Why are we being lied to about Covid? There’s no good reason
By Dr Mike Yeadon | Conservative Woman | May 10, 2021
Be in no doubt, among the reasons that voices and opinions like mine are never heard in the main media is extreme censorship more suited to China than a liberal democracy. Please allow me to illustrate with an example close to my heart why it is high time for us to change our response.
Ivermectin is one of the WHO’s ‘essential drugs’ which all countries should have access to. It’s very cheap as its patent has long expired; it’s one of the most-used drugs in world history; it’s extraordinarily safe; it is often life-saving against parasitic infections. It is also one of the best-established pharmaceutical treatments for Covid-19, showing benefit in every stage of the disease, in multiple independent clinical trials of varying quality. On January 3, 2021, Dr Tess Lawrie attempted to alert the Prime Minister to the potential of ivermectin. Her video here was pulled from YouTube within hours of posting, though it survives on Vimeo. The paper by the FLCCC group of US intensivists (whose survival rates for severe Covid-19 are best in class) that was the inspiration for Dr Lawrie’s work was accepted after extensive open peer review (including two career employees of the FDA) and ‘provisionally accepted’ by the ‘open science’ journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. The screenshot of the abstract tweeted by Clare Craig shown here attracted more than 100,000 views. Then, mysteriously, it was rejected and pulled by the Frontiers editor in chief. It is still here in cached form though the Ministry of Truth has been at work and placed it in a memory hole, so no trace survives on Frontiers’ own website.
Intended for a Special Issue on ‘repurposed drugs’ for Covid-19, various guest editors were so incensed at this behaviour that they resigned in protest. You can read their letter here. They concluded that ‘these unfortunate events constitute gross editorial misconduct by Frontiers.’ Fortunately this major paper is now published by the American Journal of Therapeutics and can be read in its final form here.
This nevertheless successfully delayed by nearly six months its circulation to leading public health bodies starting mid-November. A copy was sent to Sir Jeremy Farrar (boss of the Wellcome Trust and member of Sage) who passed it on to Professor Peter Horby (also on Sage), amongst others, on November 18, 2020. So the efficacy of ivermectin must be well known to the Government’s advisers, but they have done nothing about it. Likewise, the formal and rigorous meta-analysis performed by Dr Tess Lawrie’s team at the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd has been communicated to Matt Hancock, but without reply.
I am telling you about this, because all that governments, their scientific advisers, big pharma (here’s Merck, who originally developed & marketed it) and regulatory agencies will tell you is that ivermectin doesn’t work in Covid-19. They are lying. I am inviting any of them to sue me, but they won’t, for I would win easily.
If ivermectin was more widely used, there’d be no need for vaccines.
To date, despite the brains, expertise and stature of those scientists questioning the official Covid-19 narrative, as a group they quite patently have been ineffective. And this is unlikely to change while, as polite professionals, they won’t say: ‘This is corruption and they’re lying deliberately to scare the people.’ Furthermore, unwittingly, they have been playing the parts intended by those, including our own Government and their advisers, who control the global Covid narrative.
They judged correctly that we polite Brits wouldn’t accuse them of outright lying, even though they often do exactly that. Boris Johnson’s recent piece to camera, telling us that it was lockdown and not vaccination which reduced cases and deaths, is a case in point.
Yet it’s certain this isn’t true, and also certain he and his advisers know it isn’t true.
The government’s advisers are not fools. Some may be, but the upper echelons are very smart. They believe polite people won’t say ‘not only are you lying but you’re doing it in concert with other, non-democratic actors’, because that’s conspiracy theory stuff, right? Powerful people never use their influence to benefit their interests, do they? Hmm. The only thing that’s different is scale and the power their public positions give them. Other than that, they’re just another a bunch of grubby criminals, ripping off unsuspecting people.
Truth is our most powerful tool. And that truth is that we’re being lied to.
The truth also, however hard it is to believe it, is that there is unequivocal and clear evidence of planning and co-ordination. Not to face this fact is to have your head in the sand. Where it’s leading is easy to discern, once people are willing to lift their internal censoring and look objectively at the evidence.
First, though, the lies. It’s abundantly clear now that pretty much everything that the public has been told and continues to be told is between untrue and downright lies.
I offer as a shortlist that:
-PCR mass testing reasonably reliably distinguishes infected and infectious people from others;
-that masks reduce transmission of respiratory viruses;
-that transmission of infection in the absence of symptoms is an important contribution to epidemic spreading;
-that lockdowns as executed reduce hospitalisation and deaths;
-that no matter how small the remaining susceptible population and no matter that virtually no people who, if infected, might die remain unvaccinated, the position is perilous;
-that no pharmaceutical treatments are available;
-that variants are different enough to warrant border closures and require new vaccines;
-that the gene-based vaccines are safe and effective;
-that ‘vaccine passports’ will increase safety while having no material impacts on freedom of choice in a liberal democracy.
It is impossible to believe that intelligent, well-connected and well-briefed senior advisers to governments don’t know that almost all, if not all, of the above are simply not true.
It is not a matter of opinion in almost all cases. These statements, which have been explicitly stated and used in justification for the extraordinary interferences in the lives of citizens in democratic countries, are mostly demonstrably wrong, as defined by there being multiple well-conducted, peer-reviewed studies showing the contrary.
To continue with the pretence that there’s scientific uncertainty, and it’s therefore understandable that an adviser might offer nuanced advice, is wrong and misleading. This perhaps is where the mainstream media has been most culpable.
It is not reasonable to expect typical viewers and readers of speeches, articles and editorials – whether by scientist sceptics or by critical commentators – to appreciate that, when we point out that what’s happening doesn’t make sense, we mean ‘the executive is knowingly and deliberately harming the country and its citizens’. We are mostly not saying this, leaving it to the audience to sum up for themselves. But in my view the audience are reluctant to do this. They want to believe in government and perhaps above all they want a quiet life. To disbelieve is so much harder than to believe.
So in recent weeks I’ve made a clear decision no longer merely to point out what it is that governments and their advisers and spokespersons around the world are doing is wrong, scientifically unjustified and harmful, but to join the dots in an attempt to provide potential explanations of why they’re doing these things.
It is time for all Doubting Thomases to take a lead and state unambiguously that ‘government and its advisers are telling us things that are manifestly untrue and maintaining restrictive, damaging measures for which there’s no justification’. By not doing so they are playing into the hands of those who I firmly believe are engaged in a determined series of crimes against humanity.
Why do I say this? Simply because there is no benign interpretation of the acts of commission and omission consistently imposed upon us and no explanation of the statements which are flatly wrong other than an intention to deceive the population.
Looking around us now, we see that the prevalence of the virus in the community is effectively zero. Note that the authorities have never conceded and determined the operational false positive rate of PCR mass testing. Subtracting any reasonable estimate of oFPR and we observe no cases at all. This was true for months as indicated by the positive rate in lateral flow tests.
No variant of the virus differs by more than 0.3 per cent from the original sequence, and numerous academic immunologists have stated strongly that there is no possibility that booster/top-up/variant vaccines are required. Yet we get daily ‘fear porn’ on this topic. The European Parliament just voted through the basic outlines of a vaccine passport system. It’s a racing certainty that the UK will soon follow.
Mask regulations continue in force and many psychologists believe some people are so traumatised that they will continue to wear them indefinitely, even though they are useless.
The economy and currency may already be damaged beyond repair. Yet there’s another six weeks minimum until the last restrictions are scheduled to be lifted.
Almost no one is dying ‘with’ Covid-19 now, and the attribution methodology overestimates this anyway. Yet hospitals and primary health care remain far less accessible than they should be, inevitably resulting in causing or storing up avoidable non-Covid-19 deaths, to say nothing of the suffering and misery of the millions awaiting treatments for painful and worrying illnesses.
Most terrifyingly, it appears we will soon be required to possess VaxPass apps if we wish to continue to access our lives.
This system can run effectively only if everyone is vaccinated. This is a monstrous concept, because it is known that all four vaccines in use in Europe contain a fatal design flaw: they cause the fusogenic, pro coagulation spike protein to be expressed wherever the vaccine is taken up. In some people, especially those so young that they’re at no measurable risk of death if infected by the virus, vaccination results in their deaths from thromboembolic events. Permitting the inexpert population to walk into this trap is unconscionable: there will be thousands of further vaccine-induced deaths of young people.
I invite thoughtful people to ask that difficult question: ‘Why are they doing this?’
It is my deduction and conclusion that the only motivation that fits all the observations is the intention to ‘herd’ every citizen into a VaxPass system. This is a completely novel system. Never before have all individuals been represented in a single, interoperable database as a unique digital ID, accompanied by an editable health-related field. Whoever controls that database, and the algorithms which govern what it permits and denies, has literally totalitarian control of the entire population. There is no personal threshold crossing or transaction which doesn’t fall to those operating that system.
At the very least, the public deserves to be warned that this is coming. I do not expect conventional judicial processes to protect us in any way. Every institution has already failed the people of the UK.
Given that numerous government decisions (as instructed by Sage) have arguably already led to many avoidable deaths, I think it’s only reasonable to consider what the prize is that leads intelligent people to do the things they’ve done and continue to peddle.
The possible answers to this question are all bad. I cannot conceive of a situation where we will shortly be permitted to resume our normal lives. There is not the slightest hint of that in any case.
I have found it impossible to come up with a benign interpretation of the events. No one works as carefully and for so long as evidently has been done, across the world, only suddenly to stop. Why? I’ve asked hundreds of people and not a single one has (a) pointed out where my logic fails or (b) come up with a benign interpretation.
My own conviction is that the purpose is, at minimum, to establish a system of totalitarian control which will mean the extinguishing of liberal democracy.
It almost doesn’t matter what the next steps might be, but they could, for example, have been sold to numerous people as the only solution to ‘anthropogenic global warming’: the amount of resources we’ll be permitted to produce and consume will be set by some unseen controllers. It is possible they could go a step further than this, and see reducing population or depopulation as another route to solving the perceived problem of AGW.
Consider the elimination of the class of the inquiring journalist, the censorship of all mass media. The relentless smearing and exclusion of those who ask too many awkward questions. The astonishing waste of public money, which apparently the foreign exchange markets are unperturbed about. The destruction of SMEs which provide a third of all jobs and a substantial proportion of tax revenues. The relentless lying. The misinformation. The use of psychological operations to frighten and subdue. The utter disregard for those vaccinated with ‘vaccines’ that are way too unsafe for their role. The bending past illegality of the use of incorrect information to persuade pregnant women to get vaccinated. The numerous breaches of the Nuremberg Code, since no one is being explicitly told that these vaccines are experimental and so recipients are being unwittingly enrolled in an unprecedentedly large and unmonitored Phase 3 clinical trial. The announcement that, soon, our minor children are to be vaccinated.
Add in the ‘top-up vaccines’. They’re not vaccines. Whoever has been vaccinated has no need of further vaccination. Immunology is perhaps my strongest suit, so I am certain of this. Is it impossible that in those one billion vials which pharma has already told us its manufacturing, there is some gene sequence which will instigate one of a few dozen pathologies, with onset times ranging from near-immediate to a short number of years? I assure you, biotechnology has awesome power, and it can be used for good or ill.
I think I’ve made a decent case that what governments and their advisers have done easily amounts to conspiracy. The same ‘mistakes’ have been made everywhere. The same tricks and manipulation. Those who claim this is all coincidence are coincidence theorists.
I argue that unless this is pointed out to the public before any possible ‘vaccine passports’ system is established, we’ve all collectively failed to discharge our duties to be courageous, to take chances, to risk looking foolish: I am absolutely committed to continuing to speak out for as long as I have breath in my body.
Biden Regime Blocks Security Council Action on Israeli East Jerusalem Violence
By Stephen Lendman | May 11, 2021
On Monday, Security Council members met behind closed doors to discuss weeks of Israeli state terror against defenseless Palestinians in East Jerusalem.
The Biden regime blocked a statement — demanding that Israel “cease settlement activities, demolition and evictions” of Palestinians from their homes and land, according to AFP.
Short of a binding international law resolution, the watered down statement expressed “grave concern regarding escalating tensions and violence in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”
It called for “refraining from provocative actions and rhetoric, and upholding and respecting the historic status quo at the holy sites.”
Since establishment of a Jewish state on stolen Palestinian land in 1948, the US supported and ignored the worst of Israeli crimes of war and against humanity against Palestinians and regional states.
Instead of condemning Israeli violence in Occupied East Jerusalem, State Department spokesman Price said the following on Monday:
The Biden regime “condemns in the strongest terms the barrage of rocket attacks fired into Israel” from Gaza.
Price ignored Palestinian retaliation against weeks of Israeli state-terror.
He was silent about IDF terror-bombing of multiple parts of the Strip, killing at least two dozen Gazans, injuring many more, traumatizing thousands, causing extensive damage.
Defying reality, he “welcome(d) (nonexistent) steps by the (Netanyahu regime) aimed at avoiding provocations (sic).”
At the same time, he called Israeli aggression “self-defense.”
Asked if he condemned Israeli killing of Palestinian children, he ignored reality by claiming:
“(W)e don’t have independent confirmation of facts on the ground yet, so I’m very hesitant to get into reports that are just emerging.”
Instead of denouncing Israeli plans to dispossess Palestinian Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood families of their homes and land, he largely ducked the issue, saying:
“We’ve been clear in urging the Israelis to act responsibly, to treat Palestinian residents with compassion and with humanity in this case.”
Refusing to call East Jerusalem occupied, he said what’s going on in the city “is a final status issue to be determined by the parties (sic).”
Ignored was that following the Oslo Accords over a generation ago, Palestinians got nothing in return but empty Israeli promises, colonization, apartheid, and occupation harshness.
They got nothing for renouncing armed struggle, recognizing Israel’s right to exist, and agreeing to leave major unresolved issues for later final status talks. They’re still waiting.
Major unresolved issues include an independent sovereign Palestine free from occupation, the right of return, settlements, borders, water and other resource rights, as well as East Jerusalem as exclusive Palestinian territory and future capital.
One-sidedly supported by the US — while pretending otherwise — Israel refuses to accept all of the above, its hard-wired policy for over half a century.
It includes delaying resolution of issues with Palestinians to facilitate continued theft of their land — wanting all valued parts of historic Palestine Judaized, including Jerusalem as Israel’s exclusive capital, its Arab residents expelled, and diaspora Palestinians denied their right of return.
