Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

High Recorded Mortality in Countries Categorized as “Covid-19 Vaccine Champions”

The Vaccinated Suffer from Increased Risk of Mortality compared to the Non-vaccinated

By Dr. Gérard Delépine | GlobalResearch | September 30, 2021

Since the beginning of the health crisis, the French government has claimed that early treatment was ineffective. It has  imposed major restrictions on our freedoms, in particular on doctors’ prescriptions,[1]

It has also promised that vaccination would achieve collective immunity, the end of the crisis and a return to normal life.

But the failure for 18 months of this so-called “health strategy” based on false simulations, innumerable lies, promises never kept, as well as the propaganda and fear campaign has become unbearable.

In turn this been followed by the extortion of consent to be vaccinated, by outright blackmail, while curtailing our freedoms to move and socialize, our right to work and engage in leisure activities.

Are the current vaccines that they want to impose on us effective?

Can they lead to a collective immunity or is it only a myth? To answer this question, we will make the current sanitary assessment of the most vaccinated countries according to the figures provided by the World Health Organization and the curves of OurWorldinData. (From Vaccine outset in December 2020 to September 15, 2021)

Record mortality in Gibraltar, champion of Astra Zeneca injections

Gibraltar (34,000 inhabitants) started vaccination in December 2020 when the health agency counted only 1040 confirmed cases and 5 deaths attributed to covid19 in this country. After a very comprehensive vaccination blitz, achieving 115% coverage (vaccination was extended to many Spanish visitors), the number of new infections increased fivefold (to 5314) and the number of deaths increased 19fold. The number of deaths increased 19-fold, reaching 97, i.e. 2853 deaths per million inhabitants, which is one of the European mortality records. But those responsible for the vaccination deny any causal link without proposing any other plausible etiology. And after a few months of calm, the epidemic resumed, confirming that 115% vaccination coverage does not protect against the disease.

Malta: 84% vaccine coverage, but just as ineffective

Malta is one of the European champions of pseudo-vaccines: on this island of 500,000 inhabitants, nearly 800,000 doses have been administered, ensuring a vaccine coverage of nearly 84% with a delay of about 6 months.

But since the beginning of July 2021, the epidemic has started again and the serious (fatal) forms are increasing, forcing the authorities to recognize that vaccination does not protect the population and to impose restrictions.


Here again, the recurrence of the epidemic in terms of cases and mortality proves that a high rate of vaccination does not protect the population.

In Iceland, people no longer believe in herd immunity

In this small country of 360,000 inhabitants, more than 80% are primo-vaccinated and 75% have a complete vaccination cycle. But by mid-July 2021, new daily infections had risen from about 10 to about 120, before stabilizing at a rate higher than the pre-vaccination period. This sudden recurrence convinced the chief epidemiologist of the impossibility of obtaining collective immunity through vaccination. “It’s a myth,” he publicly declared.


Belgium: recurrence of the disease despite vaccination

In Belgium, nearly 75% of the population is primo-vaccinated. And 65% of the population has a complete vaccination cycle. However, since the end of June 2021, the number of new daily infections has risen from less than 500 to nearly 2000. As RTBF acknowledges, in the face of the Delta variant, current vaccination is far from sufficient to protect the population.

Singapore abandons the hope of “Zero Covid” through vaccines

This small country is also highly vaccinated and nearly 80% of the population has received at least one dose. But since August 20, 2021, it has had to face an exponential resumption of the epidemic with an increase in cases from about ten in June to more than 150 at the end of July and 1246 cases on September 24.

This uncontrolled recurrence of the disease despite vaccination has led to the abandonment of the strategy of eradicating the virus for a model of “living with the virus” by trying to treat the disease “like the flu“.

In the UK: a worrying rise in infections

The United Kingdom is the European champion of Astra Zeneca vaccination, with more than 70% of the population vaccinated for the first time, and 59% with a complete vaccination schedule. This high “vaccination” rate did not prevent an explosion of cases at the beginning of the summer, with up to 60,000 new cases per day by mid-July.

Faced with this significant resumption of the epidemic despite vaccination, Andrew Pollard, representative of the Oxford Vaccine Group, acknowledged before Parliament: “collective immunity through vaccination is a myth“.

This resumption of infections has been accompanied by a resumption of hospitalizations, severe cases and deaths. According to the official report of August,[2] deaths were more frequent among fully vaccinated patients (679) than among non-vaccinated patients (390), thus cruelly denying the hopes of a protective effect of the vaccine on mortality.

After the last sanitary restrictions were lifted, the epidemic decreased to a level of less than 30,000 cases per day, whereas at the beginning of July, simulations by covid specialists were predicting up to 100,000 new cases per day if the sanitary measures were removed.

Israel: obvious post-vaccination disaster denied by officials

Israel, champion of the Pfizer injection, once everywhere cited as an example of effectiveness, is now being harshly reminded of reality and is now the model of vaccine failure.

70% of the population is primo-vaccinated, and nearly 90% of those at risk have a complete vaccination cycle. But the epidemic has rebounded stronger than ever since the end of June, and more than 11,000 new cases were recorded in 1 day (September 14, 2021) surpassing the peaks seen in January 2021 during the outbreak following the first Pfizer injections by nearly 50%.

This resumption of the epidemic, despite the Pfizer injections, is accompanied by an increase in hospitalizations where the vaccinated represent the majority of those hospitalized.

Vaccination does not protect against severe forms of the disease or against death.


End of July: 71% of the 118 seriously ill Israelis (serious, critical) were fully vaccinated!

This proportion of seriously ill people vaccinated is much higher than the proportion of fully vaccinated people: 61%. To claim that the vaccine protects against serious forms of the disease, as the Israeli Minister of Health imprudently declared, is a mistake (or disinformation?).

In order not to acknowledge its mistakes, the Israeli government remains in denial of this obvious failure and continues to propose only vaccination as a solution. How many more deaths will it take before it follows the example of India or Japan and finally adopts early treatment?

Conclusions

The current pseudo vaccines are not effective enough. They do not prevent the recurrence of the epidemic, nor hospitalizations, nor severe forms, nor death. In Israel and Great Britain, which specify the vaccination status of the victims, the vaccinated suffer from an increased risk of mortality compared to the non-vaccinated.

The pursuit of a vaccine-only policy leads to a deadly impasse, whereas countries that officially advise early treatment (India) or allow their doctors to prescribe it (Japan, Korea) fare much better.

What are our health authorities waiting for to stop believing in false simulations carried out by epidemiologists who are too closely linked to vaccine companies, to look at the proven facts and to interrupt their deceptive and deleterious pro-vaccination campaign and recommend early treatment?

The continuation of the ban on early treatment by treating physicians leads to a loss of chances for many patients and directly engages the responsibility of the government and particularly the Minister of Health.

Dr Gérard Delépine is an oncologist and statistician

Translated from the French by Global Research.

Notes

[1] For the first time in 2500 years…

[2] SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England Technical briefing 21
Published August 2021 Public Health England Gateway number : GOV 9374 20 August 2021

The original source of this article is nouveau-monde.ca, published on our French language web site mondialisation.ca
Copyright © Dr. Gérard Delépinenouveau-monde.ca, 2021

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 1 Comment

Crickets and psychosis account for ‘Havana Syndrome,’ says newly-declassified report by US scientists

RT | September 30, 2021

An elite team of scientists advising the State Department concluded in 2018 that the ‘Havana Syndrome’ afflicting spies and diplomats could not have been due to a microwave weapon, but their report has just now been declassified.

The report compiled by the JASON advisory group in November 2018 said that the sounds reported in eight of the original 21 incidents of the ‘Havana Syndrome’ were “most likely” caused by crickets, and that it was “highly unlikely” the reported symptoms were caused by microwaves or ultrasound beams.

While “the suffering reported by the affected individuals is real,” the group concluded “psychogenic effects may serve to explain important components of the reported injuries.”

The redacted and declassified version of the JASON report was published on Thursday by BuzzFeed. It was originally classified as “Secret,” and was not shared with the National Academies of Sciences panel whose report on the ‘Havana Syndrome’ was commissioned by Foggy Bottom last year.

The NAS panel concluded microwaves were the “most plausible” cause of the symptoms, which purportedly include headaches, dizziness, tinnitus, hearing and vision impairment, nosebleeds, vertigo and memory loss, among others.

According to JASON, however, “No plausible single source of energy (neither radio/microwaves nor sonic) can produce both the recorded audio/video signals and the reported medical effects.” The recorded noise was either mechanical or biological in origin, rather than electronic, and the “most likely” source was Anurogryllis celerinictus, the “Indies short-tailed cricket.”

This exact species was identified by University of California Berkeley researchers in January 2019 as the source of the mysterious noise, based on a recording released by AP.

JASON experts ruled out pulsed microwaves and ultrasound, in part because electronics and Wi-Fi networks in the house where the noises were first recorded suffered no disruptions during the incident. They concluded the noises did not correspond to microwave or ultrasound frequencies by calculating the power that would be required.

The Trump administration used the ‘Havana syndrome’ as a pretext to scale back the recently re-established diplomatic presence in Cuba. It gained a life of its own in the CIA and the US media later on, with over 200 spies now reportedly claiming they had been affected – and rampant speculation that China or Russia may be using some kind of science-fiction superweapon to do this.

Just last week, the US House of Representatives voted 427-0 to pass the Helping American Victims Afflicted by Neurological Attacks (HAVANA) Act, giving the CIA millions of dollars to compensate the personnel affected.

In mid-September, a team of Cuban scientists announced that claims of secret sonic weapons were not “scientifically acceptable,” and there was “no scientific evidence of attacks.” Unaware of the JASON report, they attributed the symptoms to some kind of mass psychosis on part of the US spies.

Named after a hero from Greek mythology,JASON is an independent group of scientists that has advised the US government since the heyday of the Cold War.

“This is a high powered group of expert scientists,” former Los Alamos National Laboratory chemist Cheryl Rofer told BuzzFeed, adding that the declassified report “appears to be a very thorough scientific analysis, the kind which wasn’t done in the National Academies of Sciences report.”

“What is available in the report is pretty dubious about directed energy weapons, and pretty positive about crickets,” Rofer added.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception | , | 1 Comment

General Milley Strikes Out Demonstrating What Is Wrong with the US Military

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • SEPTEMBER 30, 2021

Most Americans do not know that in the United States currently there are approximately 900 Active-duty generals and flag officers to lead 1.3 million troops in the combined armed forces. This is a ratio of one senior officer per every 1,400 men and women. During World War II, an admittedly different era, there were roughly twice as many flag and general officers for a little more than 12 million active duty troops a ratio of one to 6,000. In the Navy there are 32 flag officers for each ship currently in commission. In 1944, there was one flag officer for every 24 ships.

This development is referred to as “rank creep” which does not improve performance and instead clutters the chain of command by adding multiple bureaucratic layers to decision-making while also costing more due to funding the higher paygrades. And lest one be confused about why there continue to be so many flag officers, possibly concluding that they are needed to provide the leadership to fight wars, it could be pointed out that most of them will never get anywhere near combat even if the U.S. continues its belligerency on a global scale in an effort to establish and enforce its leadership of a fictional “rules based international order.”

It turns out that current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley was, during the latter days of the Donald Trump Administration, talking to his counterparts in China as well as to some folks in Congress who had no love for Trump. Some of the conversations were routine, but others were apparently driven by the notion that Donald Trump just might do something stupid like starting a war unless some restraints were placed on his ability to do mischief. Inevitably, there have emerged major differences of opinion regarding the propriety of what Milley was engaged in, with Democrats in general and Trump haters in particular finding no problem with the intrusion into policy-making while many Republicans have been calling for a thorough investigation to include possible consequences up to and including court-martial.

The various conversations were reported in a just released book “Peril” written by Bob Woodward and, Robert Costa and, based on a claimed 200 interviews, are generally conceded to be accurate by both sides to include the Milley camp plus the journalists involved. Some of the calls at least were made with other officials in the room and on separate phone lines, though there were also conversations with politicians like Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, that were clearly considered off-the-record as they dealt with keeping nuclear weapons out of the president’s hands.

Milley, according to the book, reportedly told the Chinese General Li Zuocheng in a back-channel phone call that had as a subject the possibility that the president might order an attack directed against China, something in the nature of a “surprise attack.” He reportedly said “General Li, you and I have known each other for now five years. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It’s not going to be a surprise.” Milley apparently justified the action by stating that he disapproves of surprise attacks in principal and his defenders cite the example of “Pearl Harbor,” which was viewed so repugnantly by the American public that something like a war of extermination became inevitable. Unstated by the Milley supporters, though implicit in their argument, is the assumption that Donald Trump was both ignorant and a loose cannon on deck who would do something stupid like initiating a conflict with China.

Milley also shared his view that Trump had experienced a “mental decline” after the election with Nancy Pelosi in a phone call to her on January 8th, two days after the alleged insurrection at the Capitol. Pelosi reportedly demanded that Milley take the nuclear launch codes away from Trump, which admittedly he did not seek to do. On the same day Milley also reviewed procedures with the senior officers at the National Military Command Center for launching nuclear weapons, insisting that he also had to be involved. To be completely clear, Milley had no legal authority or power to insert himself into the chain of command, though “Peril” reports that he did just that and at a minimum he was acting “extra-constitutionally” in his interpretation of his government role.

But it is the outreach to China that is most disturbing. It is indeed possible to regard Donald Trump negatively while at the same time responding rationally with one’s international nuclear armed adversaries. One does not know what Milley intended to do by his phone call, but “Peril” makes the case, without providing any evidence, that “American intelligence showed that the Chinese believed that Mr. Trump planned to launch a military strike to create an international crisis that he could claim to solve as a last-ditch effort to beat Joseph R. Biden Jr.” In any event, it is unlikely that the Milley phone call reassured Li of anything. Indeed, Li and the Chinese government would have only two possible responses to the threat. First would be to shut up shop, batten down the hatches, and sit still for punishment. The other option would be to preemptively strike U.S. forces in and around China which presumably would be used for the attack. Either option could easily lead to a nuclear exchange once things cease to go according to plan, presuming that the surprise attack itself was not intended to include nuclear weapons in the first place.

Colonel Richard Black observes sagely that “If the report of Milley’s intentions is accurate, he should be relieved for cause, for though he did not consummate a criminal act by making that promise, the promise was so fraught with impropriety that an officer who betrayed his government in such fashion should never be trusted to serve. Indeed, it is likely that had his Chinese counterpart made such a promise to General Milley, he’d have been executed for doing so.”

Beyond the disruption of the chain of command and ignoring the Constitution, there are, of course, some other problems with Milley’s line of thinking. Trump has, to be sure, demonstrated enough irrational behavior to make one suspect that he is not in full possession of all his marbles, but that is not the point. He was elected president of the United States and the U.S. Constitution was set up to ensure civilian control of the military, not vice versa.

And there is no solid evidence, only innuendo, that Trump ever seriously contemplated war with China. Indeed, he ran for office pledging to end the pointless wars that Washington was engaged in in Asia and towards the end of his administration he negotiated an exit from Afghanistan, which Joe Biden then postponed before bungling the evacuation. Trump did indeed assassinate a senior Iranian General and also launched cruise missiles against Syria based on bad intelligence, but otherwise his record is significantly better than that of his predecessor Barack Obama who both initiated and broadened the policy of assassinating American and Afghan citizens overseas by drone and also was party to the overthrow of the Libyan government while also conniving to replace the government of Ukraine.

In any event, in America war is clearly playing politics by other means. President Joe Biden has already declared that he has full confidence in Milley. Several Republican Senators, including Marco Rubio, have instead demanded that he be fired. Given the fact that at least one of the general’s phone calls to his Chinese counterpart could have started a war that might have gone nuclear, he should at least have the integrity to resign and take up his expected board appointment with a defense contractor.

Philip Giraldi, Ph.D. is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Militarism | | 1 Comment

Pfizer Says COVID Vaccine ‘Safe’ for Kids — But Pfizer Has Lied About Kids and Drugs Before

In 1996, Pfizer’s drug, Trovan, was still in the clinical stage of development when the drugmaker tested it, without parents’ consent, on about 200 children.

By Chelli Stanley | The Defender | September 30, 2021

Pfizer last week told the public and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) its new experimental COVID vaccine is safe for young children.

It’s a familiar story, similar to one the vaccine maker told in the past about another drug it tested on children — a story that had a terrible outcome.

Both stories began with this simple claim: “These drugs are safe for your children.”

In 1996, Pfizer, the transnational multi-billion-dollar pharmaceutical company, was working to bring a new drug — Trovan — to market. The drug was still in the clinical stage of development, when Pfizer made a decision that reportedly cost the lives of many children, and triggered an international firestorm.

Pfizer took its unlicensed Trovan to Kano, Nigeria, during a meningitis outbreak — though Trovan had never been tested in children or against meningitis.

According to Pfizer whistleblower, Dr. Juan Walterspiel, Pfizer sent unskilled doctors to Kano, who were unlicensed to practice medicine in Nigeria, and who had limited experience treating meningitis in children.

Walterspiel also reported the staff were so unskilled they could not place IV lines, and quickly resorted to orally administering the drug to children.

In the short two weeks Pfizer was in Kano, staff worked with 200 children, and gave 99 of the children unlicensed Trovan, despite the children’s desperate state. Pfizer did this even though Doctors Without Borders was operating in the same Kano hospital, treating children for free, with medicine proven to work well against bacterial meningitis.

Doctors Without Borders realized what Pfizer was doing and in a statement said they “were shocked Pfizer continued the so-called scientific work in the middle of hell.” They “communicated their concerns to both Pfizer and the local authorities.”

Pfizer gave the other 101 children ceftriaxone, which is proven effective for meningitis.  However, many children were “low-dosed,” with only one-third of the recommended amount. Because Pfizer didn’t have enough skilled medical personnel to administer ceftriaxone by IV, staff injected it directly into the children’s butts or thighs.

But “the shots were severely painful, leading to ‘great fear and sometimes dangerous struggles with children.’” So Pfizer lowered the dose significantly to ease the severe pain caused by the shots.

Pfizer said available data indicated the dose remained more than sufficient, but the drug’s manufacturer, Hoffmann-La Roche, said the reductions could have sapped the drug’s strength.

“A high dose is essential,” Mark Kunkel, Hoffmann-La Roche’s medical director, told the Washington Post. “Clinical failures … and perhaps deaths of children could have resulted from the low dosing.”

According to a lawsuit against Pfizer, “five of the children who received Trovan and six of the children who were ‘low-dosed’ with ceftriaxone died, and others treated by Pfizer suffered very serious injuries, including paralysis, deafness and blindness.”

Of the 200 children treated by Pfizer, 181 were gravely injured, and 11 died.

The Washington Post investigated Pfizer’s ethics, stating, “Some medical experts questioned why the company did not switch to the proven pills when it was clear the young patients were approaching death.”

“It could be considered murder,” said Evariste Lodi, the leading Doctors Without Borders physician in Kano, after reading a report that Pfizer kept a child solely on Trovan until the child died.

In a statement about the child’s death, a Pfizer spokeswoman said “researchers had no reason to suspect the experimental medicine was not working.” Pfizer also said Trovan was “at least as effective as the gold standard treatment,” despite it having never been used in children, or for meningitis.

Pfizer designed the clinical trial in Kano “in six weeks, though the risks and complications of such a trial would typically require a year to adequately assess,” The Atlantic reported.

The parents in Kano have maintained they were not notified of an experiment, and that Pfizer did not have their consent to use their children in a drug trial in the middle of a health crisis. They organized to sue the drugmaker, while caring for children injured during the experiment.

Pfizer maintains the Nigerian parents gave full consent for their critically ill children to be used in an experiment, though even Pfizer admits no parent ever signed a consent form.

The lawsuits dragged on for years, as Pfizer refused to admit to any wrongdoing. “We are fed up with this case,” said a father who lost his daughter. “Our children are dead and some are maimed.”

Pfizer said “the trial was conducted appropriately, ethically and with the best interests of patients in mind; and it helped save lives.”

However, even the approval letter Pfizer submitted to the FDA about the Kano trial was exposed by a Nigerian doctor, who “said that his office backdated an approval letter and this may have been written a year after the study had taken place.”

The community of Kano has been profoundly affected — “the experiment shaped public perception of Western drugs in the region. Parents told their children about it. Teachers lectured about Pfizer in classrooms. Pundits spoke of Western physicians seeking human guinea pigs.”

Pfizer acknowledged the severe nature of the meningitis outbreak to a Nigerian investigative committee, then said, “Pfizer’s intervention was therefore strictly a humanitarian gesture aimed at saving lives. It was totally devoid of any commercial undertones.” The company called it “the humanitarian trial.”

“If I had the power, I would take away their medical licenses,” said Lodi.

Pfizer’s Trovan history gets worse

In the initial development of Trovan, Walterspiel reported that Pfizer tried another study and:

“ … the study failed and several patients developed severe post-operative infections and one woman had her uterus removed. Pfizer dispatched risk managers and asked affected patients and relatives to fill out checks for whatever amount they felt right against their signature to keep the payments confidential.”

Pfizer made no such offer in Kano. The families of Kano had to sue Pfizer repeatedly, and received no compensation until nearly 15 years after the incident occurred.

Pfizer did not let these mere setbacks of death, maiming and international scandals deter the company. Within a few short years, the drugmaker brought Trovan to market in both the United States and Europe.

Expecting to reap financial windfalls, Pfizer aggressively marketed Trovan — until it discovered the public in both the EU and U.S. was reeling from liver damage, liver failure and death as a result of taking Trovan.

Reports of adverse reactions grew until Europe took Trovan off the market completely, and the FDA severely restricted the public’s access in the U.S.

New York Times article detailed how Trovan’s serious side effects became known only after it was given to the public. “The case showed how a new drug, marketed by an expert like Pfizer, could be swiftly prescribed to thousands of patients before all the side effects were known. Pfizer said its tests of Trovan had not revealed any serious problems.”

In 2000, William C. Steere Jr., then chairman of Pfizer, acknowledged some side effects only become known after a drug is approved, saying, ”You put the drug in the general population, and then everyone is taking it. We just hold our breath and wait to see if there is something unique with the drug.”

‘If I had an enemy, I would not let him take their drugs’

Pfizer was repeatedly sued in Nigeria and the U.S. for its actions in Kano. In 2009, Pfizer agreed to pay $75 million, despite initially being sued for $8.5 billion.

The company got involved in several more scandals that exploded when Wikileaks published several U.S. Embassy cables detailing Pfizer’s communications.

