuseniks would devastate our return to normality. Britain cannot be held to ransom because of a minority who don’t understand the value of the vaccines, risking their own health and that of others in the process.

There it is. We, who will never take their experimental medicines, which are already causing real harm, will be blamed for delaying the exit from lockdown. We’ll be blamed for future lockdowns too. They’ll use every trick in the book, to get us to roll up our sleeves.

We know that Covid Status Certificates or Vaccine Passports are a reality. That’s effectively mandating by coercion.

Now a leading scientist is saying that the country cannot be held to ransom by refuseniks. This will lead to families, friends and neighbours falling out and singling out those of us who won’t have a jab. It’s going to get uglier, that’s for sure.

March 24, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment