Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran marks 33rd anniversary of US downing of passenger jet in Persian Gulf

Press TV – July 3, 2021

Iran has commemorated the 33rd anniversary of the downing of its passenger aircraft by a US Navy guided-missile cruiser over the Persian Gulf, which killed 290 people.

During a memorial ceremony on Saturday, officials from Iran’s southern Hormozgan province and the families of the tragedy’s victims, who were aboard a vessel, tossed flowers into the waters near the Strait of Hormuz and Hengam Island.

Chanting slogans such as “Down with the US” and “Down with Israel,” the participants condemned the inhumane US war crime.

In Tehran, President Hassan Rouhani denounced the cowardly US targeting of the passenger plane as “a great, horrible and unacceptable crime.”

“In the incident, 290 people on board the plane were martyred. Unfortunately, the US administration has not formally apologized for the crime and failed to take any significant measure in this regard. It has instead commended the cruiser’s commander,” he said Saturday.

“We hope that the US government will recognize that a great crime was committed in the Persian Gulf in 1988. All the freedom-seekers of the world always urge the US to take necessary measures to apologize and compensate and explain to the people why it has acclaimed the murderer and the criminal responsible for this great crime.”

On July 3, 1988, the USS Vincennes fired missiles at an Iran Air Airbus A300B2 which was flying over the Hormuz Strait from the port city of Bandar Abbas to Dubai, carrying 274 passengers and 16 crew members.

Following the attack, the plane disintegrated and crashed into the Persian Gulf waters, killing all 290 on board, among them 66 children.

US officials claimed that the USS Vincennes had mistaken Iran Air Flight 655 for a warplane. This is while the warship was equipped with highly sophisticated radar systems and electronic battle gear at the time of the attack.

In 1990, the captain of the cruiser, William C. Rogers, was cleared of any wrongdoing, and was even awarded America’s Legion of Merit medal by then US president George Bush for his “outstanding service” during operations in the Persian Gulf.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , | 4 Comments

YouTube suspends Right Side Broadcasting network prior to Trump rally

By Christina Maas | Reclaim the Net | July 3, 2021

Right Side Broadcasting Network has been announced that it has been banned from broadcasting on YouTube for seven days, just hours before a Trump rally that it planned to cover.

Also, many of the channel’s videos of President Donald Trump’s events and rallies have been deleted from its popular channel.

YouTube deleted videos that had several million views.

Footage of Trump at the first “Save America” rally in Ohio last week was deleted, as well as footage of his speech at the North Carolina GOP Convention.

YouTube says the videos violate its “Community Guidelines” of “spam, deceptive practices and scams,” an increasingly given reason when videos are deleted on the platform these days.

RSBN will be using its own app and Rumble to broadcast the July 3rd rally.

RSBN was founded in 2015 by Joe Seales. The conservative media company rose in popularity for live streaming Trump’s rallies on YouTube. The over 3,000 videos on RSBN’s YouTube channel have millions of views.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Prosecutors Drop Charges Against British Army Veterans Over Killings In Northern Ireland’s Troubles

Sputnik – 02.07.2021

On 30 January 1972 the British Army’s Parachute Regiment shot dead 13 unarmed Catholic civil rights marchers in Londonderry. The incident, known as Bloody Sunday, became a recruitment tool for the Provisional IRA who were determined to kick British troops out of Ulster.

Two retired British Army soldiers have been told they will not face trial for murder over incidents during The Troubles in Northern Ireland.

More than 3,600 people suffered violent deaths during The Troubles – 30 years of sectarian strife in Northern Ireland, which was ended by the Good Friday Agreement.

​Soldier F – believed to be a former member of the Parachute Regiment – was awaiting trial over the deaths of James Wray and William McKinney on Bloody Sunday in Londonderry.

Soldier B was facing a murder trial in relation to Daniel Hegarty, 15, who was shot in the head in Derry in July 1972.

The Public Prosecution Service reviewed both cases after another trial collapsed earlier this year.

In that case Soldiers A and C were acquitted of murdering IRA member Joe McCann after a court ruled statements they made were inadmissible.

​The PPS announced on Friday, 2 July, that in view of that ruling and the similarity of the evidence against Soldiers F and B “there was no longer a reasonable prospect of key evidence in proceedings against Soldier F and Soldier B being ruled admissible.”

The decision was greeted with anger by families of the Bloody Sunday victims, who said they would seek a judicial review.

John Kelly, whose brother Michael died on Bloody Sunday, said: “It’s a day of devastation but we’re not going to give up. The fight for justice goes on.”

​Soldier F had been the only person charged in relation to Bloody Sunday. The PPS had already decided there was insufficient evidence to charge 16 other former soldiers.

The British government announced in May it would introduce legislation to give greater protection to former soldiers who had served in Northern Ireland.

That followed the resignation of defence minister Johnny Mercer, who quit in disgust at the treatment of British Army veterans who had served in Northern Ireland.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , , | 2 Comments

New emails raise new allegations of Influence Peddling by Hunter Biden and Direct Knowledge of Joe Biden

By Jonathan Turley | July 2, 2021

We have previously discussed the concerted and often embarrassing blackout in the media on stories involving Hunter Biden’s influence peddling during his father’s tenure as Vice President. That includes the burying of the laptop story and the growing contradictions over his father’s denial of any knowledge or involvement in his shady business dealings. Even recent reports that Hunter may have paid prostitutes with his father’s account were blacked out by mainstream media which exhaustively pursued any story related to the Trump children and their dealings and life styles. Now, however, there is a major allegation that Hunter used access to his father to seal previously unknown deals with Mexican businessmen, including Carlos Slim. A picture shows Hunter with the businessmen in the Vice President residence with his father.

As in the past, Americans interested in such stories have had to rely on the foreign press or a couple domestic sites for such information.

The new emails include references to the use of Air Force II by Hunter Biden to pursue the deals — a similar pattern revealed with regard to the China dealings. The emails detail a number of visits to Mexico, including a February 2016 flight on Air Force II with his father. On the plane was his business partner Jeff Cooper, who ran Illinois-based SimmonsCooper. That is one of the largest asbestos litigation firms in the country and Hunter was given 3 percent of Cooper’s venture capital firm Eudora Global, according to emails. President Biden’s brother (who featured in past controversial deals) was also reportedly involved in some of these efforts.

These dealings continued into 2018 as Hunter pushed for deals with Slim. One text message from July 24, 2018 reads “Spoke to my dad about ‘Slim ask” and Cooper responds “Oh that sounds SO F’ING GOOD.”

It obviously does not sound quite so good if you are a reporter who has been repeatedly assured by President Biden that he had no knowledge or involvement in any dealings with Hunter. That was previously refuted by various sources. Hunter himself contradicted his father’s repeated denial. Then there are the emails referring to the “Big Guy”, which witnesses say was Joe Biden. Then there is Tony Bobulinski who stated that he personally met with Joe Biden to discuss Hunter’s business dealings. Bobulinski is repeatedly praised by Hunter Biden in the emails and identified as the person in control of transactions for “the family.” He has directly contradicted Joe Biden’s denial of any knowledge or involvement in his son’s dubious dealings.

The new emails contain additional information directly contradicting President Biden. In addition to earlier pictures from golf trips and references to his involvement or knowledge, new material refers to a notable dinner arranged in Washington, D.C.

Hunter arranged for then Vice President Biden to have dinner on April 16, 2015 with his Ukrainian, Russian and Kazakhstani business associates. They appropriately chose a private room at Café Milano, a Georgetown restaurant that brags that it is “Where the world’s most powerful people go.” After the dinner, Hunter received an email from Vadym Pozharskyi, an executive with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, to thank him for introducing him to his father: “Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure.”

It is clear that Hunter Biden was selling access and influence. It appears that Joe Biden was aware of that effort. That is very serious. If these emails are false, this is a major story. If they are true, this is a major scandal. Presumably, however, this story will result in another run to the nearest ice cream shop for breathless coverage on the current frozen delights of the President.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

Vaccine Billionaires and Human Guinea Pigs

By Colin Todhunter | OffGuardian | July 3, 2021

How do you make a potentially dangerous and ineffective drug appear like a miracle of modern science? You could, for instance, enrol only certain people in clinical trials and exclude others or bring the study to a close as soon as you see a spike in the data that implies evidence of effectiveness.

There are many ways to do it.

According to health practitioner and writer Craig Stellpflug in his article ‘Big Pharma: Getting away with murder’(2012), the strategy is to get in quick, design the study to get the result you want, get out fast and make lots of money.

Stellpflug says:

If a study comes up negative for your favorite drug, just don’t publish it! 68 per cent of all drug studies are swept under the carpet to keep those pesky side effects from being reported. Only 32 per cent of studies come up positive and a lot of those studies are ‘shortened’ to limit the long-term findings. Studies cut short were found to overestimate the study drug’s effectiveness and miss dangerous side effects and complications by an average of 30 per cent. This would explain the amazing 85 per cent drug study success rate in the hands of Big Pharma according to the Annals of Internal Medicine.”

Of course, it helps to get the regulatory agencies on board and to convince the media and health officials of the need for your wonder product and its efficacy and safety. In the process, well-paid career scientists and ‘science’ effectively become shaped and led by corporate profit margins and political processes.

And what better way to make a financial killing than by making a mountain out of a molehill and calling it a ‘pandemic’?

COVID-19 VACCINE CONCERNS

The Wall Street Journal recently published an article by two health professors who said politics — not science — is behind the failure of health officials and the media to fully inform the public about the potential risks associated with COVID vaccines.

Although the article is available in full to subscribers only, the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) website provides an informative summary.

The CHD notes that Dr Joseph A Ladapo, associate professor of medicine at the David Geffen School of Medicine, and Dr Harvey A Risch, professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, wrote that while prominent scientists have raised concerns that the safety risks of Covid-19 vaccines have been underestimated, the politics of vaccination has relegated their concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking.

The two professors noted that clinical studies do not always tell the full story about the safety of medications and that the health effects often remain unknown until the medicine is rolled out to the general public. Examples include Vioxx, a pain reliever that increased the risk of heart attack and stroke; antidepressants that appeared to increase suicide attempts among young adults; and an influenza vaccine used in the 2009-10 swine flu epidemic that was suspected of causing febrile convulsions and narcolepsy in children.

The authors added that clinical trials often enrol patients who are not representative of the general population and more is learnt about drug safety from real-world evidence. With this in mind, they said the large clustering of side effects following COVID vaccines is concerning as is the silence around these potential signals of harm.

Serious adverse events reported by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System include low platelets, heart inflammation, deep-vein thrombosis and death. However, the two scientists argue this is likely to be a fraction of the total number of adverse events.

They criticise the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for ignoring the reported serious COVID vaccine side effects.

The authors acknowledge the risks of COVID vaccines in certain populations, not least children, may outweigh the benefits. They also state that not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from COVID-19 vaccination. Something which is not readily acknowledged by the CDC or Anthony Fauci, an indication, according to the authors, of how deeply entangled pandemic politics is in science.

They conclude that public health authorities are making a mistake and risking public erosion of trust by not being forthcoming about the possibility of harm from the vaccines.

MERCK AND VIOXX

It is revealing that the two scientists refer to Vioxx, which was once popular for treating the symptoms of arthritis. It was removed from the market in 2004 after concerns that it may have injured hundreds of thousands of patients, while possibly killing tens of thousands in the US.

Dr David Graham, whistleblower and senior FDA investigator, criticised the FDA’s approval process of Vioxx (rofecoxib), an anti-inflammatory drug administered orally. In various interviews and congressional hearings, he described the outcome of Vioxx as disastrous and unparalleled in the history of the US. He added that the saga surrounding Vioxx had constituted an unprecedented failure of the nation’s system of drug approval and oversight.

In 2004, Graham argued that the painkiller had caused 88,000 to 139,000 heart attacks in the US – 30-40 per cent of which were fatal – over the previous five years. Nevertheless, manufactured by Monsanto (a company with a proven track record of corrupt practices) and co-marketed by Merck, Vioxx became a leading drug in providing pain relief from the symptoms of various forms of arthritis.

Research presented to the FDA in early 2001 showed that patients taking Vioxx had a higher risk of heart attack compared to those taking some of the older alternatives.

However, the real game-changer came in 2004 when Dr Graham released the findings that found Vioxx increased the chance of heart attack and death from cardiac arrest significantly more than its biggest rival on the market. Dosages of Vioxx in excess of the recommended daily dose of 25 milligrams were also found to more than triple a patient’s risk compared to those who had not taken painkillers.

In September 2004, Vioxx was pulled from the market. But in 2006, more damning findings were revealed by a study that showed that some patients had likely suffered from a heart attack much sooner after starting treatment with Vioxx.

Appearing in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, the study showed that 25 per cent of the patients who had heart attacks while taking Vioxx did so within two weeks of starting the drug. This indicated that Vioxx-related cardiovascular risks may occur much earlier than previously thought.

The FDA was criticised for its close relationship with Merck and witnesses at a senate finance committee hearing described how danger signals of Vioxx went ignored. Indeed, a 2007 article published by the National Institutes of Health alleged that even though scientists at Merck knew that the drug might adversely affect the cardiovascular system, none of the intervention studies submitted to the FDA in 1998 were designed to evaluate such risk.

ROBBER BARONS AND GUINEA PIGS

Merck reported over $11 billion in Vioxx sales during the five years the drug was on the market. To date, the company has paid nearly $6 billion in litigation settlements and criminal fines over Vioxx. Still, in hard-nosed commercial terms, it was a massive success, resulting in a $5 billion gain for the company.

In May 2021, it was reported that Covid-19 vaccines had created at least nine new billionaires. According to research by the People’s Vaccine Alliance, the new billionaires included Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel and Ugur Sahin, the CEO of BioNTech, which has produced a vaccine with Pfizer. Both CEOs were then worth around $4 billion. Senior executives from China’s CanSino Biologics and early investors in Moderna have also become billionaires.

Although the nine new billionaires are worth a combined $19.3 billion, the vaccines were largely funded by public money. For instance, according to a May 2021 report by CNN, BioNTech received €325 million from the German government for the development of the vaccine. The company made a net profit of €1.1 billion in the first three months of the year, largely thanks to its share of sales from the Covid-19 vaccine, compared with a loss of €53.4 million for the same period last year.

Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine sales reached $1.7 billion in the first three months of this year and it had its first profitable quarter ever. Moderna is expected to make $13.2 billion in Covid-19 vaccine revenue in 2021. The company received billions of dollars in funding from the US government for development of its vaccine.

Big Pharma has every reason to perpetuate the notion of a deadly global pandemic and to inflate the efficacy of and need for its vaccines. And it, along with its associates in government and at the WHO, has every reason to discredit alternative and arguably more effective treatments like Ivermectin (see the online article ‘The Campaign against Ivermectin: WHO’s Chief Scientist Served with Legal Notice for Disinformation and Suppression of Evidence‘).

There is no need to cover ground here that has been covered extensively elsewhere but it is now abundantly clear that many continue to question the overall official COVID-19 narrative, the fear propaganda, the specific data, the PCR testing protocols, the apparent conflicts of interest and vaccine efficacy.

Moreover, A group of 57 leading scientists, doctors and policy experts recently released a report calling into question the safety and efficacy of the current Covid-19 vaccines. They are calling for an immediate end to all vaccine programmes.

There are hundreds of scientists who have questioned governmental and WHO strategy and who have brought attention to the extremely low risks posed by COVID to the bulk of the population as well as the destructive (ineffective) policies and decisions pertaining to lockdowns and other restrictions.

There are many other top scientists who are questioning the need for mass vaccination and who have also pointed out credible and extremely disturbing side effects (real and potential) of such a strategy, not least Dr Robert Malone, credited with developing mRNA vaccine technology, Dr Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist, and Dr Geert Vanden Bossche, a prominent virologist and vaccine expert.

Unlike Merck and Vioxx, it will be governments (the public) that foot any future indemnity costs of these experimental vaccines that have escaped proper (long-term) testing. And given the scale of the rollout, the damage caused could make the adverse effects of Vioxx seem a mere blip.

Vaccines that were brought to market via emergency authorisation use for an ‘emergency’ constructed on the basis of deaths so often wrongly attributed to COVID-19. Brought to market on the basis of flawed PCR test protocols with magnification cycles primed to create a ‘casedemic’.

To borrow from Dr David Graham: are we currently witnessing something more disastrous and unparalleled in the history of the world, let alone the US: an unprecedented failure of gobal drug approval and oversight?

In the meantime, while billions of vaccinated people serve as human guinea pigs, the newly crowned vaccine kings will make hay while the sun shines (and the fear continues).

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

YouTube censors video of Nobel Prize winner Dr. Satoshi Ōmura discussing ivermectin

By Tom Parker | Reclaim the Net | July 2, 2021

Before the coronavirus pandemic, ivermectin was described as a “wonder” drug by the medical community. And in 2015, Dr. Satoshi Ōmura and Dr. William C. Campbell were awarded half the Nobel prize in Physiology or Medicine for their work that led to the development of ivermectin.

“The importance of Ivermectin for improving the health and wellbeing of millions of individuals with River Blindness and Lymphatic Filariasis, primarily in the poorest regions of the world, is immeasurable,” the Nobel Assembly stated in its press release for the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

But after the pandemic began, the tech giants have gone all out to purge content that recommends ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19.

And today, these Big Tech policies against ivermectin resulted in one of Ōmura’s speeches where he discussed ivermectin being struck down for “violating YouTube’s community guidelines.”

“When the fascists at YouTube censor the Noble Prize winner Dr. Satoshi Omura, a man whose discoveries have saved a hundred million + from blindness, the world has entered a very, very dark place,” Australian Member of Parliament Craig Kelly tweeted. “I cannot express in words how angry & sad this makes me & fearful for the future.”

Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care, an alliance of physicians and scholars that has committed to “research and develop lifesaving protocols for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 in all stages of illness,” also spoke out against the censorship and warned that “brilliant scientists and lifesaving science are systematically being gagged.”

Ōmura joins the ranks of many other senatorslawmakersmedical journalsbiologists, and YouTubers who have been censored by Big Tech for discussing ivermectin.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

In many states, minors may consent to receive COVID-19 shot even without parent’s knowledge

By Mordechai Sones | America’s Frontline Doctors | June 30, 2021

District Administration survey conducted just before the FDA’s authorization for 12-15-year-olds to receive the COVID-19 shot found that only 3 in 10 parents said they would vaccinate their children right away, with most instead wanting to wait and see, or saying they would not get their child vaccinated at all or would do so only if required for school.

However, with the authorization of Pfizer’s shot for 12-15-year-olds, a group that totals almost 17 million, minors can consent to receive the COVID-19 shot even without the parent’s knowledge in many states.

The age at which a minor can consent to receive the experimental biological agent in Alabama is age 14; in San Francisco, 12; Philadelphia, 12; North Carolina, 11; South Carolina, 16. America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Legal Director Ali Schultz explained: “They can all consent, minors can consent, on their own, even if they live with their mom and dad who are married, they live with their parents, no issues, the child literally can consent at school to receive the vaccine, without the parents even knowing.”

She continued: “We’ve had so many people reach out, and they were just heartbroken, they cannot believe that their child was able to get this without them even knowing, because as parents they were personally against the vaccine, and no-one even ran it by them.

“And what’s even scarier: It’s up to the health care provider, in a multitude of states; Iowa, Idaho, Washington, Arkansas; so if a ‘health care provider’ deems that it is appropriate for a minor to get the vaccine, then they can do so without parental consent.”