During a Monday press briefing, Price refused to condemn ongoing Israeli state terror against defenseless Palestinians — calling on both sides to show restraint instead, along with ducking responses to tough questions.
According to the Palestine Red Crescent Society on Monday:
“At least 612 Palestinians sustained injuries in the course of the day in (and around the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound) and the Old City of Jerusalem.”
During the day, Israeli violence escalated after its security forces stormed the Al-Aqsa Mosque — Islam’s third holiest site.
They fired rubber bullets, tear gas and stun grenades at Palestinian worshipers inside, causing large numbers of injuries.
Rocket fire from Gaza on Israel followed its desecration of the holy site.
Ignoring Israeli state terror on Monday and previous days, interventionist Blinken said the following:
“We’re very focused on the situation in Israel, West Bank, Gaza, very deeply concerned about the rocket attacks that we’re seeing now (sic), that they need to stop (sic).”
“They need to stop immediately (sic).” But IDF terror-bombing of Gazan civilians is OK, according to longstanding one-sided US support for apartheid Israel.
A Final Comment
On Monday, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) said the following:
“…Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) violated al-Aqsa Mosque and its facilities, suppressed, and assaulted Palestinian worshipers and fired sound bombs and rubber bullets inside the Mosque and in its yards.”
“As a result, 305 Palestinians, including 8 journalists, were wounded — 7 were deemed in critical condition.”
“This serious escalation came only a few hours before a planned demonstration by thousands of Israeli settlers in Bab al-‘Amoud area and near al-Aqsa Mosque’s gates.”
“Chief of Israel Police ordered a large force to raid al-Aqsa Mosque in an attempt to facilitate the entry of Israeli settlers, who were gathering in Bab al Magharibah, into the Mosque.”
“Afterwards, IOF moved into al-Aqsa Mosque’s yards and its facilities via Bab al Magharibah and Bab al Silsilah amid heavy firing of rubber bullets, teargas canisters and sound bombs for 4 consecutive hours.”
At the same time, “Israeli snipers topped al-Aqsa Mosque’s western roofs, in addition to al-Qibli Mosque’s roof, and then raided the Mosque, assaulted Palestinian worshipers, and fired rubber bullets, teargas canisters and sound bombs at them.”
“As a result, dozens of Palestinians, old and young, men and women, who were detained inside the Mosque sustained wounds.”
“Also, IOF prevented medical and paramedics crew from providing first aid for the wounded. Moreover, IOF assaulted and severely beat worshipers.”
The Biden regime and its press agent media ignored virtually all of the above — in support of apartheid Israeli viciousness against defenseless Palestinians.
Venezuela: Accusations of Meddling in Colombia Protests ‘Shameful’
Colombian state violence and human rights abuses have stoked the protests in which nearly 50 have died
By Paul Dobson | Venezuelanalysis | May 10, 2021
Mérida – Venezuelan authorities have dismissed accusations that they are intervening in on-going mass protests in neighboring Colombia.
Speaking on Friday from a Miami-based forum on Defense of Democracy in Latin America, Ecuador’s President Lenín Moreno claimed that “Our [Ecuador’s] and Colombia’s intelligence agencies have detected a gross intervention from the dictatorial and authoritarian regime of Nicolás Maduro [in the Colombian protests] (…) We call on Maduro to remove his bloody and corrupt hands from the democracy and stability of the Colombian people.”
The outgoing right-winger went on to describe the Venezuelan president as “the great instigator and financier of the violence in Colombia,” claiming that he had authorized public payments to pay for the “intervention.”
The evidence-free accusations were quickly echoed on social media by rightwing former Colombian Presidents Andrés Pastrana and Álvaro Uribe, with the latter writing that “They [the Maduro administration] are destroying Colombia, which has a future, in order to construct another Venezuela or Cuba, which do not.”
Following Moreno’s comments, Colombian Defense Minister Diego Molano claimed a “strong” Venezuelan participation in the protests, referencing the arrest and deportation of six Venezuelan citizens allegedly participating in the protests over 10 days ago. There are an estimated 1.7 million Venezuelans living in Colombia, many of which have denounced frequent xenophobic attacks against them.
While Colombian President Iván Duque is yet to comment on the alleged “intervention,” his government decided to take action against Argentina and Cuba over the weekend, accusing them of meddling and expelling a Cuban diplomat from the country.
Both Duque and Moreno recognize US-backed self-declared “Interim President” Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s legitimate leader. They also belong to the Lima Group, a regional ad hoc organization of right governments which have previously made similar accusations of Venezuelan incitement, financing or involvement in mass protests across the region, including in Colombia (2019 and 2020), Ecuador (2020), Bolivia (2019), Chile (2019 and 2020) and the United States (2020), all of which were rebutted by Caracas.
