Commission cautions against “objectivity” in journalism and calls for censorship of “misinformation”
A chilling read
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | November 22, 2021
The Aspen Institute has released the results of its study on how to protect the public from “misinformation.” The 16-person Commission on Information Disorder recommended more censorship, warning misinformation propagated other issues such as social injustice.
Last week, the Aspen Institute published an 80-page report on how to fight misinformation and disinformation. The long-standing solution to misinformation is better information. However, the organization insisted that the best solution is censorship.
“The biggest lie of all, which this crisis thrives on, and which the beneficiaries of mis- and disinformation feed on, is that the crisis itself is uncontainable. One of the corollaries of that mythology is that, in order to fight bad information, all we need is more (and better distributed) good information. In reality, merely elevating truthful content is not nearly enough to change our current course,” the report read.
One issue raised by critics when it comes to misinformation and disinformation is the lack of proper definitions. They are a matter of “we know when we see it.” However, the report ignores the definition of the terms and focuses on the harm caused, such as inflaming existing issues.
“Disinformation inflames long-standing inequalities and undermines lived experiences for historically targeted communities, particularly Black/African American communities. False narratives can sow division, hamper public health initiatives, undermine elections, or deliver fresh marks to grifters and profiteers, and they capitalize on deep-rooted problems within American society. Disinformation pours lighter fluid on the sparks of discord that exist in every community.”
The report also endorses a growing movement against what it describes “objectivity and both sideism” in the media, some of the hallmarks of responsible journalism.
“Commissioners also discussed the need to adjust journalistic norms to avoid false equivalencies between lies and empirical fact in the pursuit of ‘both sides’ and ‘objectivity,’ particularly in areas of public health, civil rights, or election outcomes,” the report shockingly reads.
The Commission also recommended the involvement of the government in fighting misinformation, ignoring the First Amendment.
Ultimately, the commission’s solution to the “deep-rooted problems in American society” is the regulation of speech, not free speech.
This perverse ban on ivermectin, cheap and proven to work
By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | November 23, 2021
GIVEN the feared winter resurgence of Covid infection despite, or because of, the government’s mass vaccination programme, the continued ban on ivermectin in this country becomes ever more perverse.
It beggars belief that the British public is still denied access to this proven prophylactic and treatment. If the public health authorities are genuinely worried about pressure on hospitals, why have not the Medicines and Health products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), Public Health England, the NHS and Department of Health all gone flat out over this last year to approve ivermectin with the same zeal they gave emergency authorisation to the limited trialled, novel gene therapy, Covid vaccines?
The answer is widespread misinformation from the top down. Put ‘ivermectin’ into the Google search box and what do you come up with? Topping the list is a warning from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) why it should NOT be used to treat or prevent Covid-19. Their reason? It’s as simple as the fact that they have not approved it and, because they have not approved, it cannot be used. Trials are ongoing they say. Maybe some are. But plenty have been completed, as Dr Pierre Kory’s paper (he was the lead author) ‘Review of the Emerging Evidence Demonstrating the Efficacy of Ivermectin in the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Covid-19’, published by the American Journal of Therapeutics earlier this year, made quite clear.
By contrast with this detailed review of the evidence the FDA’s substantive concern appears to rest on random reports of harms deriving from self-medication with ivermectin.
The BBC not to be behindhand entered the fray with its customary selective and biased take on ‘the science’. Its recent report entitled ‘How false science created a Covid ‘miracle’ drug‘ made not even the most minimal of checks on the veracity of their assertions, which are pulled apart here. A letter sent to a programme journalist in response to their request for information (in advance of transmission) by Dr Tess Lawrie, the Director of the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Group (BIRD), an advocacy group of clinicians and scientists from around the world, setting out the science behind the case for authorising it, was completely ignored. Her letter can be found here.
How the BBC came not to ask how it was that remdesivir – a standard medication for Covid in the UK – was approved on the basis of one study when ivermectin, with 63 studies, of them 31 Randomised Controlled Trials (RCT), 7 meta-analyses, 32 Observational Controlled Trials (OCT), multiple country case studies, expert opinion, patient testimony ALL pointing in favour of the medication, was not, is inexplicable.
This is the news source the public is still told to trust.
A blog posted on BIRD last week asked whether there are indeed any genuine gripes about the quality of the evidence, as the FDA and others suggest?
No, there are not. The author argues it is down to a misinformation campaign based on misleading information produced by high profile public health agencies, like the World Health Organisation, itself a victim of disinformation tactics, that has been ‘perpetrated by a minority of corporations to manipulate and delay government action on matters that would adversely affect their income and profit’. Speculation of course. But every indication points that way.
As reported extensively in TCW Defending Freedom, for example here, the WHO is subject to the huge financial influence of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the organisation’s second biggest donor. Since one of the BMGF’s long-term interest is in delivering vaccines, why would they show any interest in promoting the use of cheap, old repurposed medications in the treatment and prevention of Covid-19? It’s for the very same reason that ivermectin has proved of so little interest to Big Pharma -it’s hardly the money spinner that indemnified world-wide vaccination is.