According to District Administration, although most states still require parental consent, “the landscape may be shifting slightly as more jurisdictions seek to encourage vaccination of young people.” Their specific findings are as follows:

  • Most states (41) require parental consent for vaccination of minors below the age of 18, although one of these states (NE) requires consent below age 19. There are some exceptions to these requirements:
    • Many allow for certain minors, such as those who are emancipated, homeless or living apart from their parent or guardian, or married, to self-consent.
    • Cities in two states (San Francisco in CA and Philadelphia in PA), have moved to allow minors, ages 12 and older, to self-consent for COVID-19 vaccination.
    • In one state (AZ), if a parent refuses to consent for COVID-19 vaccination, but if a child or a doctor requests it, a court order can be obtained to allow for vaccination.
  • In 5 states, a minor’s ability to self-consent is based on a specific age as follows:
    • Two states where a minor must be at least 16 (RI and SC)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 15 (OR)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 14 (AL)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 11 (DC; in DC, each healthcare provider may institute additional requirements which could include requiring a parent or guardian to be present).
  • The remaining 5 states apply the “mature minor doctrine”, meaning that there is no specific age cut-off but providers have discretion to decide if a minor possesses the maturity to consent for themselves (AR, ID, NC, TN, WA).
  • This means that parental consent has already been required for 16-17 year-olds in most states (41) since the initial authorization of the Pfizer vaccine on December 11, 2020. Two additional states require consent for some subset of 12-15 year-olds, bringing the count to 43 states where most minors in this age group would need parental consent. Once the next group of children is eligible for vaccination, those below age 12, this number will grow to 45.

National Vaccine Information Center‘s Barbara Loe Fisher commented on the “shifting landscape”: “This past year, we have seen many lawmakers in the U.S. and other countries vote to eliminate or severely restrict civil liberties in the name of the public health.  One of the most outrageous legislative actions violating parental and human rights took place in Washington, D.C. in November 2020 when City Council officials gave doctors the power to vaccinate children as young as 11 years old and hide what they did from parents. The D.C. Mayor refused to veto the bill and, in January 2021, the U.S. Congress sat on its hands and gave tacit approval to enactment of the most dangerous child vaccination law in America.”

She continued: “In a breathtaking violation of medical ethics and several federal laws, the new vaccine concealment law in Washington, DC allows doctors to extract “informed consent” from young children too immature to know what informed consent means or what a vaccine reaction looks and feels like. The D.C. City Council majority, with only three members dissenting, cruelly disempowered parents by voting to make it illegal for a doctor, insurance company or school administrator to divulge a child’s vaccination history in records that can be seen by the child’s mother or father.

“An 11-year old child does not know or understand his or her personal health history but most parent do. If a child has experienced previous vaccine reactions, has severe allergies or other health conditions that could increase vaccine risks, parents kept in the dark will not have a way to protect their child from further harm.

“Parents who don’t know which vaccines their children have been given will not be able to monitor them for signs of a potentially life-threatening vaccine reaction that requires immediate medical treatment. If the child is injured or dies after vaccination, parents will not know they must apply to the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) before the filing deadline expires.

“Parents will not know their insurance company has been billed for vaccines. Parents will not know that a school the child attends is in possession of their child’s secret vaccination records even when there is a vaccine exemption for religious belief reasons on file with the school.

“This blatant violation of a parent’s moral right and legal responsibility to make medical risk decisions on behalf of a minor child was endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics22 and pushed through by the DC City Council, while the Mayor and the US Congress looked the other way.”

She concluded: “The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights states that:

“The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society;” and “For persons who are not capable of exercising autonomy, special measures are to be taken to protect their rights and interests;” and “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information.”

“It is a profound betrayal of public trust for any city, state or federal government to strip parents of their God given right to protect their children from harm by allowing a doctor to give a child a pharmaceutical product without getting a parent’s permission. Science is not perfect, doctors are not infallible, and pharmaceutical products like vaccines come with risks that can be greater for some individuals than others, which is why parents must retain the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking on behalf of their minor children.

“Will the vaccine concealment bill that is now law in Washington, DC be exported to your state next?”

Mercury News provided the list of where parental or guardian consent is now generally required for COVID-19 vaccinations among people ages 12 to 15, based on a CNN query to health departments across all 50 states:

  • Alabama — Yes for younger than 14
  • Alaska — Yes
  • Arizona — Yes
  • Arkansas — Yes
  • California — Yes
  • Colorado — Yes
  • Connecticut — Yes
  • Delaware — Yes
  • Florida — Yes
  • Georgia — Yes
  • Hawaii — Yes
  • Idaho — Yes
  • Illinois — Yes
  • Indiana — Yes
  • Iowa — “It is up to each individual health care provider/health system”
  • Kansas — Yes
  • Kentucky – Yes
  • Louisiana — Yes
  • Maine — Yes
  • Maryland — Yes
  • Massachusetts — Yes
  • Michigan — Yes
  • Minnesota — Yes
  • Mississippi — Yes
  • Missouri — Yes
  • Montana — Yes
  • Nebraska — Yes
  • Nevada — Yes
  • New Hampshire — Yes
  • New Jersey — Yes
  • New Mexico — Yes
  • New York — Yes
  • North Carolina — No for teens
  • North Dakota — Yes
  • Ohio — Yes
  • Oklahoma — Yes
  • Oregon — Yes for younger than 15
  • Pennsylvania — Yes
  • Rhode Island — Yes
  • South Carolina — Yes
  • South Dakota — Yes
  • Tennessee — Yes for younger than 14
  • Texas — Yes
  • Utah — Yes
  • Vermont — Yes
  • Virginia — Yes
  • Washington — Yes
  • West Virginia — Yes
  • Wisconsin — Yes
  • Wyoming — Yes

Additionally, some private businesses or pharmacies have their own rules.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Retraction of paper on vaccine deaths spurs call for more scrutiny of COVID-19 death reports

Medical journal sets much higher burden to show deaths from vaccine than from COVID, say authors of retracted paper.

By Greg Piper | Just the News | July 2, 2021

Should public health authorities scrutinize deaths attributed to COVID-19 as closely as they scrutinize deaths attributed to COVID-19 vaccines?

Defenders of a controversial study on the risk-benefit ratio of COVID-19 vaccines are calling hypocrisy on a medical journal for retracting the paper a week after publishing it, following the resignations of several journal editors in protest.

In a Friday retraction notice in the journal Vaccines, the editor in chief and “several” editorial board members said the paper’s authors were not able to “satisfactorily” answer claims that they conflated correlation with causation.

Analyzing data from the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre, known as LAREB, the paper’s authors estimated COVID-19 vaccines take two lives for every three they save. The country leads Europe in vaccine adverse-reaction reporting.

Authors Harald Walach, Rainer Klement and Wouter Aukema challenged criticism from Eugene van Puijenbroek, who leads LAREB’s scientific department, that they had misused its data.

“This starts a long-overdue debate on how to gauge the safety of COVID-19 vaccines,” they wrote in a statement provided to Retraction Watch Thursday.

“Currently we only have association, we agree, and we never said anything else. But the same is true with fatalities as consequences of SARS-CoV2-infections [sic],” which are “rarely vetted by autopsy or second opinion” to confirm they were caused by the novel coronavirus, rather than incidental to infection.

Brown University epidemiologist Andrew Bostom wasn’t impressed by the journal’s “baloney” explanation for the retraction, either. “The [vaccine] deaths are as causally related as C19 deaths which allow for any positive test within 30-60 days of a death from any cause to be tallied as a C19 death,” he wrote in a Twitter message to Just the News.

Bostom pointed to a June study, not yet peer-reviewed, of a sample of deaths in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System reported through April. The sample was limited to people who got early vaccinations, primarily elderly or those with “significant health conditions.”

Researchers at the University of London and New Zealand’s Massey University found that they could rule out “vaccine reaction” as a contributing factor in just 14% of deaths. “Contrary to claims that most of these reports are made by lay-people and are hence clinically unreliable, we identified health service employees as the reporter in at least 67%,” they wrote:

Correlation versus causation is also an ongoing issue in research on the effectiveness of masks in mitigating the spread of COVID-19. Commenters immediately challenged a Thursday report in MedPage Today on a study that purported to find masks effective in stopping in-school transmission, but had no control group of mask-optional schools.

‘Largest vaccination experiment in history of medicine’

The journal Vaccines was under internal pressure to retract the paper almost immediately. Two of its editors, virologist Florian Krammer and immunologist Katie Ewer, publicly announced their resignations on Twitter within three days of publication.

Science magazine reported four more resignations from Vaccines by July 1, including the journal’s founding editor in chief. Ewer made the same correlation-versus-causation argument and complained that the paper was “being used by anti-vaxxers and COVID-19-deniers as evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are not safe.”

Only one of the three peer reviewers was identified by name, Anne Ulrich, chair of biochemistry at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany.

Her review said the authors made “plausible and convincing arguments” for why they chose the Dutch adverse-reaction data, and their analysis was “performed responsibly … without methodological flaws” and with “necessary caveats.”

After controversy, Ulrich told Science the analysis was done “responsibly and without flaws.” (One of the anonymous reviewers was confused why the authors compared the Dutch adverse-reaction data with “number needed to vaccinate” data from a large Israeli field study.)

The journal’s retraction said the paper’s authors reached “incorrect and distorted conclusions” by ignoring the caveats in LAREB, the Dutch reporting system.

Both “healthcare professionals and patients are invited to report suspicions of adverse events that may be associated with vaccination,” but “a causal relation” is not needed. It also said the paper falsely claimed “fatal cases were certified by medical specialists.”

After the journal announced the investigation, Aukema, one of the authors, tweeted that the Dutch reporting system was unlike most in the EU by “timely reporting” adverse reactions to the European Medicines Agency, “so theirs is the best data available.”

According to Science, LAREB official van Puijenbroek wrote to Vaccines the day after the paper’s publication, making the same arguments that appeared in the retraction. He did not respond to an email from Just the News asking for that message, which does not appear to be posted anywhere.

In the statement the paper’s authors gave Retraction Watch, they challenged van Puijenbroek’s characterization of the register’s data.

Just this spring, the LAREB official told the journal Regulatory Science that the Dutch register received more than half of its 34,000 adverse-reaction drug reports in 2019 from “marketing authorisation holders.” The rest came from “healthcare professionals and patients.”

The majority of reports came from parties who “by law, are required to report,” and LAREB says it checks all submissions for “completeness and possible ambiguities,” requesting additional information if necessary. If it’s treating COVID-19 vaccine reports differently, it should say so, the authors wrote.

Treating all deaths following COVID-19 infection as virus-caused deaths, which created a staggering official death toll, has given rise to “an unprecedented sloppy regulation process” that allowed the novel mRNA vaccine technology to be widely tested in humans for the first time, they wrote.

Van Puijenbroek is tacitly arguing that “the largest vaccination experiment in the history of medicine cannot be assessed for safety and unforeseeable toxicities,” but the authors believe “it is mandatory” to use existing “imperfect data” to gauge vaccine safety.