In response to the latest claims, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza described the accusations as “shameful,” going on to say that the accusers were “underestimating their people.” He also quoted Spanish poet Antonio Machado, writing via Twitter that “Lies are the most destructive weapon used by fascism.”
For his part, Chavista number two Deputy Diosdado Cabello likewise downplayed the accusations, questioning Colombian intelligence capabilities. “They couldn’t even investigate Operation Gedeon – the failed maritime incursion which happened a year ago and was planned in Colombia – but they can conclude that we [supposedly] have people there. Get out of here!” he said.
Culture Minister Ernesto Villegas chimed in as well, pointing out the hypocrisy of the accusations in comparison to Duque’s 2019 call for Venezuelan soldiers to rebel against the Maduro government.
Colombia has been rocked by a wave of popular protests and strikes since April 28, with government sources claiming 27 people have died. Independent organizations have placed the figure as high as 47, with around 800 injured and more than 400 missing.
The protests were initially organized to oppose a fiscal reform which increased the poor’s tax burden. In efforts to quell the protests, Duque withdrew the reform last Sunday and Finance Minister Alberto Barrera resigned.
However, widespread police brutality, as well as accumulated grievances based around the state’s noncompliance with the 2016 Peace Agreement and other human rights violations have stoked the mass demonstrations. Despite ongoing dialogue, the protests have continued, with Duque authorizing state agencies to use “all necessary force” against them on Monday.
Reports of widespread state violence and human rights abuses have been denounced by a range of Venezuelan leftwing movements, including at a piquet outside the Colombian Consulate in Caracas on Friday.
The rally, which featured the Popular Revolutionary Alternative (APR) bloc and a number of other leftist forces, came in addition to a number of activities in solidarity with the Colombian people held across the country. Solidarity events also took place in a number of other Latin American cities, including Buenos Aires, Santiago and La Paz.
Venezuela and Colombia have had a tense relationship over past years, with diplomatic relations broken and borders closed in 2019. Recent border skirmishes have resulted in a number of deaths, with the Venezuelan government pointing to Colombian “irregular armed groups.” Additionally, Caracas has accused it neighbor’s government of backing regime change attempts, including the 2018 drone attack against Maduro, the 2019 attempted ‘humanitarian’ border incursion, the 2020 Operation Gedeon, and a 2021 foiled terrorist plot, amongst others.
Craig Murray Jailed for Eight Months for Contempt of Court Over Alex Salmond Trial
Sputnik – 11.05.2021
The High Court in Edinburgh has jailed former British diplomat-turned-whistleblower Craig Murray for eight months for contempt of court.
The charge related to Murray’s alleged “jigsaw” identification of the identities of protected witnesses in the trial of former Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond.
But Murray will remain free for three weeks while his lawyers submit an appeal against his conviction.
Sentencing Murray on Tuesday, 10 May, Lady Leeona Dorrian said his actions “strike at the heart of the fair administration of justice” and created a risk of people alleging sexual offences might not want to come forward in future.
Murray believed the prosecution of Salmond was politically motivated and he blogged extensively throughout the trial.
Salmond faced a raft of sex allegations but was acquitted by a jury of all of the charges against him.
The former SNP leader later accused his successor, Nicola Sturgeon, of influencing the prosecution against him and earlier this year he set up his own party, Alba, which ran in the Scottish Parliament elections last week but only won two percent of the vote. Salmond failed to get elected as an MSP.
Murray was charged with three offences:
· Publication of material that creates a “substantial risk” of prejudicing the jury in violation of the Contempt of Court Act 1981;
· Reporting on the exclusion of two jurors in violation of a court order “preventing publication of the details of the issues raised by the Advocate Depute on 23 March 2020” as they related to the jurors’ removal; and
· “Jigsaw identification” of alleged victims who testified against Salmond.
The allegation of jigsaw identification argued that Murray’s articles, individually or in conjunction with other articles and material that can be obtained via Google and social media, could indirectly result in a member of the public determining the identity of alleged victims in the Salmond case.
The Government argued in favour of a wide interpretation of jigsaw identification, meaning that a journalist might violate the law if a person with intimate knowledge of the case could piece together the identity of a protected witnesses. Murray’s lawyers argued that such an interpretation would be unfair and would violate the Article 10 rights of journalists and the public.
See also: The World Darkens a Little More: I May Have to Spend Some Time as a Political Prisoner
Using ‘Russiagate’ & ‘bounties’ logic, anonymous officials claim GRU behind mysterious ‘sonic attacks’ on US spies
By Nebojsa Malic | RT | May 11, 2021
Mysterious “sonic attacks” a scientist had identified as the work of crickets are now being blamed on some kind of Russian secret sci-fi superweapon by anonymous US officials, using the same script as “bounties” and ‘Russiagate’.
The “suspected directed-energy incidents” that have allegedly afflicted US diplomats and spies around the world may have been the work of “Russia’s military intelligence unit, the GRU,” Politico claimed on Monday, citing “three current and former officials with direct knowledge of the discussions.”