A Pfizer lawyer described in the cables that “Pfizer has worked closely with former Nigerian Head of State Yakubu Gowon. Gowan spoke with Kano State Governor Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau, who directed the Kano AG to reduce the settlement demand from $150 million to $75 million.”

In another cable, a top Pfizer representative in Nigeria said:

“Pfizer had hired investigators to uncover corruption links to Federal Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa to expose him and put pressure on him to drop the federal cases. Pfizer’s investigators were passing this information to local media. A series of damaging articles detailing Aondoakaa’s ‘alleged’ corruption ties were published in February and March.”

A cable showed a Pfizer representative commenting that “Doctors Without Borders administered Trovan to other children during the 1996 meningitis epidemic, and the Nigerian government has taken no action.”

The accusation prompted Doctors Without Borders to publish a strongly worded press release stating that they did not give anyone Trovan, and were in fact the first to speak out about Pfizer’s unethical actions.

Finally, the cables showed that “Pfizer was not happy settling the case, but had come to the conclusion that the $75 million figure was reasonable because the suits had been ongoing for many years, costing Pfizer more than $15 million a year in legal and investigative fees.”

The original lawsuit also sought prison terms for Pfizer officials.

Scandals continued even after the case was settled, when Pfizer demanded that anyone collecting the money give a sample of their DNA. Several people refused, distrusting what Pfizer may do with their DNA. They were not allowed to get compensation as a result.

Pfizer said it “always acted in the best interest of the children involved, using the best medical knowledge available.”

Najib Ibrahim of Kano said of Pfizer, “If I had an enemy, I would not let him take their drugs.”  Abdul Murtala said, “Pfizer reminds me of recklessness with human lives.”

The pattern continues, with 12-year-old injured during Pfizer COVID trial

Maddie de Garay was 12 when she voluntarily participated in Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine trial for 12- to 15-year-olds in Ohio. After she took the second dose on January 20, 2021, her life changed.

Her mother, Stephanie de Garay, spoke at press conference in June, held by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), during which she described the maiming of her child and Pfizer’s disregard towards Maddie and the family — despite Maddie being part of the trial in order to determine whether Pfizer’s covid vaccine is safe for children.

Stephanie said:

“All we want is for Maddie to be seen, heard, and believed, because she hasn’t been.  And we want her to get the care that she desperately needs so that she can go back to normal. She was totally fine before this. They’re not helping her.”

Stephanie said within 24 hours of the second dose, Maddie “developed severe abdominal and chest pain. She had painful electrical shocks down her neck and spine that forced her to walk hunched over. She had extreme pain in her fingers and toes.”

Maddie went to the ER immediately, as instructed by Pfizer’s vaccine trial administrator. After doctors ran few tests, she was sent home with a diagnosis: “Adverse effect of vaccine initial encounter.”

In the first five months after getting her second dose, Maddie would return to the ER eight more times.

According to Stephanie:

“Over the next 2.5 months, her abdominal, muscle and nerve pain became unbearable.  She developed additional symptoms that included gastroparesis, nausea and vomiting, erratic blood pressure and heart rate, memory loss, brain fog, headaches, dizziness, fainting, and then seizures.

“She developed verbal and motor tics, she had loss of feeling from the waist down and muscle weakness, drastic changes in her vision, urinary retention and loss of bladder control, severely irregular and heavy menstrual cycles, and eventually she had to have an NG tube put in to get nutrition. All of these symptoms are still here today. Some days are worse than others.”

Maddie’s doctors began to suggest she had “functional neurological disorder due to anxiety” and even tried to admit her to a mental hospital. Her family fought it.

It took five months for Maddie to get an MRI of her brain and appropriate blood tests, which she got when her family went elsewhere for medical advice after talking to others who were adversely affected by the COVID vaccines.

Stephanie said:

“What I want to ask is: Maddie volunteered for the Pfizer trial. Why aren’t they researching her to figure out why this happened so other people don’t have to go through this? Instead, they’re just saying it’s ‘mental.’”

The de Garay family has joined with emerging grassroots advocacy groups whose members’ lives suddenly changed after they got a COVID vaccine. They are asking the CDC and FDA to recognize their injuries, the medical community to believe and help them, the media to share their stories, for the public to know about these injuries as part of informed consent, and for their injuries to be studied so that solutions can be found.

Since being injured by new vaccines still in phase 3 trials, they have been subjected to stonewalling, cover-ups, bullying, refusal to collect the data and blanket denials.

Pfizer has not commented publicly on Maddie’s case.

At the September FDA advisory meeting on Pfizer COVID boosters in the U.S., Steve Kirsch, executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, said Pfizer did not record Maddie’s extensive injuries in its clinical trial results. Kirsch also noted Pfizer marked the entirety of Maddie’s injuries as “abdominal pain.”

Kirsch reported Pfizer’s fraud to FDA acting Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock, but no investigation has been launched into Pfizer for allegedly erasing Maddie’s extensive injuries from its trial data for children.

© 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Deception | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

It appears the Canadian military’s covert Covid propaganda operation has made unjabbed citizens enemies of the state

By Rachel Marsden | RT | September 30, 2021

The shocking revelation that the armed forces implemented a secret information campaign in 2020 to brainwash people over the pandemic is proof of deliberate intent to quash critical and independent thought and freedoms.

As a Canadian citizen who recovered from Covid and acquired natural immunity and antibodies without the anti-Covid vaccine, the government doesn’t much appreciate my narrative.

Proof lies in the fact that when I arrived back home in Vancouver from my work base in Europe in August, the federal government demanded that I pay for my own three-day imprisonment in a government mandated facility at a cost of up to $2,000. Refusal resulted in being ordered in writing to immediately get back on a plane and leave my own country under threat of penalties up to and including imprisonment. All because my acquired immunity didn’t jibe with the government’s “one size fits all” two-jab narrative.

Now I’ve learned that the Canadian military was deployed against unconventional and inconvenient narratives like mine in favor of lockstep groupthink. Does that make me an enemy of the state?

The Canadian military’s Joint Operations Command implemented a propaganda campaign in April 2020 with the intent to manipulate unsuspecting Canadians into falling in line with the federal government’s official positions on Covid-19. The brainwashing operation’s termination was ordered a month later, but in the meantime, it “relied on propaganda techniques similar to those employed during the Afghanistan war,” according to the Ottawa Citizen’s exclusive report on documents obtained under Access to Information.

The operation’s aim, according to the military, was to “head off civil disobedience by Canadians during the coronavirus pandemic and to bolster government messages about the pandemic.”

Generally, government intelligence operations rely on ear-bending friendly journalists and think-tank analysts to publish the state’s talking points in mainstream publications or online. Washington Post journalist Carl Bernstein, best-known for breaking the Watergate scandal, wrote in a Rolling Stone magazine article titled “The CIA and the Media,” back in 1977, how the CIA used “journalist-operatives” to “plant subtly concocted pieces of misinformation.”

He further noted: “There are perhaps a dozen well known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources. They are referred to at the Agency as ‘known assets’ and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.”

Another known tactic used by military intelligence to manipulate its own country’s citizens is to send out retired generals to spew talking points on various media platforms. In 2008, the Los Angeles Times wrote of the Pentagon’s Iraq War era “message multipliers” program. At the time, Democratic Congressman Paul Hodes had introduced an amendment – overwhelmingly adopted – to investigate the Pentagon’s public opinion manipulation program, unveiled by the New York Times as “cultivating former military officers who became regulars on Fox News, CNN and the broadcast networks.”

“They were fed administration talking points, believing they were getting independent military analysis,” Hodes said at the time of the public manipulation campaign.

So despite the Ottawa Citizen’s reporting that the program was officially quashed one month after its deployment, we really don’t know how much damage was done and to what extent the propaganda distribution it sparked may have since become autonomous and taken on a life of its own.