To conclusively end this debate, governments or “university consortia” should set up a transparent “systematic observational post-marketing surveillance study” across a large group of vaccinated people, they said.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

mRNA technology pioneer blasts Big Tech censorship

Dr. Malone’s LinkedIn account was deleted

By Christina Maas | Reclaim the Net | July 2, 2021

Dr. Robert Malone, a pioneer of mRNA technology, is being censored by Big Tech platforms. According to Malone, the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines carry some risks that are being downplayed by public health bodies and his statements are coming up against ‘misinformation’ policies on many social media platforms.

Malone’s team conducted early research on mRNA back in 1990, showing that nanoparticles could transfect mRNA into cells before Hungarian biochemist Katalin Karikó worked on solving some of the obstacles in introducing mRNA into cells throughout the 90s.

Malone’s personal LinkedIn account was removed this week without warning or explanation.

“The historic record of what I have done, stated, figured out (and when) etc. over time is a key part of establishing my credibility and track record as a professional,” Robert Malone tweeted Wednesday. “And that has been erased completely and arbitrarily without warning or explanation.”

The premium LinkedIn account for the government and biotech consultancy business he runs with his wife Jill was not removed.

“He was given no notice, no warnings,” Jill wrote in a statement to Just the News. “He has a 10-15 year old account – has never even had a warning. 6,000 followers.”

It appears LinkedIn took issue with a recent post Malone made about Health Canada responding to the concerns he and other experts raised about the presence of the “spike protein” in the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines.

The Canadian health regulator warned about a small number of cases involving heart inflammation in young male adults and adolescents observed after receiving the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines.

In the since-unavailable post, Malone wrote: “This is certainly a big step forward in my opinion – particularly in contrast to the communication (or lack thereof) and denial from the US and other governments. At least we are now discussing the merits and limitations of the scientific data.”

The Microsoft-owned professional networking platform refused a request for comment on why Malone’s account was removed.

This was not the first time Malone was censored by a mainstream social media platform. A few days ago, YouTube removed an episode of the DarkHorse podcast, run by evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein, where Malone warned about the spike protein in the coronavirus vaccines.

Following the removal, he appeared on Fox News and claimed that the CDC was yet to conduct “risk benefit analyses” of the vaccines, warning that in young people, the vaccines’ “benefits probably don’t outweigh the risks.”

YouTube demonetized the two channels that broadcast the DarkHorse episodes, a move Weinstein said would affect “more than half of our family income.”

According to Jill, YouTube “seems to be banning any content with him [Malone] in it.” She is of the opinion the platform is targeting her husband for contradicting the narrative by the WHO and CDC, which insist that the vaccines are safe.

According to Martin Kulldorf, a Harvard Medical Professor who was locked out of his Twitter account for a month for expressing skepticism on the effectiveness of masks, such censorship is dangerous.

Speaking to Just the News, Kulldorf said: “Open debate is especially important during a public health emergency when many important public health question[s] do not yet have a known answer.”

He said Big Tech platforms should reinstate all suspended accounts, because “To censor and silence scientists under such circumstances can lead to many unnecessary deaths.”

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Petition to Halt FDA Approval of COVID Vaccines

By Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn | July 3, 2021

In the global COVID pandemic there has not been a more important action to protect public health than the current Citizen Petition to FDA to stop the full approval of COVID vaccines until many serious concerns and issues are genuinely addressed.

There has been no significant coverage of this historic petition by mainstream and corporate social media. This cancel action is itself as remarkable as the petition itself. This is a concerted effort to keep the public uninformed about the many problems with the COVID vaccines. Any person who spends the time to peruse the 20-page petition would most likely have a very negative view of the vaccines. For the unvaccinated this awareness would greatly increase vaccine hesitancy and rejection. For the vaccinated it would produce concern and regret.

The political system would literally go crazy if the petition was seriously covered by big media. Big drug companies would jump into action to suppress political and media attention to the petition. The goal of this article is to better inform the public and motivate people to take action.

CONTEXT

Before delving into the substance provided in the petition context is needed to fully understand the critical importance of the petition and make the case for individuals to officially express their support for it as part of the federal regulatory process.

One rational reaction to reading the very detailed, 20-page petition signed by 27 physicians and medical researchers from the US and other nations is this: Why not use all the detailed concerns about the COVID vaccines to demand FDA take the experimental vaccines off the market?

Indeed, the biggest name on the list of signatories is the esteemed Dr. Peter McCullough of Baylor University. He has been very outspoken and honest about many pandemic issues. He has said that, considering the high numbers of deaths and serious health impacts associated with taking the vaccines, FDA should do what it has done in the past when new medicines and vaccines had high negative impacts. Take them off the market.

Why not petition FDA to do this? Just imagine what stopping the whole COVID vaccine effort worldwide would cause. Political and public health systems would not know what to do. They would be totally stunned and flummoxed. So, though the current petition does not do this, it definitely took considerable courage to make the case to FDA to not move quickly from an emergency use authorization to full approval of the COVID vaccines.

People who have not fallen victim to the endless propaganda of the political, big media and public health systems promoting COVID vaccine jabs may not be willing to seriously examine the medical and scientific details of the petition. The problem is cognitive dissonance. Too many people will not easily resolve their propaganda induced positive views of the vaccines with the medical and science details in the petition. But that is what must happen. People must temper their fear of COVID infection with awareness that vaccines are now experimental and have not been sufficiently proved safe for all users.

The potential frustration and fear if the vaccines were deemed insufficiently safe could be mitigated by advocating for early home/outpatient treatment and preventive use of a number of cheap, safe and fully approved generic medicines. The government and public health system have blocked their wide use in favor of the wait-for-the-vaccine strategy that serves the financial interests of vaccine manufacturers. As presented in detail in Pandemic Blunder and this website, there are mountains of medical evidence to justify the treatment protocols. They are legitimate, proven alternatives to experimental and insufficiently tested vaccines that might be fully approved by FDA.

To achieve true protection of public health we need an avalanche of official public support for the petition. More details later on how people can do this.

WHAT THE PETITION EMPHASIZES

A week after the June 1 petition, lead authors of the petition published an editorial in the British Medical Journal with the title “Why we petitioned the FDA to refrain from fully approving any covid-19 vaccine this year.” Here are some key statements that use plain language to summarize key parts of the petition:

“The message of our petition is ‘slow down and get the science right—there is no legitimate reason to hurry to grant a license to a coronavirus vaccine.’ We believe the existing evidence base—both pre- and post-authorization—is simply not mature enough at this point to adequately judge whether clinical benefits outweigh the risks in all populations.”

“We focus on methods and processes, outlining the many remaining unknowns about safety and effectiveness—and suggest the kinds of studies needed to address the open questions.”

“Trials by vaccine manufacturers were designed to follow participants for two years, and should be completed before they are evaluated for full approval.”

“We also call on FDA to require a more thorough assessment of spike proteins produced in-situ by the body following vaccination—including studies on their full biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, and tissue-specific toxicities.”

“We all agree that there remain many open, unanswered questions surrounding the efficacy and safety of covid-19 vaccines that must be answered before the FDA gives serious consideration to granting full approval.”

“Some surveys suggest that vaccine hesitancy in the United States is due, in part, to lack of full FDA approval. While approval might lead to increased public confidence in covid-19 vaccines, as well as provide legal support for employer-instituted vaccine mandates, to approve a medical product for these reasons is outside FDA’s regulatory purview. Approval decisions must be driven by the safety and efficacy data. The potential unintended consequences of a rushed approval may contribute to growing mistrust of the US public health and regulatory institutions.”

“For each covid-19 vaccine, the benefits may ultimately outweigh the harms. Or not. Or we may end up in a more nuanced position, finding that benefits outweigh harms for some populations, but not others. Only time—and better evidence—will tell.”

Now, some key parts of the petition itself are presented to further illustrate what medical and science perspectives have been formulated to pressure FDA to better evaluate the COVID vaccines.

A most important point made in the petition is this. Work must be done to show that there is “substantial evidence of clinical effectiveness that outweighs harms in special populations such as: infants, children, and adolescents; those with past SARS-CoV-2 infection; immunocompromised; pregnant women; nursing women; frail older adults; and individuals with cancer, autoimmune disorders, and hematological conditions.” This is so important because so many of the deaths and harmful impacts have occurred in these groups.

Most importantly: “The widespread use of a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA, particularly for a limited amount of time, also is not a valid reason to approve a product.”

And here is a critical point that many critics of the vaccines have focused on: “In-situ production of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is the target mechanism of action of all COVID-19 vaccines with an EUA at present. Therefore, the safety profile of spike protein itself (i.e., in the absence of virus) must be thoroughly understood [in all populations]. Recently, evidence of systemic circulation of spike protein or its components in subjects post-immunization was reported. All studies we are aware of to date raise concerns about the safety of spike protein, and the concentration of circulatory spikes was correlated to the disease severity in COVID-19 patients.”

WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO

Though FDA cannot ignore the petition, there is no assurance that it will genuinely address all of the issues and concerns in it. Or that it will postpone approval of the vaccines until there is sufficient research and analysis into all the points in the petition.

It must be appreciated that the petition is authorized by federal law. The FDA citizen petition process, described in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR Part 10), allows individuals and community organizations to request the agency make changes to health policy. Any “interested person” can request the FDA “issue, amend or revoke a regulation or order,” or “take or refrain from taking any other form of administrative action.” Granting full approval of the COVID vaccines is a major FDA administrative action with both national and global significance.

What is needed is a massive number of people officially registering their support of the petition on the proper FDA website. This can be done anonymously. Here are important links for the petition:

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

FINALLY AN RCT ON FACEMASKS IN CHILDREN – PARENTS TAKE NOTE!

Ivor Cummins | July 1, 2021

NON-CENSORABLE as this is a simple summary of study * just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association – JAMA *

ALL Parents should be aware of the emerging science – their kids are THEIR responsibility.

Download the vid here: https://we.tl/t-nPkQHzkh5T

NOTE: My extensive research and interviewing / video/sound editing and much more does require support – please consider helping if you can with monthly donation to support me directly, or one-off payment: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_
– alternatively join up with my Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/IvorCummins

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | 1 Comment