Both the CIA and the State Department are looking into the alleged attacks, but “all 18 federal intelligence agencies” are now focusing on the GRU’s “potential involvement” according to one anonymous congressional official. That makes it highly likely the source is someone from the office of House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff (D-California), best known as the promoter of the conspiracy theory that Russia “hacked our democracy” in 2016.
That part about “18 intelligence agencies” is almost verbatim the “17 intelligence agencies” line used in Russiagate. The Space Force has added another agency in the meantime, you see. Trouble is, only select teams from four – the FBI, CIA, NSA and ODNI – ended up actually involved in the Russiagate document.
They produced an assessment that the alleged meddling was “consistent with the methods and motivations” they attributed to Moscow. Compare that to Politico quoting one former national security official, who said it “looks, smells and feels like the GRU.”
“When you are looking at the landscape, there are very few people who are willing, capable and have the technology. It’s pretty simple forensics,” said the anonymous former official, somehow supposedly still in the loop.
Another former official said that Israel and China may also have the technology, but not a presence in all the locations of the alleged incidents, or desire to attack Americans. But Russia does? Again, no evidence, or even explanation what any of this is supposed to be based on.
Politico’s sources also admitted no specific weapon was identified, but that didn’t stop them from speculating about a device that could fit into a car or a large backpack, capable of targeting an individual from 500 to 1,000 yards away. Does any such weapon actually exist?
Now that the KGB is no more, US propagandists love pointing the finger at GRU – which hasn’t been known under that name for a decade, by the way. The agency has been accused of everything and anything – without evidence – from hacking the emails of Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta and running WikiLeaks in 2016, to paying “bounties” to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan.
The “Russian bounties” story – likewise based on anonymous sources – emerged just in time to derail President Donald Trump’s plan to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of 2020, and give then-candidate Joe Biden ammunition to call Trump unpatriotic. After Biden was installed in the White House and announced that he would withdraw from Afghanistan, the “bounties” story was downgraded to “low confidence” and quietly dropped.
Politico’s bombshell speculation was picked up and parroted just as quickly and uncritically as the bounties story had been. In doing so, outlets around the world ignored the publication’s warning earlier in the day that the White House communications team handles all the quotes emanating from administration officials.
While Biden campaigned on “following the science” – a phrase the 78-year-old is fond of repeating in speeches – that commitment seems entirely absent from discussions of the alleged sonic incidents. Back in January 2019, a US Berkeley scientist said he had analyzed the recordings of the “attacks” published by AP and identified them as the chirping of the Indies short-tailed cricket.
Nebojsa Malic is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Telegram @TheNebulator.
Putin submits bill for Russia to quit Open Skies Treaty one year after US withdrew from ‘spying agreement’
By Jonny Tickle | RT | May 11, 2021
Russian President Vladimir Putin has submitted a bill to the country’s parliament to leave the Open Skies Treaty, a post-Cold War surveillance agreement that allows signatory countries to openly spy on each other from the air.
The much-maligned pact has come under attack in recent times, and appears to be on its last legs. Last May, under then-President Donald Trump, the US announced it would withdraw from the treaty. This was confirmed six months later, in November.
Following Washington’s decision to leave the agreement, Moscow revealed that it wanted guarantees from America’s NATO military bloc allies that they would not share information gained through Open Skies with Washington. Such reassurances are yet to come, and current US President Joe Biden has not shown a willingness to re-sign the treaty.
On Tuesday morning, Putin submitted a bill to the State Duma, noting that Moscow would “start domestic procedures” to enable the country to withdraw from Open Skies.
The explanatory note attached to the document praised the agreement for “significantly contributing to building confidence in the military sphere,” noting that America’s decision to leave the treaty in its current form threatens Russia’s national security.
“On November 22, 2020, the US withdrew from the treaty under a far-fetched pretext,” the statement says. “Serious damage was done to compliance with the treaty and its significance in building confidence and transparency.”
In January, Russia’s foreign ministry announced that it had launched domestic procedures to withdraw from the treaty. In a statement, it noted that the move was coming after a “lack of progress in negotiations around the continuation of the treaty under new circumstances.”
Keep Weapons Out of Space — ‘The New War-Fighting Domain’
By Brian Cloughley | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 11, 2021
In January it was noted by a New York Times’ columnist that the nominated Secretary of the U.S. Defence Department, General Lloyd Austin, had “told the Senate he would keep a ‘laserlike focus’ on sharpening the country’s ‘competitive edge’ against China’s increasingly powerful military. Among other things, he called for new American strides in building ‘space-based platforms’ and repeatedly referred to space as a war-fighting domain.” This was not a surprising commitment by the about-to-be confirmed head of the Pentagon, which had already added the ominously named Space Force to its war-fighting assets.