Canadians now need to know exactly what “government messages” were propagandized and where, and what “enemy narratives” were targeted for smears. Only then is it possible for the public to assess how much of the current conventional wisdom is the result of deliberate boosting or suppressing.

It’s a sad fact that the Canadian military has seen fit to use similar techniques to those that US intelligence has long deployed on foreign opponents. Declassified US intelligence manuals drafted in 1987 show that both the Pentagon and the CIA used similar propaganda techniques in Latin America, with the aim of indiscriminately brainwashing both civilians and guerrillas to support the US-backed movements. And like with the Canadian military campaign, it involved monitoring innocent people for their thoughts and beliefs while minimizing consideration of both basic human rights and the rule of law.

Lest we forget that Canadians were also victims of some of the most egregious brainwashing experimentation under the CIA-led MK-Ultra program to test various mind control methods, including LSD, sensory deprivation, and electroshock therapy, on unwitting Canadians at the Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal between 1957 and 1964.

We really have no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes with this recent revelation that Canadians were once again treated as experimental guinea pigs – this time in the interest of quashing critical thinking or dissent amid the pandemic. What we do see, however, it’s probably just the tip of the iceberg, and that its aim of creating a compliant citizenry has been successful.

More than three in four double-jabbed Canadians consider their unjabbed fellow citizens selfish and irresponsible, according to a new Leger poll. If they’re jabbed, and they have so much confidence in the jab preventing them getting ill, then what do they care what anyone else does? How much has the Canadian military and government propaganda played a role in shaping their views?

The whole truth about the extent of this psychological abuse of innocent Canadian civilians needs to come out – if only so the manipulated can see to what extent they were coerced into turning against their fellow citizens for simply making a different personal choice in what, after all, is supposed to still be a free and democratic country.

Rachel Marsden is a columnist, political strategist and host of an independently produced French-language program that airs on Sputnik France. Her website can be found at rachelmarsden.com

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

UK Military Wants to Spy on Social Media to Detect “Change in Population Sentiment”

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | September 30, 2021

The UK Ministry of Defence has inadvertently revealed its plan to spy on social media platforms in order to detect “change(s) in population sentiment.”

Despite ostensibly being about “better use of existing silos,” the MoD’s Data Strategy for Defence document explains how the military should move towards “Automated scanning of social media platforms” to detect “change in population sentiment.”

“Nowhere does the document explain why a strategy paper has gone so far off the beaten track that it promotes collecting data the MoD doesn’t have and using it for decidedly non-military purposes,” reports the Register.

Since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, the military has increasingly turned its attention inward towards its own citizens rather than doing what it should do, which is fighting foreign adversaries.

As author Laura Dodsworth revealed, GCHQ has embroiled itself in anti-vaccine and anti-lockdown messaging by targeting people who challenge the official COVID narrative online.

“She says some people believe they have been targeted by the 77th Brigade, part of the 6th Division of the Army,” reported the Telegraph.

According to the Ministry of Defence, the 77th Brigade uses “legitimate non-military levers as a means to adapt behaviours of the opposing forces and adversaries.”

The military’s main “adversaries” are now apparently British citizens who complain about lockdown while questioning the efficacy and safety of vaccines.

Dodsworth said she “hit a brick wall” when attempting to get answers about the unit’s activities, noting, “and I find that when someone puts up a brick wall, it’s because that’s where the real story lies.”

The unit played its role in the broader agenda, facilitated by government-affiliated behavioral psychologists, to terrify the public into mass obedience to lockdown rules by exaggerating the threat posed by COVID.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

If YouTube’s block of RT’s German channels is about ‘misinformation’, when will MSNBC & CNN be banned for Russiagate conspiracies?

By Glenn Diesen | RT | September 30, 2021

Russia is locked into yet another standoff with an American tech company. This time, it’s YouTube, which has taken down two of RT’s German-language news channels and provoked a furious response from Moscow’s most senior officials.

The decision, understood to have been taken over allegations the broadcaster tried to circumvent a ‘community standards strike’ handed down over ‘medical misinformation’, has seen Russia’s regulators rally round RT DE and its sister account, Der Fehlende Part.

Roskomnadzor, the Russian federal executive agency responsible for overseeing the media, warned Google it would be fined if did not end the suspension. At the same time, RT’s editor-in-chief, Margarita Simonyan, cautioned that this was “a declaration of media war against Russia by Germany,” and argued in favour of retaliatory restrictions against German media in Russia.

The closure of German-language RT channels should be seen in the context of growing censorship in the West and hostility to Moscow’s media outlets.

The rise of censorship in the West

Censorship has acquired a new dictionary over the past few years, with the rise of concepts such as safe spaces, cancel culture, and de-platforming – which are synonyms for striking down what people can and can’t say. Terms like hate speech and propaganda are defined increasingly loosely and censorship is therefore imposed on a wider and more inconsistent basis. The US government works hand in glove with the private tech giants to re-label censorship at platform policies.

There is especially a growing effort to legitimise censoring news and media related to Russia, which is usually conducted under the auspices of “countering propaganda.” We are constantly informed that Russia is launching a disinformation and propaganda campaign against the West to undermine its democracies. The response to this alleged threat by Western governments is a firm campaign of one-sided fact-checkers and efforts to out-propaganda the supposed propagandists.

The problem is that what is framed as counter-propaganda usually looks indistinguishable from propaganda, and merely undermines and ignores the arguments on the other side. Propaganda is the science of persuading an audience without reason by instead appealing to group psychology and emotional rhetoric. If propaganda entails “closing the mind to argument,” then countering propaganda implies appealing to reason by objectively presenting competing arguments.

British philosopher Bertrand Russell is known for arguing during the Cold War that countering communist propaganda did not necessitate simply censoring the Soviet Union, as such a move would merely give space for British propaganda. Instead, he envisioned counter-propaganda as facilitating all perspectives by, for example, organising a debate between Stalin and the Archbishop of Canterbury. By redefining propaganda as anything that presents Russia favourably – debates that give Russian arguments a platform and legitimacy are deemed dangerous and thus require censorship. Under this new definition of propaganda, even the Russian Sputnik V Covid-19 vaccine and Russian cartoons are considered propaganda.

It is only a year ago that Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal unfolded ahead of the US presidential election, purporting to reveal that now-US President Joe Biden was involved in corruption with Ukraine and China. Fearing that this revelation could cause Joe Biden to lose the election, the Biden campaign adopted the same Russiagate playbook as the Clinton campaign – blame Russia.

By labelling the entire scandal a Russian disinformation campaign, the media chose not to report on the matter while social media platforms outright censored the story from their platforms. Well, last week the evidence was in – the incriminating emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop were completely authentic and Moscow had absolutely nothing to do with it. Much like the conspiracy theories linking former President Donald Trump to the Kremlin and the tale of Russia placing bounties on US troops in Afghanistan – the disinformation came from the Western media.

In many cases, mainstream outlets have championed claims that were at the time unsubstantiated, and now fully discredited, without ever correcting themselves. American networks including MSNBC and CNN have played host to some of the most egregiously untrue Russia-gate conspiracy theories. Those, like Rachel Maddow, who unapologetically championed them, have never faced repercussions for their careers, and their sensationalist content still sits online proud as punch and without retraction or amendment. Accountability, it seems, is something reserved for other people.

Western states are also countering alleged Russian disinformation with ‘fact-checkers’. The problem is that these fact-checkers do not actually check facts, they check narratives, impose their own, and thereby operate as a Ministry of Truth.

Case in point, the EU fact-checkers label the reference to ‘coup’ to describe the events in Ukraine in February 2014 as Russian disinformation, as it was argued to supposedly have been a ‘democratic revolution’ and that former leader Viktor Yanukovich chose to leave the country voluntarily.

Actual fact-checkers would check objective facts: Did the OSCE characterise the election of President Yanukovich as free and fair? – Yes. Did the removal of Yanukovich from power violate the Ukrainian constitution? – Yes. Did the toppling of Yanukovich enjoy support from a democratic majority of the Ukrainian population? – No. Did the US and EU support the removal of Yanukovich? – Yes. Instead of fact-checking, the fact-checkers employ ambiguous and contradictory terms such as ‘democratic revolution’ to delegitimise the Russian position. Subsequently, these fact-checkers send an unmistakable signal to Western media that they cannot discuss the extent to which a coup occurred in Ukraine, as this can be considered peddling Russian disinformation.

Diversity of perspectives demands a diversity of media

The media landscape is polarising both domestically and internationally. Within the US, liberals who appear on conservative media platforms are chastised for their lack of loyalty to the group. Within Europe, the media polarises between pro-Brexit and anti-Brexit, or between pro-EU and anti-EU.

Groupthink is amplified and the subsequent polarisation implies that the nuances disappear as political questions are framed as a struggle between right and wrong, or good and evil. With the death of objective reporting, the solution for the audience to remain informed is a diversity of media – both CNN and Fox News, both The Daily Telegraph and the Guardian, both Haaretz and Al Jazeera.

The Western media acts in conformity with a heavy anti-Russian bias that reflects the alliance system and security architecture of a divided Europe. Those interested in Russian politics should by no means limit themselves to RT as the sole arbiter of truth, but RT is an important contribution to a severely polarised media landscape.

The Western media has exceptionally poor reporting on Russia, as it is ideologically constrained from recognising Russian security concerns. All political questions are filtered through the simplistic and outdated binary stereotypes of ‘democracy’ versus ‘authoritarianism’ that provides little if any heuristic value to understand the complexities of the socio-economic, political, and military conflicts.

The inability to recognise that the West can threaten Russian security makes it impossible to have any reasonable analysis of Russian foreign policy. By neglecting external threats and limiting the analysis of Russia to its internal characteristics, Russian policies can only be explained by referencing Putin’s belligerent personality or nostalgia for empire.

The information space is becoming a key battleground in great power rivalry, and for the sake of an informed population, we have to hope what some see as propaganda is countered with reason – not just more propaganda.

Glenn Diesen is a Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway and an editor at the Russia in Global Affairs journal.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Italians’ electricity bills to rise by 30%, gas up 14%

By Max Civili | Press TV | September 30, 2021

Rome – On Friday, the Italian Energy Authority ARERA announced that electricity bills will rise by almost 30% while gas bills will increase by over 14%, effective from Friday.

Italians are not pleased at all. Some consumer associations have estimated that the sharp rise may cost Italian families up to 2,000 euros a year due to a ripple effect on the entire productive system.

On one side, ARERA has pointed out that without government intervention to stem the rises, spikes in electricity and gas bills would have been 45% and 30% respectively, on the other, people are saying that the executive should have been able to predict the increase and handle the situation more effectively.

In its bid to tackle climate change, the European Union has adopted an Emission Trading Scheme which covers more than 12,000 polluting (sic) companies across the old continent, today.

It consists in the establishment of a market where firms trade emission allowances to cover their annual CO2 emissions, increasing, this way, their expenditures.

Analysts are warning the world is heading into an energy crunch that will likely affect global economies. The prices of fossil fuels such as coal, carbon and gas have all hit record highs lately. This is while crude oil has pushed above 80 dollars a barrel.

Energy price could go much higher if the weather is as cool this winter as some meteorologists predict. It’s not only the people that are worried. Several European energy-intensive industries have claimed that the adoption of the Emission Trading Scheme may entail a significant loss of international competitiveness due to increases in production costs.

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | 1 Comment

Why Do You Say “Scamdemic”? – Questions For Corbett

Corbett • 09/29/2021

A listener writes in with a straightforward (but important) question: why do I use the term “scamdemic”? Here’s my (equally important and meticulously documented) answer!

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Minds.com / Odysee or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES
Episode 376 – Lies, Damned Lies and Coronavirus Statistics

Interview 1555 – Rosemary Frei on How the High Death Rate in Care Homes Was Created on Purpose

What NO ONE is Saying About The Lockdowns

Episode 392 – The Future of Vaccines

Episode 393 – The 4th Annual Fake News Awards!

30 facts you NEED to know: Your Covid Cribsheet

Everything Is Connected!

Alberta update on COVID-19 – September 23, 2021

September 30, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Farm to Fork: How the EU and the Davos Cabal Plan to Control Agriculture

By F. William Engdahl – New Eastern Outlook – 29.09.2021

Whenever we hear the word “sustainable” we would be well-advised to take a critical look behind the nice sounding words. In the case of the globalist Agenda 2030 with its 17 sustainable goals by 2030, the one for creating a “sustainable agriculture”, when looked at closely, will destroy a huge part of EU agriculture production and drive already rising global prices for food far higher. The EU Commission calls their Green Deal for food the cute title, “Farm to Fork.” It is being backed by Klaus Schwab’s omnipresent World Economic Forum and their Great Reset.

Keep in mind that sustainable as defined by the UN and Davos World Economic Forum means achieving Zero Carbon emissions by 2050. Yet there is no scientific study independently proving that CO2 is endangering our planet by creating global warming. Only myriads of dubious, well-funded computer models. The harmless gas is essential to all human, animal and all plant life. Now the European Union Commission is pushing a top-down radical agenda on the agriculture heart of the world’s second most important food producer as part of its ill-conceived EU Green Deal. If implemented as is likely, it will cause drastic reduction in crop outputs, a severe reduction in meat protein and, perhaps most dangerous, an overturning of current EU law regulating new gene-edited crops, or GMO.2. That will have global consequences.

Farm to Fork…

In May 2020 the EU Commission released its Farm to Fork Strategy. The official Brussels rhetoric makes it sound like a food nirvana is coming. They state, “The Farm to Fork Strategy is at the heart of the European Green Deal, aiming to make food systems fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly.” Wow, that sounds super.

They then get to the real agenda: “We need to redesign our food systems which today account for nearly one-third of global GHG (Green House Gas) emissions, consume large amounts of natural resources, result in biodiversity loss and negative health impacts…” This is a clever way of demonizing farmers and our food production as CO2 violators. The solution? “New technologies and scientific discoveries, combined with increasing public awareness and demand for sustainable food, will benefit all stakeholders.” What new technologies will be explained.

How do the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels plan to “redesign our food systems” to eliminate one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050? By forcing farmers to go bankrupt by demanding new costly inputs to production and radical new genetic manipulated patented plants with unproven safety. Above all they plan to lift the current de facto ban on gene-edited plant cultivation. For those who do not know, it is the same unproven risky technology used in the COVID-19 vaccines of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA gene-edited vaccines using CRISPR.

EU Commissioner for Agriculture, Janusz Wojciechowski, says of the Farm to Fork Green Agenda, “Farmers will need to radically transform their production methods and make the best use of technological, digital, and space-based solutions to usher in the new agricultural transition.” So they plan a radical transformation. Already this sounds ominous.

To raise the share of pesticide-free organic farming to 25% of the EU total at the same time reducing chemical pesticide use by 30% by 2030 sounds great to the uninformed. Like the claims of Monsanto and the GMO industry that their GMO crops reduce need for pesticides, it is a lie. The EU is using this as bait to introduce a radical change in strict current EU rules for allowing approval of gene-edited plants and animals into agriculture. In their May 2020 document on Farm to Fork Green Deal, the EU states that the Commission is “carrying out a study which will look at the potential of new genomic techniques to improve sustainability along the food supply chain.” This means gene-editing, CRISPR/Cas9 genetic modification.

New Genomic Techniques’

In April this year, the EU Commission released that study on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). NGTs are producing gene-edited plants and even animals. The report claims that NGTs, “techniques to alter the genome of an organism, have the potential to contribute to a more sustainable food system as part of the objectives of the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork Strategy.” The report calls for a “public debate” to change the strict EU laws on approval of GMO crops that require extensive testing and labelling of GMO crops.

That law from 2001 has successfully restricted use of GMO across the EU in contrast with the USA where unregulated GMOs are dominant for key crops. In 2018 the European Court of Justice, the EU court, ruled that Gene-edited crops should be subject to the same stringent regulations as first-generation genetically modified (GMO) organisms. The key to the Davos and EU Farm to Fork Agenda is a radical reduction in pesticides to be replaced by gene-edited crops allegedly able to replace pesticides.

The EU Commission, in cahoots with Bayer-Monsanto and others of the GMO agribusiness lobby, are working hard to remove that court restriction. Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, Stella Kyriakides, said of their April EU study, “The study we publish today concludes that New Genomic Techniques can promote the sustainability of agricultural production, in line with the objectives of our Farm to Fork Strategy.” New Genomic Techniques is the euphemism for gene-edited crops.

EU Vice President responsible for the Green Deal, Franz Timmermans, has openly admitted the lure of promising huge cuts in pesticides, implying it will come from abolishing restrictions on gene-editing. He told a recent EU Green Week conference that the EU aims to give farmers the tools to adopt precision agriculture and to leverage scientific discoveries to optimize seeds: “That’s how we limit our dependency on pesticides.” Precision agriculture and scientific discoveries to optimize seeds is Brussels doublespeak for massive introduction of unregulated gene-editing. He continued, “Going to ecological farming doesn’t mean we all have to munch on grass and live in caves, we need to use the latest technology to get us there.” That means gene-editing CRISPR.

Translated into plain English, the heart of Farm to Fork is the planned overturning of the 2018 ECJ court ruling that treats CRISPR gene-edited plants or animals under the same strict “precautionary principle” rules for GMO. With no restrictions, gene-editing companies like Bayer-Monsanto will be free to introduce experimental and unproven genetically altered plants and animals into our diet with no labelling.

Such a gene-edit-free regime already exists in the USA where the USDA and regulators allow CRISPR gene-edited soy oil, mushrooms that don’t brown, wheat with more fiber, better-producing tomatoes, herbicide-tolerant canola and rice that doesn’t absorb soil pollution as it growsGene-edited US projects on fish and animals include such dubious ones as cows that only have male calves, using CRISPR; Pigs that don’t need castration; hornless dairy cows and growth-enhanced catfish using CRISPR to develop catfish with more muscle cellsIt makes the mouth water…

CRISPR Risks Huge, Rewards Not

The major lobbying push to remove EU regulations on gene-edited crops or animals is coming from Bayer-Monsanto and the other GMO agribusiness giants including Syngenta, BASF, and DowDupont’s Corteva. In November 2020 Liam Condon, the President of Bayer-Monsanto crop science division told a Bayer Future of Farming conference, that Bayer is lobbying “very strongly” to change the EU’s GMO regulations to exempt gene editing. Condon said, “[We are] promoting very strongly that regulations should catch up with technology and allow this technology to be used, [not only] for the benefit of Europeans, but also for the benefit of others all over the world who look to Europe for regulations.” Condon called gene editing and CRISPR technology an “amazing breakthrough” that would allow agriculture to be more sustainableWhat he omitted was that deregulating gene-edited crops will allow Bayer-Monsanto and other major GMO companies to charge farmers for their patented “sustainable” seeds.

Gene-editing of plants or animals is not at all risk-free as claimed. The technology is not at all precise or controlled and often has unpredicted outcomes such as unintended genetic alteration, even the inadvertent addition of foreign DNA from other species, or even entire foreign genes, into the genome of gene-edited organisms.

This is still a new experimental technology. Its advocates such as Bayer-Monsanto claim that gene editing of plants is precise. Yet investigation finds that far from proven. Dr. Allison K Wilson of The Bioscience Resource Project, states, “plant gene editing methods are also prone to introducing UTs (Unintended Traits or genetic damage)… new evidence from both animals and plants indicates that gene editing itself can result in unintended mutations at or near the target site. These include the insertion of vector, bacterial, and other superfluous DNA, and the unintended introduction of large DNA deletions and rearrangements.”

These are not minor flaws that can be ignored. Wilson concludes, “plant gene editing outcomes are imprecise and unpredictable, and that, depending on the combination of techniques used, gene editing can be highly mutagenic. While in theory it might someday be possible to create a GM crop that meets the broad requirements of sustainable agriculture, in practice this seems highly unlikely to ever happen.”

According to an analysis of the EU Farm to Fork strategy by Global Ag Media, “the effect of these strategies will be an unprecedented reduction of EU production capacity and of its farmers’ income. All sectors show declines in production of 5% to 15%, with the livestock sectors being the most heavily impacted… Meanwhile, whatever the scenario, production prices show a net increase of around 10% with a negative impact for most farmers’ incomes. ” The EU farmers’ union, Copa-Cogeca warns the policy will result in an unprecedented reduction in agriculture capacity. But that’s the real intent of “sustainable agriculture.”

Davos and EU Farm to Fork

The radical EU Farm to Form Green agenda finds its echo in the Davos World Economic Forum which already in 2014 promoted what it called, “Enabling Trade: From Farm to Fork.” A January 2018 WEF report states, “Gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR-Cas could provide a way to achieve multi-trait improvements, producing a step change in productivity while improving the drought resistance and nutritional content of food. “ This was done together with McKinsey & Co as part of the WEF Food Security and Agriculture Initiatives and their Great Reset. WEF Forum Partners include Bayer, Syngenta, BASF. According to the WEF website, “The World Economic Forum at its Annual Meeting in Davos in January 2020 brought together leaders from industry and business with Executive Vice-President Frans Timmermans to explore how to catalyze the European Green Deal.” Bayer’s Liam Condon was also there as was the head of Syngenta and BASF.

If the EU agriculture sector is brought into the gene-edited GMO regime and its production radically reduced as a consequence, it will drive ever greater food shortages around the world. This is the Davos plan along with their COVID-19 eugenics Great Reset agenda. Calling it Farm to Fork makes it sound harmless. It clearly is not.

September 29, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

26,041 Deaths 2,448,362 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Union’s Database

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | September 29, 2021

The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 26,041 fatalities, and 2,448,362 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.

Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.

The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50. (There are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.)

So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured following COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.

The EudraVigilance database reports that through September 25, 2021 there are 26,041 deaths and 2,448,362 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,176,130) are serious injuries.

Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”

Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.

Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*

Here is the summary data through September 25, 2021.

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer – 12,362 deathand 1,054,741 injuries to 25/09/2021

  • 28,662   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 172 deaths
  • 29,569   Cardiac disorders incl. 1,834 deaths
  • 277        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 23 deaths
  • 14,027   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 822        Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 16,330   Eye disorders incl. 30 deaths
  • 92,590   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 514 deaths
  • 274,633 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 3,517 deaths
  • 1,186     Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 59 deaths
  • 10,876   Immune system disorders incl. 65 deaths
  • 36,113   Infections and infestations incl. 1,214 deaths
  • 13,804   Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 191 deaths
  • 26,554   Investigations incl. 387 deaths
  • 7,555     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 225 deaths
  • 138,223 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 155 deaths
  • 837        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 78 deaths
  • 185,082 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,341 deaths
  • 1,347     Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 39 deaths
  • 172        Product issues incl. 1 death
  • 19,436   Psychiatric disorders incl. 159 deaths
  • 3,605     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 205 deaths
  • 24,848   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 46,177   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,443 deaths
  • 50,420   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 111 deaths
  • 2,007     Social circumstances incl. 15 deaths
  • 1,034     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 34 deaths
  • 28,555   Vascular disorders incl. 532 deaths

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna – 6,907 deathand 306,490 injuries to 25/09/2021

  • 6,051     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 67 deaths
  • 9,283     Cardiac disorders incl. 744 deaths
  • 122        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 3,769     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 1 death
  • 248        Endocrine disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 4,627     Eye disorders incl. 20 deaths
  • 26,405   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 269 deaths
  • 82,564   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 2,617 deaths
  • 500        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 2,659     Immune system disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 9,570     Infections and infestations incl. 487 deaths
  • 6,759     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 127 deaths
  • 5,811     Investigations incl. 128 deaths
  • 2,944     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 158 deaths
  • 38,397   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 139 deaths
  • 369        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 42 deaths
  • 53,562   Nervous system disorders incl. 706 deaths
  • 583        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 8 deaths
  • 62           Product issues incl. 2 deaths
  • 5,772     Psychiatric disorders incl. 118 deaths
  • 1,772     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 114 deaths
  • 4,576     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 13,315   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 682 deaths
  • 16,453   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 62 deaths
  • 1,366     Social circumstances incl. 28 deaths
  • 1,032     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 71 deaths
  • 7,919     Vascular disorders incl. 267 deaths

Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca – 5,468 deathand 1,008,357 injuries to 25/09/2021

  • 12,160   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 226 deaths
  • 17,334   Cardiac disorders incl. 623 deaths
  • 163        Congenital familial and genetic disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 11,826   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 1 death
  • 522        Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 17,753   Eye disorders incl. 26 deaths
  • 97,985   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 280 deaths
  • 265,482 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,320 deaths
  • 866        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 53 deaths
  • 4,104     Immune system disorders incl. 25 deaths
  • 26,800   Infections and infestations incl. 347 deaths
  • 11,472   Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 153 deaths
  • 22,152   Investigations incl. 129 deaths
  • 11,805   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 77 deaths
  • 151,690 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 76 deaths
  • 536        Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 17 deaths
  • 209,576 Nervous system disorders incl. 872 deaths
  • 456        Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 11 deaths
  • 164        Product issues incl. 1 death
  • 18,858   Psychiatric disorders incl. 50 deaths
  • 3,752     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 49 deaths
  • 13,707   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 35,537   Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 654 deaths
  • 46,297   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 40 deaths
  • 1,328     Social circumstances incl. 7 deaths
  • 1,199     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 24 deaths
  • 24,833   Vascular disorders incl. 395 deaths

Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson – 1,304 deaths and 78,774 injuries to 25/09/2021

  • 737        Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 32 deaths
  • 1,315     Cardiac disorders incl. 129 deaths
  • 26           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
  • 687        Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 1 death
  • 47           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,067     Eye disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 7,102     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 59 deaths
  • 20,536   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 333 deaths
  • 98           Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 321        Immune system disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 1,943     Infections and infestations incl. 79 deaths
  • 743        Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 17 deaths
  • 3,998     Investigations incl. 79 deaths
  • 465        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 12,263   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 33 deaths
  • 37           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 2 deaths
  • 16,253   Nervous system disorders incl. 148 deaths
  • 26           Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
  • 21           Product issues
  • 1,059     Psychiatric disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 311        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 15 deaths
  • 1,139     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 2,786     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 148 deaths
  • 2,426     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 235        Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
  • 572        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 43 deaths
  • 2,561     Vascular disorders incl. 109 deaths

September 29, 2021 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 1 Comment

Taliban reinforces warning to US not to use drones in Afghan airspace

By Lucas Leiroz | September 29, 2021

The US, which recently withdrew its troops during the Taliban’s takeover of Kabul, apparently is still active in the Central Asian country. Clandestine operations involving drones allegedly aimed at combating Daesh K agents have caused controversy in the region in recent days. The Taliban emphatically affirms that it will not tolerate a foreign presence and that it will fight American drones in the same way it fights terrorists, while Washington insists on a “global police” posture and says that it will continue to use drones against the Daesh K.

In late August, a drone strike by the US military against Daesh K militants caused outrage in the Taliban. The de facto government in Kabul repudiated the American measure not only because Washington disrespected Afghan sovereignty by carrying out incursions into the country after its participation in the war ended, but mainly because the operation was a complete disaster, resulting in the death of ten civilians, including seven children and a humanitarian NGO agent. In fact, the terrorists were not affected by the American operation, which only killed innocent people and caused massive humanitarian damage.

In response, the Taliban warned that Washington would suffer consequences for its interventionist stance if there were new drone operations in Afghan territory. The group emphasized the fact that operating in Afghan airspace without prior authorization from the local government is an international crime and can be responded with military action. Considering that the Taliban is currently the group that controls Afghanistan, establishing a real government, although not internationally recognized, Washington should ask the Taliban for authorization to act in the region. Without this authorization, there is a crime of territorial invasion.

On Tuesday, the Taliban published a new statement reaffirming its authority over the entire Afghan territory and prohibiting unauthorized foreign military actions in the country. The group also highlighted the clauses of the Doha peace agreement, signed by Washington in 2020, which established non-intervention as one of the prerequisites for the future of the Afghan issue. In the statement, we can read: “The United States has recently violated all international law and its commitments to the Islamic Emirate in Doha, Qatar, and Afghanistan’s sacred airspace is being occupied by US drones. These violations must be corrected and prevented (…) We will call on all countries, especially the United States, to abide by their international commitments and laws in order to prevent any negative consequences”.

Previously, the US government had stated that last month’s attack was not the last and that new actions in Afghan territory using military drones were about to take place. Apparently, there is an understanding on the part of Washington that the end of the participation in the Afghan war does not imply the end of “security measures” against targets identified as terrorists, which is quite contradictory. The mentality of acting as “global police” is so strongly rooted in US security policy that the country simply believes it really has the right to invade other states’ airspace and does not consider it an international crime.

The increase in the activities of terrorist groups has influenced this scenario because these terrorist organizations’ actions “justify” to Western public opinion the “need” for new interventions in Afghanistan. The largest of these groups is Daesh K itself, a Central Asian branch of ISIS, which operates heavily in Afghanistan and Pakistan and has been involved in terrible episodes of violence since the Taliban’s takeover. The group has established itself as the number one enemy of the new government, operating several attacks against civilians with the objective of generating social chaos and preventing the Taliban from consolidating in power.

Washington sees this fact as evidence that the West needs to remain involved in Afghan internal disputes and, with no possibility of sending human military personnel, considering the recent withdrawal, the American government mobilizes drones to carry out the attacks. However, it is clear that the Taliban has strength enough to deal with this situation without international coalitions. The Taliban’s military potential is far greater than the power of the former Afghan government – it is not by chance that the former government collapsed within a few days. In addition, a substantial portion of the American military apparatus passed into the hands of Afghan leaders after the seizure of Kabul, resulting in a Taliban far stronger than any terrorist group currently present in Afghan territory.

Considering this scenario, the American “concern” seems unnecessary. The US has no right to intervene in Afghanistan unless the Taliban itself requests it. The group appears to have enough strength to resolve its disputes with other terrorist organizations – and even if the Taliban were weaker than Daesh K, other countries would need authorization to operate in Afghan territory. The US government is visibly invading the airspace of another sovereign state and needs to be punished internationally for it.

Lucas Leiroz is a research fellow in international law at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro.

September 29, 2021 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , | 3 Comments