Worse perhaps than what these big interests have not done is what they have actively done to discredit ivermectin. The BIRD blog relays an analysis by Dr Kory setting out what the WHO ‘did’ with the ivermectin evidence. He says it:
· Failed to publish a pre-established protocol for data exclusion
· Excluded two ‘quasi-randomised’ controlled trials (RCTs) with lower mortality
· Excluded two RCTs that compared ivermectin to or gave it together with other medications, all reporting lower mortality
· Excluded seven other available ivermectin RCT results
· Excluded all RCTs and observational controlled trials (OCTs) investigating ivermectin in the prevention of Covid-19
· Excluded 13 OCTs, more than 5,500 patients, that showed reductions in mortality
· Excluded numerous published and pre-print epidemiologic studies.
The bottom line, however, remains – if ivermectin is good enough and provenly effective for the more than 20 lower-income countries which do distribute it and also benefit from lower Covid rates, why are the populations of wealthier nations and individuals still being denied?
It’s a point that clearly has bothered the chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association, Dr Haruo Ozaki, who would recommend ivermectin for Covid patients, noting that the parts of Africa that use ivermectin to control parasites have a Covid death rate of just 2.2 per 100,000 population, compared with 13 times that death rate among African countries that do not use ivermectin.
‘I would like,’ said Dr Ozaki, ‘the government to consider treatment at the level of the family doctor’ with the informed consent of the patient. So would we.
Vaccinated English adults under 60 are dying at twice the rate of unvaccinated people the same age
And have been for six months. This chart may seem unbelievable or impossible, but it’s correct, based on weekly data from the British government.
By Alex Berenson | Unreported Truths | November 20, 2021
The brown line represents weekly deaths from all causes of vaccinated people aged 10-59, per 100,000 people.
The blue line represents weekly deaths from all causes of unvaccinated people per 100,000 in the same age range.
I have checked the underlying dataset myself and this graph is correct. Vaccinated people under 60 are twice as likely to die as unvaccinated people. And overall deaths in Britain are running well above normal.
I don’t know how to explain this other than vaccine-caused mortality.
The basic data is available here, download the Excel file and see table 4.
Man’s Inhumanity to Man Accelerated
By Gary D. Barnett | Lew Rockwell | November 16, 2021
“The belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary; men alone are quite capable of every wickedness.”
~ Joseph Conrad, Under Western Eyes pt. 2, ch. 4 (1911)
It is not only difficult to understand, but almost impossible to believe, that only a small fraction of mankind can produce what is described as most of the evil, while virtually all the rest of society voluntarily allows it. It matters not that most of the herd believes that mankind is basically good, for so-called good men do not stand idle while bad men pillage, plunder, and murder. Good men do not hide in the face of adversity or due to terror levied at the hands of the state monsters. Good men do not maim and kill on orders from warmongers and criminals in government without legitimate cause, of which none exists. Good men do not bend and comply to immoral mandates handed down by self-proclaimed elites and political scum. Good men do not succumb to cowardice. Those who do nothing in the face of evil then are not good men. So, is man really basically good, or is this just a falsely created myth meant to protect the fragile psyche of the masses so that weak and inadequate humans can continue to shield themselves from guilt through dishonesty, while doing nothing to prove their worth?
Man’s inhumanity to man has accelerated greatly, as the obvious evil among us, and those who willingly allow that evil to exist and prosper, are knowingly and unknowingly working together to bring about the destruction of mankind.
Some may take offence at the claim that man is not inherently good, but can they defend that position given the state of the world we live in today, where the masses take little or no responsibility whatsoever for their extreme non-caring and apathetic behavior that has led to total tyranny? In this country called the ‘United’ States, there is essentially no unity left, only divisiveness and antagonistic loathing survive. Love and compassion have been replaced by hate and indifference. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is now rarely if ever considered, while self-fulfillment, self-indulgence, envy, and an abandonment of self-responsibility reign supreme. The Golden Rule has disappeared from view in this society in favor of do unto others in order to gain for self. This reversal of the basic premise of good has left only emptiness and misery, and this state of mind does not allow for the capability of compassion. How can a country or world survive under these barren and meaningless conditions?
Consider the fact that mankind has existed throughout history in a perpetual state of war. War is essentially and purposely the slaughter of others for the benefit of the abhorrent rulers and state, little or nothing more. It requires that its participants, whether they claim to be ‘patriots,’ (a desired state lie and excuse for those prosecuting and participating in this evil, ) righteous protectors, or saviors of country, to become murderers of the innocent; not because they are defending themselves, their families, their fellow men, or their country, but because they are doing the bidding of the heinous ruling class and the governments that prosecute this carnage only for the sake of money, power, and control. Hundreds upon hundreds of millions, and likely over a billion lives have been lost due to war throughout history, and this is just the beginning of what is to come. Is this the best that this human species can accomplish? Is this the true essence of man? Is man so consumed by a deficiency of character and deep-rooted hate that war is eternally inevitable and desired? Are death and destruction permanent ambitions of mankind, and is mass indifference by the collective all that is necessary in order for the carnage of the ruling class to continue its quest for total domination?
At this particular point in time war is raging in the U.S. and in every corner of the world, but it is not any war against some manufactured foreign enemy, it is not a war of missiles and bombs, it is not a war brought about by any false flag military attack, but it is a deadly war of stealth. No, this war we are in today is not about dictators or terrorists, it is aggressive war by this and every other state against its people; a war against humanity itself. The ruling class who stay hidden from sight and their pawns and enforcers in government, are at war against the rest of us. The goals of this globalist cabal are of course power and control, and a great reset of all aspects of life, but in order to accomplish these grand agendas, the murder and slaughter of hundreds of millions, if not billions is sought. This will not be accomplished simply by traditional warfare, it must be done covertly, and with the blessing and voluntary acceptance by those being eliminated and also those left who are to be controlled. Hence, the fake ‘Covid pandemic,’ the poisonous killer ‘vaccines,’ the manmade ‘climate change’ lie, and the continued notion of state as master and ‘protector’ of the people, still continue to be the catalysts driving this carnage of life and liberty against the people in order to achieve this totalitarian takeover.
While this analysis may seem defeatist in nature, or based on a doomsday scenario, it is not meant for that purpose. This harsh message is only necessary in order to hopefully awaken the mind, spirit, and souls of all those still passionate enough about individual freedom to do what is required to regain it. We are all men, we all fail at times, but constant, allowed, and accepted failure, or voluntary acquiescence to false authority, is simply a willing compliance to a master’s commands, and can only lead to slavery and despair. We have but one life on this earth, and to allow that gift to be destroyed due to an absence of feelings, compassion, and courage, is self-destruction. These words are meant to awaken as many as possible to their own sorry plight created by their own hand; all due to the fact that mass indifference has consumed this society. That indifference not only guarantees defeat at the hands of evil, it breeds evil in the minds of all men consumed by it. Without a change of heart and mind, without knowledge of the facts of one’s own existence, and without honest acceptance of reality, we all face a hell on earth. That should never be accepted by any who desire to be free.
To challenge reality is to ignore truth. To ignore truth is to accept defeat by the wicked. This will be our fate if the people do not soon wake up and stop it. If this madness continues, the people will have allowed this ruling class to get its way. That should never be acceptable to any who desire freedom. That should never be acceptable to any who desire life.
To gain freedom only requires the desire and courage of the many to say no, and to say it loudly.
All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you.
~ Étienne de La Boétie, book Discourse on Voluntary Servitude–1548
Gary D. Barnett [send him mail] is a retired investment professional that has been writing about freedom and liberty matters, politics, and history for two decades. He is against all war and aggression, and against the state.
Davos Billionaires Want to Save the Planet… Why Don’t Developing Countries Trust Them?
By Matthew Ehret | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 17, 2021
A miracle appears to be happening, as the multibillionaires of the World Economic Forum (WEF) appear to have grown consciences.
As if by magic, it appears that these gold collar elites no longer yearn for profit and power as they once had. As COP26 closes up its 12 day annual ceremonies, leading WEF-connected figures like Prince Charles, Jeff Bezos, Mario Draghi, Mark Carney and Klaus Schwab have announced a new system of economics that is based on virtue over profit!
According to the COP26 website, “95 high profile companies from a range of sectors commit to being ‘Nature Positive,’ agreeing to work towards halting and reversing the decline of nature by 2030.”
Prince Charles has boasted that he has coordinated 300 companies representing over $60 trillion to get on board with a global green transition, and after meeting with the Prince on November 2, Jeff Bezos announced his new $2 billion Earth Fund to protect nature’s ecosystems with a focus on Africa. Even Prime Minister Mario Draghi has joined Mark Carney on this new green path, as both men have moved beyond their old Goldman Sachs money worshipping days and embraced a better destiny. At the Nov 1 G20 Summit, Draghi embraced Prince Charles’ Green Markets Initiative and threw Italy’s full support behind the de-carbonization initiative.
The Prince himself (who also happens to be the nominal creator of the Great Reset Agenda launched in 2020), spoke as an enlightened statesman saying to the world’s leaders “as the enormity of the climate challenge dominates peoples’ conversations, from news rooms to living rooms, and as the future of humanity and Nature herself are at stake, it is surely time to set aside our differences and grasp this unique opportunity to launch a substantial green recovery by putting the global economy on a confident, sustainable trajectory and, thus, save our planet.”
Among the new array of financial mechanisms which we see being brought online in this war against humanity involve Bezos’ new Earth Fund, and Sir Robert Watson’s Living Planet Index (unveiled in 2018 at the World Economic Forum) and the new Rockefeller Foundation-sponsored Intrinsic Exchange Group (IEG) which seeks to turn global ecosystems worth an estimated $4 quadrillion into financial equity controllable by new private corporations (dubbed “natural asset companies”).
On its website, the IEG stated: “In partnership with the New York Stock Exchange, IEG is providing a word-class platform to list these companies for trading, enabling the conversion of natural assets into financial capital. The NAC’s equity captures the intrinsic and productive value of nature and provides a store of value based on the vital assets that underpin our entire economy and make life on earth possible… In 2021, we began seeking regulatory approval to bring the first natural asset transactions to the capital markets. Our vision is to bring to market hundreds of Natural Asset Companies representing several trillion dollars’ worth of natural assets.”
These new companies will become the stewards of new protected zones across the globe which the UN demands encapsulate 30% of the earth’s surface by 2030 and much more by 2050.
Is this time to rejoice, or is something darker at play?
To answer this question it is worth asking: Does this new virtue-driven order have anything to do with lifting people out of poverty or ending economic injustice?
Sadly, it is designed to do very much the opposite.
As we are coming to see, and as statesmen around the world are beginning to point out, this new order has more in common with oligarchical obsessions with controlling human cattle, and less to do with actually preserving the environment. The thousands of tons of CO2 emitted by private jets at Davos and COP26 represents on small aspect of this disingenuity.
Obrador Calls out the Game
On October 30, Mexico’s President Lopez Obrador called out this new virulent form of colonialism while presiding over a ceremony in celebration of the ongoing construction of the $6.7 billion high-speed Maya Train now being built in the southern regions of Mexico. The project which would dramatically uplift living standards in Mexico by driving the growth of industrial and infrastructure production has fallen far behind schedule due in large part to vast legal battles led by indigenous groups who have been used as proxies by foreign interests to defend Mexico’s ecosystems. In many of the legal cases opposing the project, the argument has been made that since several species of insect, fauna and even some leopards will be affected by the new railways, then the project must be ground to a halt and buried.
In his remarks to a journalist inquiring into the rail project, Obrador said:
“One of the things which they [the neoliberals] promoted in the world, in order to loot at ease, was the creation or promotion of the so-called new rights. So, feminism, ecologism, the defense of human rights, the protection of animals was much promoted, including by them. All these causes are very noble, but the intent was to create or boost all these new causes so that we don’t remedy—so that we don’t turn around and see that they were looting the world, so the subject of economic and social inequality would be kept out of the center of debate… The international agencies which supported the neoliberal model, which is a model of pillage where corporations grab national property, the property of the people—these same corporations financed, and continue to finance, environmentalist groups, defenders of ‘liberty.’ ”
Many people have been confused over these remarks since they cannot conceptualize how neoliberal monetarists that have parasitically driven the new age of pillage under globalization would also support such ‘new rights’ groups outlined by Obrador.
For nations of the global south who feel resentment that their rights to support their people by having their lands and resources kept off limits, they are told not to worry, since streams of money will be showered upon them from on high. Hundreds of billions of dollars worth of monopoly money will be sprayed onto the developing sector as rewards for remaining undeveloped. If that isn’t sufficient, then carbon exchange markets will be set up so that poor nations can sell their un-used carbon quotas to private polluting companies (perhaps the same companies controlling the African cobalt mines which seek a monopoly in controlling the renewable energy sector). That is another way they can make money which at least can keep them warm at night as kindling since the world’s poor will not have to worry about having nature-killing hydro electric dams mucking up their pristine environments.
Even in the west where Biden’s 30×30 executive order has been signed into action, farmers will be offered money to stop grazing on soon-to-be protected lands, while a supposedly grassroots-based WWF-connected American Prairie Reserve (with a $160 million endowment) can be seen pushing a program designed to take 5000 square miles of grazing land in Montana out of use and converted into a pure ecosystem.
As President Obrador has alluded to, today’s billionaire-funded conservation movement simply seeks to take earth’s ecosystems out of bounds of any human economic activity under a new global feudal system of controls.
Even the indigenous populations which such billionaires profess to admire as role models for global “good behavior” are being monetized by these new green indices, with monetary values being placed not only on keeping land and water untouched, but also the very cultural ecosystems of indigenous groups around the world receiving dollar values which wealthy green financiers will somehow be able to invest into. To the degree that such immutably fixed patterns of indigenous lifestyles remain unchanged by the toxic pollution of modern technology or infrastructure, the more these eco-assets will be worth for whomever professes to invest in them. This may not be scientific but it is sick.
The term ‘feudal’ is in no way used for hyperbolic purposes, as we can see a stark parallel to the 12th century Europe, except that today’s aspiring feudal lords manage such companies as Blackrock, Vanguard, Google, Microsoft, Amazon and State Street and seek to punish all serfs from infringing on properties which only the nobility may control. Blackrock alone manages over $9 trillion in assets and $21.6 trillion in technology platforms and along with Vanguard is fast becoming one of the largest real estate owners in the USA with Bill Gates having recently become the largest owner of American farmland.
The Deeper Imperial Roots of Conservationism
With this vast imperial landgrab in mind, one should not be surprised to discover that the modern conservation movement actually finds its origins not in Greenpeace activists fighting poachers as mythmakers have cooked up, but rather in the bowels of the British Empire. It was this empire that innovated “nature conservation” regions in India during the late 19th century specifically to keep the poor of India under control after having destroyed India’s once powerful textile sector. The practice was applied across India during the greatest density of famines struck southern India in 1876 killing tens of millions. It was amidst this darkness that British Imperial overlords took the opportunity to create “The Imperial Forestry Department’ in 1876 putting two fifths of India’s lands under “protection” and off limits to humans. This ensured no starving subject could use the protected zones which they had relied upon for survival for decades for food, or water.
The Nazi embrace of both Anglo-American funded science of eugenics on the one side and the Reich’s embrace of nature conservationism were also not unconnected. Herman Goring, who served as Minister for German Forests believed in a poisonous worldview that held that: 1) nature is pure and thus good due to its pure unchanging natural order while 2) humanity is impure and thus un-natural due to our aspirations for progress. This dangerous equation resulted in seemingly innocent programs launched by the Fuhrer and Goring to cleanse the German ecosystems of all foreign and thus un-natural fauna and flora in order to return the forests of Germany to their supposedly pure pre-industrial states. The worship of nature was an integral part of the new master race and the weeding out of impurities extended itself to human genetics following racial theories advanced by British eugenicists and anthropologists.
Julian Huxley’s New Eugenics Revolution
Upon Hitler’s defeat, the repackaging of eugenics took the form of British Eugenics Society Vice President Julian Huxley’s outline in the founding Manifesto for UNESCO where he said:
“At the moment, it is probable that the indirect effect of civilization is dysgenic instead of eugenic, and in any case it seems likely that the dead weight of genetic stupidity, physical weakness, mental instability and disease proneness, which already exist in the human species will prove too great a burden for real progress to be achieved. Thus even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”
Putting this new eugenics into practical action took on many heads of a hydra in the post WWII years. The particular hydra head most relevant to the thrust of this article took the form of another project Julian created in 1948 called the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) followed soon thereafter by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in 1961 which he co-founded alongside two misanthropic princes named Philip Mountbatten and Bernhardt of the Netherlands.
Between 1959 and 1962 Julian had risen to become president of the British Eugenics Society and had put the finishing gloss on a new field of scientific misanthropic theology which he dubbed ‘Transhumanism’ alongside a Jesuit collaborator named Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.
If you haven’t guessed, Transhumanism was merely another form of re-packaged eugenics serving the spiritual needs of a new priesthood of elitist social engineers that would be expected to manage the gears of a new technocratic feudal machine. This neo-paganism is not intrinsically different from the cultish beliefs of the Nazi Thule society of the past which gave spiritual direction to the members of Hitler’s government.
The neo-Malthusian revival that these eugenicists would spearhead through the end of the 1960s took the form of a new array of international organizations which incorporated systems analysis, and cybernetics, which aimed to control nation states and ecosystems alike. This took the form of the World Economic Forum’s early embrace of the Club of Rome’s computer models outlined by Aurelio Peccei (and incorporated into Schwab’s second official Davos meeting in 1973). These new models aimed to impose fixed immutable limits to humanity’s growth potential beyond which no technology or scientific discovery could ever penetrate. The fact that these same multibillionaires managing the overhaul of the world economy as it transitioned into a neo-liberal looting operation were simultaneously funding the growth of this new array of “new rights” groups led by a growing armada of non-governmental organizations, ecology protection and human rights groups is not a coincidence.
Today’s involvement of both Julian Huxley’s WWF and IUCN (no renamed Conservation International) as partners with the Intrinsic Exchange Group should not make any honest lover of nature in any way comfortable.
Much more obviously remains to be said both about the history of conservationism, and how it is being used once again to conduct a new age of population control, or how it has been used to disrupt large scale infrastructure projects across the world for over 120 years, or how nature reserves across the global south have supported narco terrorist groups.
However, for the time being, it is sufficient to note that the world’s developing sector is generally not going to accept being sacrificed on the altar of a new Gaia cult managed by a priesthood of Davos billionaires. Based on the momentum we see being driven by the Greater Eurasian Partnership, the Belt and Road Initiative and ambitions from Latin American and African leaders to finally break free of centuries of imperial manipulation, it is becoming increasingly obvious that COP26’s utopic computer models are increasingly breaking down when confronted with the reality of humanity’s creative power to leap outside of the fixed rules of imperial games when a true crisis moves us into action.
NATO submarine caused Kursk sinking that killed 118 Russian sailors, ex-admiral claims
By Layla Guest | RT | November 22, 2021
The catastrophic sinking of the Russian nuclear-powered Kursk submarine more than two decades ago was the result of a collision with a stricken NATO vessel in the Barents Sea, a former high-ranking navy chief has insisted.
The ‘Kursk’ sank on August 12, 2000 at a depth of 108 meters, claiming the lives of all 118 crew members and sparking the first major international crisis of Vladimir Putin’s presidency. An official investigation commissioned by the Russian government ruled two years later that the incident was the result of a torpedo explosion, which then triggered the detonation of ammunition on board.
However, in an interview with RIA Novosti, aired on Monday, former Northern Fleet commander Vyacheslav Popov offered a theory on how the incident might have happened. According to him, a vessel operated by a NATO power got too close to Moscow’s vessel, colliding with its bow and damaging the torpedo tube, which was followed by an explosion. The compartment then flooded, sending the sub to the depths of the sea.
“The submarine that collided with ‘Kursk’ was following it, apparently, but failed to ensure safety in the sea’s environment and all other conditions, approached too close, or the Kursk maneuver led to a loss of contact,” he said.
Popov claimed he knew the name of the sub belonging to the US-military led bloc “with a 90% probability.” However, he admitted he did not have sufficient available evidence to make the case publicly at present.
According to the former naval chief, who served until 2001, the vessel was in the region where it collided with ‘Kursk’. He also noted that SOS signals were sent from special equipment that Russian boats were not equipped with, implying another submarine must have been present.
Viktor Kravchenko, a former chief of staff of the Russian Navy, later agreed with Popov’s theory, remarking he was “also inclined to believe this version” of the demise of the Kursk, based on circumstantial evidence.
Three NATO vessels, the British ‘Splendid’ and American subs ‘Toledo’ and ‘Memphis’, were reportedly in the vicinity of Russian military exercises in the Barents Sea at the time. Neither Washington nor London provided documents on the condition of their vessels after Moscow requested the information.
However, the Russian government maintains that the official investigation’s conclusion is the most likely, with many analysts pointing out the period was a challenging time for the Russian military. A combination of underfunding, aging Soviet hardware, and low morale could all have contributed to the incident.
Putin, then only months into his first term as president, took the brunt of much of the criticism for the Kursk tragedy, with the large-scale loss of young Russian sailors sparking sorrow and outrage. Failed rescue efforts caused anger and frustration both domestically and worldwide.
Popov’s claims come amid heightened concerns over NATO’s activity around Russia’s borders. On Friday, the bloc’s top official, Jens Stoltenberg, proposed deploying American nuclear warheads around Eastern Europe to counter a supposed threat posed by Moscow.
In response, the Kremlin said such a statement would mean that the Founding Act of Russia-NATO relations “no longer exists.” Under this document, inked in 1997, the two parties do not consider each other rivals. It guarantees no nuclear weapons will be deployed to new NATO members after this date.
RFK, Jr.’s ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ #1 Overall on Amazon Bestseller List
The Defender | November 19, 2021
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s latest book, “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” today claimed the #1 spot overall on Amazon’s bestseller list.
The book, released Tuesday, debuted at #2, but moved up on the list today. The book is also in the #1 spot on the Kindle books bestseller list.
“Conventional wisdom holds you can’t have a bestselling book without plenty of media attention” — and no surprise, ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ has had a near-total news media blackout,” said Kennedy, Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel. “Given that, it feels great to report this good news.”
The hardcover version is available at Barnes & Noble, Amazon, IndieBound, Bookshop.org, Target, Walmart, Books-A-Million and at independent booksellers throughout the U.S. and Canada.
The Real Anthony Fauci” chronicles Fauci’s 50-year tenure at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), including his long list of failures.
The book also and sheds light on previously little-known experiments using animals and orphaned children. It recounts recent NIAID experiments performed on beagle puppies. In a recent letter to Fauci, U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and a bipartisan coalition of Congress members described the experiments as ”cruel.”
Social media picked up on the revelations, with trending hashtags #AvengeTheBeagles and #ProtectOurChildren.
“Books might literally be the last bastion of free speech in America,” said Kennedy.“ They can’t be easily erased, deleted, canceled, or disappeared.”
Chances of dying from COVID
By Joel S Hirschhorn | November 21, 2021
Nice table showing relatively low lethality from COVID relative to other risks; even for older people:
Germany’s vakzine fail
Despite over 67% fully vaxxed covid looks worse than 2020
el gato malo | bad cattitude | november 20, 2021
germany reached 50% fully vaxxed on july 27th. that figure is now over 67%.
it is making NO difference.
all else equal, just given prior surges and the greater past generation of natural immunity you’d expect a drop.
but we’re seeing a major rise instead.
to make this easier to see, i grabbed the our world in data data and plotted it year against year starting august 1.
cases are MUCH higher. they are currently 124% higher as a 7 day moving average than this date last year.
as they have been higher throughout, i also plotted this as cumulative cases.
those are 122% higher overall.
they have had well over twice the full period case count vs a year ago.
this is not an artifact of testing.
testing is actually down year on year.
so the reality is actually worse than described above if one were to adjust for sample rate.
cases would be more like triple last year’s count.
so much for “stopping spread.” that looks like spread acceleration (which was predictable)
that is WAY too big a variance to be a 20-45% difference in variant infectiousness.
but that ship had largely sailed.
few with any real familiarity with this data are still claiming that these vaccines stop spread. the evidence has been clear for some time and even the CDC has stopped arguing it.
but perhaps it works on severity?
nope. on a societal scale, it does not seem to. the hospitalization data was sparse and incomplete for germany, so i looked at deaths instead.
they have been higher all along and are basically indistinguishable now.
taken as a cumulative, deaths are 84% higher than the same time span a year ago despite a variant with notably lower CFR.
much of this may be higher case count. higher cases with lower CFR could land you here. it could also be consistent with some vaccine efficacy.
we’re into the realm of error bars too big to do any useful math on that, but it seems plausible to me that we’re seeing a situation like the UK where despite some VE on death, it’s being swamped by the vaccinated being at higher risk for cases and by a leaky vaccine increasing CFR on delta variant so even the vaccinated have become more likely overall to die of covid.
(if you have triple the cases and triple the CFR vs what you would have had, you’d need 89% VE just to break even. none of these vaccines are even close to that in practice)
we’re obviously playing a bit of a mosaic game here, that would be my odds on bet.
this is the shape of the disaster starting to play out all over the world.
these vaccines have not attenuated covid. they have rekindled its spread.
the vaccinated have become a potent vector to carry the disease and to actually make the disease itself worse because leaky vaccines invert the evolutionary gradient and select for hotter rather than milder strains.
this is going to keep happening as regions come into season. people will blame “the variants” but the fact is that the reason delta case fatality rate basically tripled on an age cohorted basis over the summer (when it should have been dropping) IS the vaccines.
this was not exogenous to human action. it did not “just happen.” this is such an outlier outcome that it might as well be water flowing uphill. when you see that, you have to suspect external forcing and there is an obvious culprit, the timing matches, and we know that this is what leaky vaccines do.
boosting is just going to make it worse and invert the viral gradient even further. any short term help from boosted antibodies (at the price of another round of dangerous adverse events) will just run up a bigger bigger bill to pay when it comes due later, and it’s far from clear that this booster strategy even provides short term help.
in fact, there is basically no evidence that their high vaxx rates, green pass, and heavy restrictions accomplished ANYTHING when compared to the neighbors.
i see no way to look at this and say “vaccines worked.”
this is the outcome no one wanted but that many (including certain internet felines) warned against.
rolling out a functionally untested vaccine t this sort of scale was a wildly reckless global epidemiological joyride. it’s not going well.
i wish i had better news here, but this is unfortunately playing out just as one would predict for a vaccine accelerated double dip pandemic driven by hotter substrain selection and reduction of sterilizing immunity.
i suspect the OAS issue here is very real (and possibly permanent in the vaccinated even post live virus exposure and recovery).
there are going to be some rotten surprises for those who thought they had vaxxed their way out of this.
this was not a fire extinguisher.
more and more, it looks like it was gasoline.
Another major red flag about Covid vaccines and death
By Alex Berenson | Unreported Truths | November 18, 2021
People appear to die at rates 20 percent or more above normal for weeks after receiving their second Covid vaccine dose, according to data from a huge Swedish study.
The figures are buried in a preprint paper on vaccine effectiveness released last month. The headline finding of the paper was that protection against Covid, including severe cases, plunged after six months.
The researchers did not explicitly examine deaths from all causes – which have risen since the summer in many countries that have highly vaccinated populations.
But on page 32 of the 34-page report, a chart shows that 3,939 of 4.03 million Swedes who received the second dose died less than two weeks later.
(SOURCE: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410)
Over a one-year period, that rate of death would translate into an annual mortality rate of about 2.5 percent a year – 1 person in 40 – almost three times the overall Swedish average. In a typical year, about 1 in 115 Swedes dies.
Of course, that huge gap does not account for an important confounding factor: younger people, who have a much lower risk of death, were less likely to be vaccinated.
But Sweden also provides detailed data on overall deaths nationally, making a crude baseline comparison possible.
That data shows that from an average of about 1,650 Swedes died every week between 2015 and 2019 between April 1 and early August, the period in which almost all of those 4 million Swedes in the study received their second dose. Death rates hardly varied over those years.
(SOURCE: https://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/population/population-composition/population-statistics/)
In other words, during the spring and summer, Sweden normally has about 3,300 deaths every two weeks – not just in the people who received vaccines, but in all 10.6 million of its people.
So let’s make an incredibly conservative assumption, one that strongly favors the vaccines. (The next couple paragraphs are a bit tricky, but I hope the payoff is worth taking the time to read and think through them.)
Assume that the group of people who received vaccines were so much older and unhealthier than those who didn’t that they would have accounted for every single death in Sweden whether or not they were vaccinated. In other words, assume that even if the vaccines did not exist, every person in Sweden who died would have been part of that group of 4.03 million people the researchers tracked – while not one other person would have died.
In that case, those 4.03 million people “should” have about 3,300 deaths every two weeks. They CANNOT HAVE MORE – because all of Sweden does not have more.
But the vaccines do exist. Those 4.03 million people received them. And in the two weeks after receiving the second vaccine dose, as a group, the researchers reported they had not about 3,300 deaths, but 3,939.
And 3,939 deaths is about 20 percent more deaths than “should” have occurred in those two post-vaccine weeks. Again, the 20 percent figure understates the real gap, because in the real world some deaths will occur in the 6.6 million unvaccinated people too, so the actual baseline number for the vaccinated group is not 3,300 deaths but somewhat lower.
Unfortunately, the researchers did not report any details on the deaths, so it is impossible to know if they are disproportionately cardiovascular. It is also impossible to know whether one particular vaccine was disproportionately linked to deaths. (Sweden used mostly the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, as well as some of AstraZeneca’s DNA/AAV vaccine, which is not available in the United States, and a small amount of Moderna’s mRNA vaccine.)
Of course, it is just possible the extra deaths are due to chance. Or that the handful of elderly Swedes who received vaccines in February and March accounted for a hugely disproportionate number of the post-vaccine deaths. (Because per-week Swedish death rates are higher in the winter, a large number of post-vaccine deaths in those months would somewhat reduce the strength of the signal, though it would still exist.)
But the caveats aside, the Swedish figures offer a very large real-world dataset apparently showing a notable increase in all-cause mortality directly following Covid vaccination.
They are yet another piece of evidence in an increasingly worrying picture – alongside case and anecdotal reports, a known link to heart inflammation in young men, the updated Pfizer clinical trial data revealing a numerical imbalance in deaths in vaccinated people, and most importantly the general rise in all-cause mortality in many countries.
And all of these red flags come for vaccines that – if the Swedish data are correct – may actually raise the risk of Covid infection after about eight months.
Yes, RAISE. See how that black line drops below the zero level on the top chart? That represents negative effectiveness, which is another way to say people who are vaccinated are MORE likely to be infected than those who aren’t.
And, as the second chart shows, effectiveness against severe Covid infection is also spiraling towards zero.
Yet the Biden Administration and governments across Europe continue to try to force more people to take these vaccines.
Why?
Featured Video
Prof. Ted Postol: US–Iran War? Israel’s Fatal Gamble
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Still No End in Sight of the Murder and Mayhem Wrought by the 9/11 Culprits
By Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | July 17, 2016
The Kevin Barrett-Chomsky Dispute in Historical Perspective – Fourth part of the series titled “9/11 and the Zionist Question”
Back in 2006 all but a prescient few, such as Christopher Bollyn, perceived it as premature to try to identify and bring to justice the actual perpetrators of the 9/11 crimes. There was still some residue of confidence that responsible officials in government, law enforcement, media and the universities could and would respond in good faith to multiple revelations that great frauds had occurred in interpreting 9/11 for the public.
Accordingly, the main methodology of public intellectuals like Dr. Kevin Barrett or, for instance, Professors David Ray Griffin, Steven E. Jones, Peter Dale Scott, Graeme MacQueen, John McMurtry, Michael Keefer, Richard B. Lee, A.K. Dewdney, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and Michel Chossudovsky, was to marshal evidence demonstrating that the official narrative of 9/11 could not be true.
The marshaling of evidence was spurred on by observations coming from government insiders like Eckehardt Wertherbach, a former head of Germany’s intelligence service. In a meeting in Germany with Christopher Bollyn and Dr. Andreas von Bülow, Wertherbach pointed out that, “an attack of this magnitude and precision would have required years of planning. Such a sophisticated operation would require the fixed frame of a state intelligence organization, something not found in a loose group like the one led by the student Mohammed Atta in Hamburg.”
Andreas von Bülow was a German parliamentarian and Defense Ministry official. He confirmed this assessment in his book on the CIA and 9/11. In the text von Bülow remarked that the execution of the 9/11 plan “would have been unthinkable without backing from secret apparatuses of state and industry.” The author spoke of the “invented story of 19 Muslims working with Osama bin Laden in order the hide the truth” of the real perpetrators’ identity. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- UK prosecutors drop aggravated burglary charges against 24 Palestine Action activists
- Unidentified drone downed over Lebanon airbase, US forces block authorities from crash site
- Peeling Back the US Information Operation in Iran
- Israel ‘dictating terms’ to US – Turkish professor
- US ramps up nuclear claims against China
- Erdogan wants nukes: What a Turkish bomb would mean for the Middle East
- Ukrainian disruption of Russian oil pipeline triggers emergency in EU state
- Kaja Kallas: an uncomfortable figure useful to the EU’s Russophobic purposes
- German state blacklists right-wing party for first time
- Romania’s stolen elections were only the start: Inside the EU’s war on democracy
- If Americans Knew
- Compliant aid: Who are the Israel-approved NGOs scaling up in Gaza?
- Why won’t Trump’s “Board of Peace” bring peace? – Not a ceasefire Day 131
- Help end the injustice against Shadi
- Israel’s Favorite American President
- Israel’s “Yellow Line” Is a Death Trap for Palestinians. We Drove Into It.
- Why Israel’s expanding occupation in Syria presents a critical legal test
- Gaza is not a natural disaster. It is the victim of genocide enabled by global inaction
- Netanyahu’s plan to “end” US aid to Israel is to give even more money under a different name
- Israel ceased firing on Gaza for just 15 days of the “ceasefire” – Not a ceasefire Day 130
- In Gaza, “rats run over our faces” – Not a ceasefire Day 129
- No Tricks Zone
- Coal Power Back In Trend As Globe Tries To Keep Pace With Growing Demand For Power
- New Study: A 4°C Warmer Beaufort Sea Had ‘No Sea Ice’ 11,700 – 8200 Years Ago
- Unfudging The Data: Dutch Meteorological Institute Reinstates Early 20th Centruy Heat Waves It Had Erased Earlier
- German Gas Crisis…Chancellor Merz Allegedly Bans Gas Debate Ahead of Elections!
- Pollen Reconstructions Show The Last Glacial’s Warming Events Were Global, 10x Greater Than Modern
- Germany’s Natural Gas Storage Level Dwindles To Just 28%… Increasingly Critical
- New Study Rebuts The Assumption That Anthropogenic CO2 Molecules Have ‘Special’ Properties
- Climate Scientist Who Predicted End Of “Heavy Frost And Snow” Now Refuses Media Inquiries
- Polar Bear Numbers Rising And Health Improving In Areas With The Most Rapid Sea Ice Decline
- One Reason Only For Germany’s Heating Gas Crisis: Its Hardcore-Dumbass Energy Policy
Aletho News 