Former White House incumbent, Donald Trump, announced creation of the Space Force in December 2019, stating it would be responsible for “the world’s newest war-fighting domain.” He considered that “Amid grave threats to our national security, American superiority in space is absolutely vital. We’re leading, but we’re not leading by enough, but very shortly we’ll be leading by a lot. The Space Force will help us deter aggression and control the ultimate high ground.” His explicit declaration that Washington is prepared to engage in warfare in yet another “domain” was not surprising, but it is regrettable that the Biden Administration shows no sign of reversing the intention to deploy weapons in space.
Russian reaction to establishment of the Space Force was President Putin’s observation that “The U.S. military-political leadership openly considers space as a military theatre and plans to conduct operations there” which is entirely against the letter and spirit of the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, known generally as the Outer Space Treaty. In Article IV of this agreement of 1967, as recorded by the U.S. State Department, “States Parties to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner.”
111 countries have agreed to abide by the treaty, and the 23 that have as yet failed to ratify it are unlikely to engage in space activities of any sort. The accord was a major step forward during the Cold War, and it was hoped that in later years its provisions might be extended and made more precise and binding, but this was not to be. The attraction of space as a war-fighting domain was too attractive to be ignored by Washington, and in 1982 the U.S. Air Force was directed by President Reagan to form Space Command, known as the “Guardians of the High Frontier” and it is not surprising that members of the new Space Force are also titled “Guardians”. The problem is the mission of these people includes “maturing the military doctrine for space power, and organizing space forces to present to our Combatant Commands.”
There has been no rebuttal of Trump’s definition of space as “the world’s new war-fighting domain,” and no modification of the Space Command Mission to “enhance warfighting readiness and lethality through the integration of space capabilities with the joint force, allies, and inter-agency partners in all domains.” And there is rejection of international moves to reduce the possibility of confrontation in space that could lead to outright conflict.
Unconditional U.S. opposition to peace in space was exemplified by its 2014 rejection of a UN General Assembly resolution on the prevention of an arms race in that domain. It is extremely difficult to see how any government could object to a proposal that calls “on all states, in particular those with major space capabilities, to contribute actively to the peaceful use of outer space, prevent an arms race there, and refrain from actions contrary to that objective.” But sure enough, although 178 countries consider this to be a good thing for the future of the world, and voted for the resolution, the United States and Israel abstained. It is verging on the incredible that these countries would not endorse a proposal that there should be peaceful use of outer space.
There was worse to come in the saga of space militarisation, for in November 2020 the First Committee of the UN General Assembly received no support from the U.S. for further initiatives that could guide the world away from the disaster that will befall us if there is no check on movement to “war-fighting” in space. Five resolutions were put forward concerning the furtherance of peace in space, and the U.S. voted against four of them, including the one that specified there should be “No first placement of weapons in outer space.” It seemed that the then U.S. administration actually favoured placement of weapons in space, and it is woeful that the Biden administration has not made it policy to cease militarisation of Trump’s “war-fighting domain”.
April 12 is the International Day of Human Space Flight, marking an important anniversary, not only of technical achievement but of a hoped-for dawn of international cooperation. The UN notes that in 1961 there was “the first human space flight, carried out by Yuri Gagarin, a Soviet citizen. This historic event opened the way for space exploration for the benefit of all humanity.” Formalisation of the anniversary was declared by a UN General Assembly stressing that celebration is merited because of international desire “to maintain outer space for peaceful purposes,” and the U.S. representative declared that the “cold war space race is over and we have all won”.
Unfortunately, the Cold War has been resumed by Washington, and the “space race” has been re-established by creation of the Space Force intended to “control the ultimate high ground.”
The fact that the International Day of Human Space Flight involves remembrance of a Russian astronaut is enough to keep the anniversary out of the U.S. mainstream media, and this affected reporting of an important statement made on that day last month.
Russia’s foreign minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s space policy by stating “We consistently believe that only guaranteed prevention of an arms race in space will make it possible to use it for creative purposes, for the benefit of the entire mankind. We call for negotiations on the development of an international legally binding instrument that would prohibit the deployment of any types of weapons there, as well as the use of force or the threat of force.”
The policy could not be clearer. And it was followed by a similar declaration by China’s Zhao Lijian that “We are calling on the international community to start negotiations and reach agreement on arms control in order to ensure space safety as soon as possible. China has always been in favour of preventing an arms race in space; it has been actively promoting negotiations on a legally binding agreement on space arms control jointly with Russia.”
On February 22, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a speech in Geneva that the U.S. should “engage all countries, including Russia and China, on developing standards and norms of responsible behaviour in outer space.”
Even if Blinken’s words fall well short of equating “responsible behaviour” with any indication of a commitment to refrain from placing weapons in space, he did conclude that “I pledge that the United States is here to work, cooperate, and once again use the Conference on Disarmament to create bold, innovative agreements to protect ourselves and each other.”
Well: get on with it, Secretary Blinken. Start talking with people rather than at them. You might even manage to convince your own Space Guardians that peace is better than war.
US handing out germ warfare weaponry that could wipe out millions across world, Russian official claims
RT | May 11, 2021
The US is becoming a major exporter of deadly biological weapons to nations across the globe, a member of Russia’s Security Council has argued, warning of the potential for a colossal body count if they are ever actually used.
Yuri Averyanov, the first deputy secretary of the country’s top national defense body, used an interview with RIA Novosti on Tuesday to warn that “lethal and dangerous microorganisms… could potentially be released into the environment, allegedly by mistake.” He added that such an attack, if used against Russia, “would lead to a massive destruction of the civilian population” both within the country and in neighboring states.
He added that Washington is currently working to increase biological weapons capabilities in a number of states around the world, including some close to Russia. These programs, he says, weaponize viruses and other pathogens “primarily for military purposes.”
Last month, the secretary of the Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, also warned about research facilities near the borders of Russia and China, suggesting that they could be used as part of a concerted biological warfare effort against the two nations. “There are research centers where Americans help local scientists develop new ways to combat dangerous diseases,” he said, but claimed that “the authorities in the countries where these centers are located have no real idea what is happening within their walls.”
Germ warfare is formally banned by the Biological Weapons Convention, signed in 1972 and ratified by 183 states. Russia, along with the US and Britain, underwrites the agreement as one of the three depository members responsible for administering membership of the treaty. The convention describes the potential use of biological and toxin-based weapons as “repugnant to the conscience of mankind.”
Despite this, the Federation of American Scientists has previously cautioned that US research on non-lethal bio-agents “exceeds the limits” imposed by the Cold War-era deal. However, the Atlantic Council, a lobby group for the US-led NATO military bloc has implied that Moscow could be breaching the convention, and argued that the pact should be “given some teeth – to keep countries like Russia in line.”
COVID vaccine can worsen disease; mainstream study; not on the evening news
By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | May 11, 2021
“COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralising antibodies may sensitise vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.”
Feel free to take THAT to a doctor.
This quote appears in an October 2020 study, published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice. The title of the study: “Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease.”
The two authors are Timothy Cardozo and Ronald Veazy. Cardozo’s affiliation is listed as “Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.” Veazy’s affiliation is “Division of Comparative Pathology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Tulane University School of Medicine, Tulane National Primate Research Center, Covington, LA, USA.”
The study declares that volunteers in COVID vaccine clinical trials and people who receive the vaccine after clinical trials—meaning now—should be informed there is a risk of “more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.”
So that’s what I’m doing.
Have you heard of anyone about to receive the vaccine being INFORMED that they’re at risk—that they’re liable to become more seriously ill than if they refused the shot?
Of course not. Politicians, news people, and other idiots simply take the word “vaccine” and push it like a street dealer pushes heroin.
Consent given by the patient, after being truly informed, is a bedrock medical responsibility.
The claim that a declared crisis overrides a person’s need to understand what is being done to him is a criminal claim.
Looking at how the COVID vaccination campaign is being conducted, anyone can see informed consent is being violated to its core.
Manufactured hysteria is not an acceptable substitute for moral duty.
Modern-day fascists believe that “ten thousand bloviating Faucis” declaring the vaccine is absolutely safe and effective is actual science.
Months ago, I wrote a piece that fits nicely with this article. Based on a New York Times op-ed by Peter Doshi and Eric Topol—the clinical trials of the COVID vaccine conducted by Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna were designed to prove nothing more than:
The vaccine could prevent a cough, or chills and fever (diagnosed as COVID-19).
That’s right.
Now follow this. The vaccine makers were waiting for the SARS-CoV-2 virus to descend on some volunteers during the clinical trials.
But since the volunteers were healthy, how long would it take for “serious cases of COVID”—pneumonia—to show up? Three years? Ten years? Never?
The vaccine makers certainly weren’t going to wait. No, they were going to stop the clinical trial when 150 of the 30,000 volunteers were diagnosed with “mild COVID”—a cough, or chills and fever.
Then they were going to see how many people who actually got the vaccine vs. how many people who got a saltwater placebo shot received a COVID-19 diagnosis.
THAT was the essence of the clinical trial.
Of course, all three vaccine makers claimed that far more people in the placebo group were diagnosed with COVID—thus “proving” the vaccine was effective.
Effective at preventing “a mild case of COVID”—a cough, or chills and fever—both of which cure themselves naturally, without the need for a vaccine.
There’s your vaccine science.
A show for buffoons.
So now, as vaccine-caused deaths escalate daily, this destructive genetic shot is being given to people all over the world. There is no authentic informed consent that spells out the incredible danger. And the vaccine was never meant to prevent more than a cold or mild flu.
Yet you’re supposed to develop a suicidal impulse, take the shot, and earn your vaccine passport or virtue-signaling immunity bracelet or microchip so you can enlist in the Brave New World.
Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX.