Family worried as Iranian held incommunicado in Swedish detention
Hamid Nouri, a former Iranian official, has been jailed in Sweden since 2019
Press TV – June 1, 2022
A former Iranian official, wrongfully accused and jailed in Sweden, has been held incommunicado for almost a month, his relatives say.
The Iranian Judiciary’s Media Center cited Hamid Nouri’s family members as saying that he has not been able to contact them for 28 days now.
The Swedish judiciary has reportedly cut off communication with his family after relocating him to another detention center, leading to serious concerns among his family in Iran.
Nouri was arrested upon arrival in Sweden at Stockholm Airport in November 2019 and immediately imprisoned. He has been held in solitary confinement for over two years.
Swedish prosecutors have requested the maximum penalty of life imprisonment for Nouri, accusing the former Iranian judiciary official of prisoner abuse.
The charges against Nouri stem from accusations leveled against him by members of the anti-Iran terrorist Mujahedin Khalq Organization (MKO), who claim Nouri was involved in the execution and torture of MKO members in 1988. Nouri vehemently rejects the allegations.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian has denounced his detention as “illegal.”
Reports say Swedish judicial authorities have been preventing Nouri from contacting his family since moving him to a different detention center.
Upon arrest, he was forbidden for around eight months from making phone calls to his family members, and barred from meeting them in person for two years.
Brazilian front-runner slams US billions for Ukraine
Samizdat | June 2, 2022
Brazilian presidential candidate Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva called out US President Joe Biden in two campaign speeches this week, citing the $40 billion in military aid Washington has pledged to Ukraine. Lula is polling far ahead of the incumbent, Jair Bolsonaro, in the upcoming presidential election.
“Biden, who has never made a speech to give $1 to those who are starving in Africa, announces $40 billion to help Ukraine buy weapons,” Lula said on Wednesday in Porto Alegre. “This can’t be!” he added.
The 76-year-old is the candidate of the leftist Party of Workers (PT), and currently the favorite to win the presidential election in October.
Speaking in Sao Paulo on Tuesday, Lula brought up the $40 billion in another context. How is it possible, he asked, that the world’s supposedly strongest economy is reduced to scouring the globe for baby formula – amid shortages in the US – even as Biden pledges billions in weapons sales to Kiev?
About half of the $40 billion package is directly earmarked for US weapons headed to Ukraine, while the rest would fund the government in Kiev, replenish the depleted Pentagon stockpiles, and fund US military deployments in Europe. Biden signed it on May 21 after both chambers of Congress passed it with token Republican opposition. The physical bill was flown to Asia, where Biden was visiting at the time, so he could formally attach his signature.
Lula has previously criticized Biden over the conflict in Ukraine, saying the US leader could have prevented it, but instead chose to give a blank check to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
“The United States has a lot of political clout. And Biden could have avoided [the conflict], not incited it,” Lula said in an interview with Time magazine in early May.
“And now we are going to have to foot the bill because of the war on Ukraine. Argentina, Bolivia will also have to pay. You’re not punishing [Russian President Vladimir] Putin. You’re punishing many different countries, you’re punishing mankind,” he added.
Lula was president of Brazil from 2003 to 2010 and remains one of the most popular Brazilian politicians ever. He was convicted on corruption charges and jailed in 2018 – during the interim presidency that had impeached his successor, Dilma Rousseff – but the conviction was annulled in 2021. The Brazilian Supreme Court ruled that Lula did not receive a fair trial, and cleared him to run for office again.
The most recent polls by Datafolha show Lula with a 21-point lead over Bolsonaro.
Three French weapons makers complicit in war crimes in conflict-hit Yemen, three rights groups say
Press TV – June 2, 2022
Three human rights groups have filed a complaint against three top French weapons manufacturers for their complicity in gross war crimes after selling various types of ammunition to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as the major members of the Saudi-led coalition of aggression.
The complaint was lodged by the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), the Mwatana for Human Rights as well as Sherpa International at a Paris court on Thursday.
The non-governmental organizations targeted French aerospace company Dassault Aviation, Thales Group and MBDA France, hoping that the legal action will further enlighten the world public opinion about the acts of aggression by the Saudi-led coalition at a time when the United States and its Western allies are seeking to improve ties with the Riyadh regime.
“The [Saudi-led] coalition’s airstrikes have caused terrible destruction in Yemen. Weapons produced and exported by European countries, and in particular France, have enabled these crimes,” Abdulrasheed al-Faqih, Executive Director of Yemeni organization Mwatana for Human Rights, said.
“Seven years into this war, the countless Yemeni victims deserve credible investigations into all perpetrators of crimes, including those potentially complicit,” he added.
Rights groups in France have repeatedly argued that the Paris government’s tacit support for the Saudi-led coalition has prolonged and worsened the Yemen conflict.
French prosecutors are already studying similar complaints filed against UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the French customs authority.
The complaint filed by rights groups against French arms makers comes as the United Nations announced that a truce between warring Yemeni sides had been extended for two months.
The initial two-month truce started at the beginning of the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan on April 2, and was set to expire on Thursday.
“I would like to announce that the parties to the conflict have agreed to the United Nations’ proposal to renew the current truce in Yemen for two additional months,” UN Special Envoy for Yemen Hans Grundberg said.
Grundberg added that the truce extension would come into effect “when the current truce period expires, today June 2, 2022 at 19:00 Yemen time (1600 GMT)”.
The Norwegian Refugee Council’s (NRC) Yemen Country Director, Erin Hutchinson, said in a statement after Grundberg’s announcement, “The announcement of the truce extension today shows a serious commitment from all parties to end the senseless suffering of millions of Yemenis.”
She added, “The last two months have shown that peaceful solutions to the conflict are a real option.”
Saudi Arabia launched the devastating war on Yemen in March 2015 in collaboration with its Arab allies and with arms and logistics support from the US and other Western states.
The objective was to reinstall the Riyadh-friendly regime of Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi and crush the Ansarullah resistance movement, which has been running state affairs in the absence of a functional government in Yemen.
While the Saudi-led coalition has failed to meet any of its objectives, the war has killed hundreds of thousands of Yemenis and spawned the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
Reports of OPEC+ death are greatly exaggerated
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JUNE 2, 2022
The fact that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states held a joint ministerial meeting with their Russian counterpart Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in the Saudi capital of Riyadh at this point in time in global politics conveys a powerful message in itself.
To drive home the message in no uncertain terms, the Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said at a press conference following the ministerial on Wednesday that the GCC member-countries share a common stance with respect to the crisis in Ukraine. (The news conference was broadcast live by the Al-Arabiya TV channel.)
“The countries of the Persian Gulf share a common stance regarding the Ukrainian crisis and its negative consequences, especially with regard to the food security of other countries,” Al Saud said.
For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told the media that “the GCC countries understand the nature of the conflict between Russia and the West.” Earlier, during a bilateral with Lavrov who was on a 2-day visit, Al Saud said the “the kingdom’s position regarding the crisis in Ukraine is based on the principles of international law and support for efforts aimed at achieving a political solution to the crisis.”
After the meeting, Lavrov said the GCC countries will not join the West in imposing sanctions on Moscow over the conflict in Ukraine. In his words, “Aspects of the international situation, which are connected with the events unfolded by the West around Ukraine, are well understood by our partners from the Gulf Cooperation Council states.”
Lavrov added, “We appreciate and reaffirmed today once again the balanced position that they take towards this issue at international forums, and in practice, refusing to join the illegitimate, unilateral Western sanctions that were introduced against Russia.”
Lavrov said Moscow and Gulf countries intended to further develop their partnership in sharp contrast with the growing tensions between Russia and the US and its European allies. After meeting with the top diplomats of the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman in Riyadh, Lavrov said, “We reaffirmed our focus on the comprehensive development of our partnership, including in the new conditions that are emerging in the world economy in the context of the policies of our Western colleagues.”
Looking ahead, Lavrov expressed satisfaction that “We reaffirmed our focus on the comprehensive development of our partnership, including in the new conditions that are emerging in the world economy in the context of the policies of our Western colleagues.”
The timing of the GCC-Russia ministerial and Lavrov’s visit to Riyadh is highly significant at a juncture when the Biden Administration is pulling out all the stops to repair the US’ fractured relationship with Saudi Arabia ever since Candidate Biden famously christened the Kingdom as a “Pariah state” and the Washington establishment launched a concerted campaign to defame the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman personally over the killing of the ex-CIA consultant Jamal Khashoggi.
The latest reports in the US media have spoken of Biden’s interest to personally make amends with the Saudi Prince by visiting Riyadh and meeting with him. This is after Biden’s refusal to speak with the Prince so far or to have any dealings with the latter in any form!
The volte-face in Biden’s approach to Saudi Arabia is to be attributed to the realisation in Washington that to isolate Russia and weaken that country permanently, there is an imperative need to gain control of the world oil market, which in turn necessitates the break-up of the Russian-Saudi concord regulating world oil output in the recent years.
In a nutshell, Saudi Arabia has overnight become a “swing state” in the US’ strategic calculus whose stance on the Ukraine conflict is going to be of momentous consequence to the Biden administration’s agenda to weaken Russia.
Indeed, Saudi Arabia’s potential as a “swing state” has been in the making ever since 2006 when late King Abdullah used his first trip outside the Middle East since becoming the Saudi ruler to visit China and India. It was the first visit by a Saudi king to China since the two countries established diplomatic relations in 1990, and the first such visit to India since 1955. Perceptive observers saw the Saudi monarch’s tour presaging an era of reduced influence for the United States in Riyadh and of Saudi friendship with a widening spectrum of nations in Asia.
That shift, emanating from the desire to move away from a monocultural situation — having one big friend America, one big product (oil), and based on one big idea, the Islamic idea — was proceeding at glacial pace through the next decade until Prince Mohammed bin Salman was appointed as the Crown Prince in June 2017, making him heir presumptive to the throne.
Under Prince Mohammed’s leadership, the KIngdom’s transformation began accelerating, and acquired an ideological mooring of Saudi nationalism. The strengthening of relations with Russia and the signing of an agreement in 2016 to cooperate with Russia in global oil markets in a matrix that subsequently came to be known as OPEC+ was an early manifestation of that shift.
It coincided with launch of the Vision 2030 carrying the Crown Prince’s imprimatur, embodying the country’s strategic orientation for the next 15 years. From a historical perspective, Vision 2030 can be regarded as marking the abandonment of the Saudi reliance on a rentier economy. In the foreign policy sphere, its impact came to be felt in a steady assertion of the Kingdom’s strategic autonomy.
Against such a tumultuous geopolitical backdrop, it comes as no surprise that the US’ confrontation with Russia finds Saudi Arabia in the eye of the storm. Lavrov’s trip to Saudi Arabia rang alarm bells in Washington. On the eve of Lavrov’s arrival in Riyadh, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a call with Al Saud ostensibly to discuss Yemen and other regional issues.
The state department readout said inter alia, “The Secretary (Blinken) underscored the importance of international support for Ukraine as it defends its sovereignty and territorial integrity and emphasised the need for a global response to the food security crisis resulting from President Putin’s brutal war.”
Plainly put, Blinken canvassed for the support of the Gulf states to the US-led “global response” to the temporary food crisis, which aims to put the blame on Russia’s doorstep for creating the current shortage of wheat. Evidently, the Saudi leadership hasn’t fallen for the trap. At any rate, under UN auspices, Russia and Turkey have begun work on arranging humanitarian corridors through the waters of the Black Sea, which have been mined by Ukraine. The UN Secretary-General has appealed to the US to ease sanctions to allow Russian exports of food grain to the world market.
To deflect attention from Lavrov’s successful trip to Riyadh, the US-led “information war” has concocted the fake news that Saudi Arabia is “reportedly considering” Russia’s removal from the OPEC+. Lavrov’s talks in Riyadh underscore that on the contrary, Russia and Saudi Arabia are signalling that OPEC+ is indeed going strong. The message cannot be lost on Washington.
The REAL agenda behind the created food crisis
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | June 1, 2022
We’re in the early stages of a food crisis.
The press has been predicting this for years, but up until now it always appeared to be nothing more than fearmongering, designed to worry or distract people, but the signs are there that this time, to quote Joe Biden, it “is going to be real”.
Nobody knows how bad it could get, except the people who are creating it.
Because the evidence is pretty clear, it is being deliberately & cold-bloodedly created. We’ve been documenting it for months.
We have Russia’s “special operation” in Ukraine driving up the price of staple foods, wheat and sunflower oil, as well as fertiliser.
We have the sudden “bird flu outbreak” driving up the price of poultry and eggs.
The soaring price of oil is driving up the cost of food distribution.
The inflation caused by huge influxes of fiat currency means families are spending more money on less food.
And as all this is happening, the US and UK (and maybe others, we don’t know) are literally paying farmers not to farm.
It’s pretty clear this is The Great Reset: Food Edition. The lockdown melody with slightly different lyrics. A process of breaking down the structures already in place so we can “build back better” with a more controlled and more corporatised food system
Just as the Covid “pandemic” was said to highlight “weaknesses in the multilateral system”, so this food crisis will show that our “unstable food systems are in need of reform” and we need to ensure our “food security”…or a thousand variations on that theme.
That’s not supposition. They already started, over a year ago.
The Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems & Community Developments published a paper in February 2021 titled:
Dismantling and rebuilding the food system after COVID-19: Ten principles for redistribution and regeneration
In an interview from July last year, Ruth Richardson the Executive Director of the NGO Global Alliance for the Future of Food literally said:
Our Dominant Food System Needs to Be Dismantled and Rebuilt”
Later, in September 2021, the UN convened the first-ever “Food Systems Summit”, whose mission statement included the line:
Rebuilding the food systems of the world will also enable us to answer the UN Secretary-General’s call to “build back better” from COVID-19.
Writing in the Guardian two weeks ago, George Monbiot, weathervane for every deep state agenda, states with his trademark lack of subtlety:
The banks collapsed in 2008 – and our food system is about to do the same… The system has to change.
But what does “change” and “rebuilt” actually mean in this context?
Well, that’s no mystery, they’ve been talking it up for years.
- It will mean press and politicians alike pushing the WEF’s “planetary health diet”.
- It will mean conditioning children to eat bugs and seaweed.
- It will mean increased pushing of “gene-edited” or genetically modified foods.
- It will mean stigmatising meat-eaters whilst perpetually fluffing veganism.
- It will mean promoting lab-grown “meat” and bacterial slime mixed in giant vats over natural food.
- It will mean “carbon taxes” on red meat and imported food of all kinds.
- It will mean “obesity” taxes on foods high in sugar or fat.
- It will mean propaganda efforts to rebrand staple foods as “luxuries”.
Almost all of these are stories from just the past month or so, many of them talking points at the World Economic Forum’s Davos Conference.
As is almost always the case, the problem to which they’re currently “reacting” already has a series of pre-ordained solutions.
Just as we saw lockdowns break the economy to pieces whilst the billionaire class land record profits whilst corporate megaliths expanded their monopolies, so too will any proposed food security policies end up benefiting the already mega-rich or installing infrastructure for corporate control.
They just announced the building of the largest “cultured meat factory” in the world. Fake meat, of course, can’t be raised at home and is subject to patented processes of creation. Genetically edited or modified plants and animals are likewise subject to patents.
Supranational companies, with profits larger than the budget of some nations, are developing carbon footprint tracker apps which reward people for making the “right decisions”. That could easily be applied to food.
Bill Gates has quietly become the largest owner of agricultural land in the United States. Land on which he can grow new Frankencrops, or which the US government will pay him not to use.
The play is clear: Right now they’re getting ready to tear all our old food systems down, with the stated aim of building them back better.
But better for them, not us.
Biden pitches advantages for US stemming from EU’s Russian oil embargo
Samizdat | June 2, 2022
The US may try to buy some cheap Russian oil after the European oil embargo drives the price down, US President Joe Biden indicated on Wednesday. He aired the idea while talking to media about his administration’s plan to deal with the shortage of baby formula and surging prices for basic commodities such as food and gas.
Biden took credit for keeping US gas prices, currently at all-time highs, from going even higher. He blamed Russia and its military campaign in Ukraine for driving food and energy prices up and said his administration was working hard to deal with the problems.
“The issue that is occurring now is you have Europe deciding that they’re going to further curtail the purchase of Russian oil,” he said, referring to the sixth package of anti-Russian sanctions.
EU members reached an agreement several days ago partially banning imports of Russian crude. The Europeans want to cut oil trade with Russia by 90% by the end of the year. But Russia’s loss of European market may be an opportunity for the US, Biden implied.
“There’s a whole lot of consideration going on about what can be done to maybe even purchase the oil but at a limited price so that it has to be sold,” he said. “There’d be an overwhelming need for the Russians to sell it, and it would be sold at a significantly lower price than the market is generating now.”
The president warned that his administration would not be able to “click a switch, bring down the cost of gasoline” in the near term and that the same was true for food.
Moscow downplayed Biden’s remarks, saying the global oil market would rebalance itself despite EU restrictions.
“Certainly, Russia will not sell anything without a profit. The demand may fall in one place and rise elsewhere. The supply chains reorient as parties seek the best conditions for trade,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday.
Inflation is currently the biggest concern for many American voters. Political experts predict that Biden’s Democratic Party may be wiped out at the ballot box come November, unless his administration manages to rein in the surging prices soon.
The White House has repeatedly pointed the finger at Russia, and personally President Vladimir Putin, for the ongoing problems. It even coined the term “Putin’s price hike” to explain why American working families find it harder to make both ends meet with every passing month.
However, food and energy prices were going up globally long before Russia attacked Ukraine in February. The disruption of supply chains amid the Covid-19 pandemic was a major factor. Moscow said Washington’s blame game ignored many causes of the problems, including some that resulted from the US campaign to punish Russia with economic sanctions.
The US banned all imports of Russian oil, liquified natural gas and coal in March.
The FDA’s proposed “Future Framework” is the worst idea in the history of public health
If approved on June 28, all reformulated Covid-19 shots will skip clinical trials
By Toby Rogers | May 31, 2022
I. Pfizer and Moderna’s Dilemma
Pfizer and Moderna have a problem — their Covid-19 shots do NOT work. Everyone knows this. The shots do not stop infection, transmission, hospitalization, nor death. Over half a billion doses of this product have been injected into Americans in the past 17 months and these shots have made NO discernible impact on the course of the pandemic. Far more Americans have died of coronavirus since the introduction of the shots than before they were introduced.
Pfizer and Moderna are making $50 billion a year on these shots and they want that to continue. So they need to reformulate the shots. Maybe target a new variant, maybe change some of the ingredients — who knows, these shots don’t work so it’s not clear what it will take to get them to work. This is a problem because reformulated shots mean new clinical trials and new regulatory review by the FDA. There is a decent chance that any reformulated shot might fail a new clinical trial and the public is deeply skeptical of these shots so the scrutiny would be intense.
So Pfizer and Moderna have figured out a way to use regulatory capture to get their reformulated Covid-19 shots approved WITHOUT further clinical trials. Their scheme is called the “Future Framework” and it will be voted on by the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) on June 28.
II. Doubling down on a failed strategy
Viruses vary by region. At any given time, the influenza strain circulating in England is different than it is in South Africa which is different than in southeast Asia. However, pharmaceutical companies prefer to create one-size-fits-all vaccines in order to decrease manufacturing costs and thereby increase profits. So the W.H.O. and public health agencies around the world (including FDA and CDC) have created a vast “influenza surveillance network” that identifies the different influenza strains in circulation. Then they engage in an elaborate theatrical performance called the “flu strain selection process” where they select four influenza strains that will go into the one-size-fits-all flu vaccine used throughout the world that year.
This carefully choreographed process is a complete and total failure. This is not a surprise — using a one-vaccine-fits-all approach to prevent a rapidly evolving virus that varies by region is never going to work. Lisa Grohskopf from the CDC’s Influenza Division reports that last year the flu shot was somewhere between 8% and 14% effective (based on data from seven sites that participate in the U.S. Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network).
But a case study of a flu outbreak at the University of Michigan between October and November 2021 found that the effectiveness of the flu vaccine was literally zero.
Over the last thirty years, the federal government has paid out more compensation for adverse events in connection with the flu shot than any other vaccine — so we know that the shot comes with a high rate of harms. Given that the flu shot does not stop the flu, the harms thus outweigh the benefits.
In a sane world, the WHO, FDA, and CDC would admit that they made a strategic mistake and then change course to find better ways to support the human immune system. But we don’t live in a sane world. Instead, the FDA is proposing to take the failed flu strain selection process and apply it to future Covid-19 shots.
III. The FDA knew that Covid-19 shots would fail but they proceeded anyway
There are a quadrillion x quadrillion viruses in the world (literally more viruses on earth than stars in the known universe). Only a couple hundred of those seem to have the potential to impact human health. But some viruses make better candidates for a vaccine than others. Viruses that have been around a long time, that are very stable and evolve slowly are the best candidates for a vaccine.
Viruses that evolve rapidly are bad candidates for a vaccine. There is no vaccine for the common cold nor HIV because these viruses evolve too quickly. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is a bad candidate for a vaccine which is why all previous attempts to develop a vaccine against coronaviruses have failed (they never made it out of animal trials because all of the animals died during challenge trials or were injured by the vaccine).
What are some of the bad things that can happen when you vaccinate against a rapidly evolving virus? Original antigenic sin, antibody dependent enhancement, and the possibility of accelerating the evolution of the virus in ways that make it more virulent (and even more resistant to vaccination).
Trevor Bedford has his own lab at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center where he researches the evolution of Covid-19. He gave a fascinating presentation at the April 6 meeting of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting where he explained that SARS-CoV-2 is evolving rapidly. He explained that SARS-CoV-2 evolves twice to ten times as fast as the flu virus and these mutations “substantially” reduce vaccine effectiveness. Following the introduction of Covid-19 vaccines, the evolution of the virus has accelerated.
Dr. Bedford’s presentation rattled some of the smarter members of the VRBPAC because his data scream — “SARS-CoV-2 is a bad candidate for a vaccine!” But FDA officials just mumbled some platitudes and then continued on with the meeting.
The only way out of the pandemic is to withdraw these vaccines from the market and pivot to therapeutics. Instead, the FDA is proposing to just hide the data from the American people.
IV. The “Future Framework” = no more clinical trials for Covid-19 shots ever again
The purpose of the “Future Framework” is to rig the Covid-19 vaccine regulatory process in perpetuity in favor of the pharmaceutical industry. If this “Future Framework” is approved all future Covid-19 shots, regardless of the formulation, will automatically be deemed “safe and effective” without additional clinical trials because they are considered “biologically similar” to existing shots.
This is literally the worst idea in the history of public health.
If you change a single molecule of mRNA in these shots it will change health outcomes in ways that no one can anticipate. That necessarily requires new clinical trials — which is what the FDA is proposing to skip.
The FDA’s “expert advisory committee” (VRBPAC) met on April 6, 2022 to discuss the “Future Framework” for the first time. All of the committee members agreed that Covid-19 shots are not working, that boosting multiple times a year was not feasible, and that the shots need to be reformulated. They also unanimously agreed that there are no “correlates of protection” that one can use to predict what antibody levels would be sufficient to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection.
On June 28 the VRBPAC will meet once again to discuss the “Future Framework” and it will be presented as a done deal because manufacturers want a decision on vaccine strain selection by June in order to deliver shots for autumn vaccination appointments.
So if the FDA authorizes Covid-19 shots for kids on June 14 and 15 and then approves the “Future Framework” on June 28th, the shots that will be given to kids in the fall will be the reformulated shots that skipped clinical trials.
V. Monovalent Covid-19 shots failed, so maybe throwing two, three, or four variants into a single shot will make it better?
When it comes to the flu shot, the FDA tries to hedge their bets by putting four strains of the virus into a single shot (so called “quadrivalent” vaccines). As I explained above, this strategy does not work. But these people are not very clever so that’s exactly what they are planning to do with future Covid-19 shots.
Moderna is already signaling that they intend to manufacture a Covid-19 shot with the Alpha variant and then, to make it “new and improved (TM)”, they will add genetically modified mRNA targeting the Beta variant. Here’s the best part — Moderna claims that this formulation (Alpha + Beta) will somehow protect against Omicron variants — even though by the time these reformulated shots get to market, none of these variants will likely still be in widespread circulation.
There are reasons to believe that this approach will make future Covid-19 shots even less effective and more dangerous than the current failed Covid-19 shots.
Think about it. The more mRNA you put into a shot, the higher the adverse event rate (as the genetically modified mRNA hijacks the cell and starts cranking out spike proteins). So if Pfizer and Moderna put more mRNA into these shots (in order to cover multiple variants) adverse event rates will skyrocket.
But if Pfizer and Moderna put less mRNA per variant into a shot (in order to keep the total amount of mRNA at 100 mcg for Moderna and 30 mcg for Pfizer) then the effectiveness against any one particular variant will be reduced.
The Future Framework is 100% guaranteed to fail. If the “Future Framework” is approved, effectiveness of these shots will decrease, adverse events will increase, these shots will fuel the evolution of variants that evade the vaccines, and there will be no clinical trial data before these reformulated Covid-19 shots are unleashed on the unsuspecting public.
VI. Summary
The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee will meet on June 28 to vote on a “Future Framework” for evaluating so-called “next generation” Covid-19 shots. The “Future Framework” is a plan to rig the Covid-19 vaccine regulatory process in perpetuity.
The “Future Framework” would take the “flu strain selection process” that fails every year and apply it to future (reformulated) Covid-19 shots. Federal bureaucrats, many of whom have financial conflicts of interests, would choose which SARS-CoV-2 variants to include in a yearly (or twice yearly) Covid-19 shot. In the process, all future Covid-19 shots will be deemed automatically “safe and effective” without further clinical trials because they are considered “biologically similar” to existing Covid-19 shots.
The “Future Framework” is the most reckless idea in the history of public health. It shows that the FDA has completely abandoned science and its statutory duty to protect the public. If the Republic is to survive, we must stop the “Future Framework” before June 28.
VII. Call to action
We have very little time and an enormous challenge in knocking this proposal down before the VRBPAC meets on June 28. So I am asking to you to contact your elected officials to tell them to reject this dangerous proposal.
Below are talking points that you can paste into an email, a script that you can use on the phone, and a tool for looking up your elected officials. I am only asking you to contact 8 officials — the President and Vice President; your two Senators and U.S. Representative; and your Governor, state House/Assembly member, and state Senator. Please be respectful but make it clear that this plan must be stopped.
Talking points (to paste into an email, letter, or fax)
Subject line: NO “flu framework” for future Covid-19 shots
The FDA and CDC are developing a “Future Framework” to authorize future Covid-19 shots without requiring additional clinical trials. This would be a public health disaster. I am asking you to contact the FDA to tell them to stop all work on this “Future Framework” immediately. If the FDA proceeds with this “Future Framework” I am asking you to eliminate all funding for the FDA in this year’s budget.
Phone script
Hi, my name is ____________. I live at __________________[address]. I’m calling because the FDA is proposing a “Future Framework” to authorize future Covid-19 shots without requiring additional clinical trials. This would be a public health disaster. I am asking you to contact the FDA to tell them to stop all work on this “Future Framework”. If the FDA proceeds with this “Future Framework”, I am asking you to eliminate all funding for the FDA in this year’s budget.
Whom to contact: 8 phones calls, letters, emails, or faxes:
President Joseph R. Biden
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
(202) 456-1111 (The White House comment line is open between the hours of 11 to 3 p.m. EST Tues.-Thurs.)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
https://twitter.com/POTUS
Vice President Kamala Harris
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
(202) 456-1111 (between the hours of 11 to 3 p.m. EST Tues.-Thurs.)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
https://twitter.com/VP
You can look up contact info for your two U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative here:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map
The message for State elected officials is slightly different:
Hi, my name is ____________. I live at __________________[address]. I’m calling because the FDA is proposing a “Future Framework” to authorize future Covid-19 shots without requiring additional clinical trials. This would be a public health disaster. If the FDA proceeds with this “Future Framework” I are asking you to nullify the actions of the FDA and reject any Covid-19 shots that have not gone through proper clinical trials.
This is a great tool to look up contact info for your Governor, state Senator, and state House/Assembly member:
That’s it, just 8 people. We want to let them know that we are watching, that we understand what they are up to, and that this wretched plan must be stopped.
Extra credit:
Here are the email addresses for all of the public health political appointees, FDA staff, and VRBPAC members who have a say in connection with the “Future Framework”. Let’s contact them as well (proposed subject line and email text below).
Subject line: The “Future Framework” is the WORST idea in the history of public health. Please vote NO.
1. The FDA must revoke the authorizations for Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J Covid-19 shots and withdraw them from the market immediately. SARS-CoV-2 was never a good candidate for a vaccine. These shots do not stop infection, transmission, hospitalization, nor death. They appear to have negative efficacy and are driving the evolution of variants that evade vaccines. The pandemic will never stop as long as the FDA and CDC are promoting shots that lack sterilizing immunity.
2. The FDA and CDC must pivot to therapeutics. This was always the answer. About twenty off-the-shelf treatments are more effective than vaccines (if used for prophylaxis or early intervention). Get these safe and effective medicines to people who need them and let doctors be doctors again and treat patients based on their own best clinical judgment.
3. Any reformulated Covid-19 shots MUST go through proper clinical trials and FDA review. That means:
• Large (50,000+ person) double-blind randomized controlled trials with inert saline placebos conducted by an independent third party;
• Safety and efficacy studies for two years prior to any application; the treatment and control groups must be followed for 20 years to monitor adverse events and all-cause mortality (no more wiping out the control group after 6 months to hide bad outcomes);
• Greater than 90% efficacy with less than 1% Grade 3 Adverse Events; and
• Proper monitoring for carcinogenesis, mutagenesis, and impairment of fertility.
sean.mccluskie@hhs.gov, commissioner@fda.hhs.gov, ashish.jha@whitehouse.gov, Aux7@cdc.gov, Peter.Marks@fda.hhs.gov, Hong.Yang@fda.hhs.gov,
Richard.Forshee@fda.hhs.gov, Huilee.Wong@fda.hhs.gov, Leslie.Ball@fda.hhs.gov, Doran.Fink@fda.hhs.gov, hanae@bcm.edu, paula.annunziato@merck.com,
adam.berger@nih.gov, hbernstein@northwell.edu, acohn@cdc.gov, anc0@cdc.gov, hjanes@fredhutch.org, hgans@stanford.edu, david.kim@hhs.gov,
asmonto@umich.edu, offit@chop.edu, spergam@fredhutch.org, Jportnoy@cmh.edu, erubin@hsph.harvard.edu, erubin@nejm.org, ashane@emory.edu,
swamy002@mc.duke.edu, fullerao@umich.edu, RandyHawkins@cdrewu.edu, officeofthepresident@mmc.edu, JYLee@uams.edu,
ofer.levy@childrens.harvard.edu, wayne_marasco@dfci.harvard.edu, cmeissner@tuftsmedicalcenter.org, mrn8d@virginia.edu,
BBC joins crusade against dissenting academics via propaganda documentaries
Press TV – June 1, 2022
It seems the nefarious Inquisition in Europe, which brutally sought to rid the world of heresy and political rivalry for centuries, has reignited as its new protagonists in the British national broadcaster BBC strive to silence and delegitimize any dissenting viewpoints held by academics.
In a new documentary on BBC Radio 4’s Facts on File, and also in a report based on the documentary by the BBC News, two academics, namely Tim Hayward and Justin Schlosberg, have been falsely accused of supporting and spreading “Russian propaganda” and “misinformation” about Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine that began on February 24, either through their lectures or on Twitter.
Hayward, a professor of environmental political theory at the University of Edinburgh, had re-tweeted a representative of Russia to the United Nations, who stated that the Russian attack on a maternity hospital in Mariupol on March 9 was “fake news.”
“As long as we’re still able to hear two sides of the story we should continue striving to do so,” Hayward said.
While the West condemned Russia for targeting the hospital several times with airstrikes, the Russian foreign ministry strongly rejected the allegation, branding it as “information terrorism” against Moscow.
A few days later and in the House of Commons, legislator Robert Halfon from the Conservative Party denounced Hayward and also Dr. Tara McCormack, a lecturer in international politics at the University of Leicester, who had spoken about “ludicrous disinformation” of both Kiev and Moscow.
Halfon also urged the parliament to “contact these universities directly to stop them acting as useful idiots for” Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Education Secretary Nadhim Zahawi at the same session of the House of Commons described the said academics and the like as people who are “buying” Moscow’s “false narrative” about the war in Ukraine.
“It is a false and dangerous narrative and we will crack down on it hard,” Zahawi said.
The BBC quotes 21-year-old history and politics student Mariangela Alejandro as saying that things in Hayward’s class got “weird” when the professor stepped in the “realm of conspiracy theories about [Syrian President Bashar al] Assad and Russia.”
The British broadcaster even criticized, though implicitly, Hayward for a lecture in which he outlined an argument that the West-backed White Helmets group might have helped fake a chemical attack in Syria years ago. Russia and the Syrian government have stressed that the attack was “staged.”
The White Helmets group, which claims to be a humanitarian NGO, is known for its coordination with terror outfits in Syria to carry out staged chemical attacks in order to falsely incriminate Syrian government forces and fabricate pretexts for military strikes by a US-led military coalition present in Syria since 2014.
On April 14, 2018, the US, Britain, and France carried out a string of airstrikes against Syria over a suspected chemical weapons attack on the city of Douma, located about 10 kilometers northeast of the capital Damascus.
That alleged attack was reported by the White Helmets group, which published videos showing them purportedly treating survivors. Washington and its allies blamed Damascus for the Douma attack, an allegation strongly rejected by the Syrian government.
Hayward used an argument put forward by members of a collective of academics and bloggers he is a member of, known as the Working Group on Syria Propaganda and the Media (WGSPM).
“One narrative says the White Helmets helped rescue victims, provided evidence and gave witness statements about the chemical attack on Douma on 7 April 2018,” Hayward said during the lecture.
However, he added that “the critics say the White Helmets were responsible for staging a false flag event to spur the West to attack the Syrian government. In fact, dispute about this case is still current.”
Hayward told the BBC that he does not teach about Syria, but simply used an example in his class that he was familiar with.
The BBC, however, seems to be eager to lash out at Hayward when it quoted Dr Nader Hashemi, director of the Centre for Middle East Studies at the University of Denver and a visiting scholar at the University of Cambridge, as describing Hayward’s argument about the White Helmets and the staged chemical attack as “a deeply distorted set of teachings.”
Regarding Hayward’s stance on the purported Russian airstrikes against a maternity hospital in Mariupol that says “we should strive to hear both sides”, the BBC drew in Kvitka Perehinets, a Ukrainian student at the University of Edinburgh, who said “there are no two sides” to the conflict and that “The oppressor – in this case, Russia – should not be given the same kind of platform as those who are being oppressed.”
Although the University of Edinburgh claims that its programs are approved by a board of studies, emphasizing its commitment to “academic freedom”, it also stresses that it takes “a strong view… against the spread of misinformation” and encourages students to report concerns.
The university should be notified that one of the primary jobs of “academic freedom” is paving the way for academic research to distinguish true information from “misinformation” and “disinformation.”
However, the UK’s Department for Education (DfE), which is responsible for education in England, inquisitively controls the flow of research in universities, saying it expected “universities’ due diligence processes to consider the reputational, ethical and security risks of false and dangerous narratives, and ensure that students are not misled by views that are clearly false.”
When the academics’ tweets were raised in the Commons, Zahawi said the minister for Higher and Further Education, Michelle Donelan, was “contacting those universities”, a means of pressure on Hayward and the like who think differently from the mainstream in the West.
Another academic pressured by the BBC and the Education system in the UK is professor Schlosberg, who specializes in media and journalism at Birkbeck, University of London.
He has been lambasted for re-tweeting Russian state media questioning what occurred in the Ukrainian city of Bucha, 37 kilometers northwest of the capital Kiev.
Back on April 2, the mayor of Bucha in a video message claimed that 300 people had been killed by the Russian army with some appearing to have been bound by their hands and feet before being shot.
He also presented footage and photographs showing the dead bodies of those allegedly killed or executed by Russian troops, claiming that 280 bodies had been buried in mass graves while nearly 10 others were either unburied or only partially covered by earth. Later on, Kiev claimed a death toll of more than 1000 in the city.
A day later, the Ukrainian government urged major Western powers, including the United States, to impose crippling fresh sanctions on Moscow over what it called a “massacre” in Bucha, a newly liberated town at the time.
The Kremlin strongly rejected any involvement of Russian troops in the so-called massacre, with Russian President Sergei Lavrov stressing that the killings did not occur while Russian soldiers were in the city.
He added that the so-called dead bodies in footage circulating the internet were “staged” and the images of them plus Ukraine’s false version of events had been spread on social media by Kiev and Western countries.
On April 4, Schlosberg tweeted that “Russian troops left on 30th March. No mention of any ‘massacre’ or bodies lining the streets for 4 days.” He also re-tweeted a video of Bucha’s mayor speaking without mentioning a massacre.
The BBC, however, hurriedly stressed in its report that Russian media has been using the video to bolster the idea that the bodies appeared after the Russians had left the city.
It quoted the academic as saying that he had “no idea” regarding what really happened there.
“My only understanding is that I think no-one else really knows what happened. I think there is a very strong likelihood that there were very serious atrocities, almost certainly the vast majority of which were committed by Russia,” Schlosberg further told the BBC.
However, in a string of tweets on Wednesday, he denounced the broadcaster’s “grossly defamatory allegation.”
“Rather than engage with the actual meaning of my tweets, the BBC chose to uncritically endorse obvious manipulation by people who have been actively trying to silence and delegitimize any dissenting viewpoints since the start of” the current operation by Russia in Ukraine, Schlosberg said.
“The manner in which the program achieved this was so cynical and unguarded it beggars belief, even for those of us increasingly skeptical about the BBC’s commitment to basic journalistic standards, let alone its own lofty public service values,” he stressed.
UK “hate crime” plans could criminalize comedy, rights group says
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | May 31, 2022
The Home Office is working on a new hate crimes strategy to encourage more people to report hate crimes. Campaigners have warned that the new strategy might result in criminalizing comedians like Ricky Gervais, who question the trans ideology in comedy routines.
The strategy is being drawn up despite a court ruling last year that banned police from recording “gender-critical” comments as non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs).
“These plans suggest either that the Government is not paying attention, or that they have contempt for the Court of Appeal,” said a lawyer from campaign group Fair Cop.
“Either way, it is astonishing that legislators are planning to expand the discredited and unlawful practice of recording non-crime hate incidents [NCHIs]. Following Fair Cop’s win in the Court of Appeal in December, the College of Policing promised to publish revised hate crime guidance by the end of May this year. We’re still waiting. Police forces that record complaints against comedians – or any other lawful speech – as NCHIs will be piling illegality upon illegality.
“They will then find themselves in court with no legitimate defense. This quixotic strategy oozes arrogance, as if the law does not apply if you’re fighting for ‘the right side of history.’
“But how can you be on the right side of history if you’re repeatedly on the wrong side of the law?”
This news comes comedian Ricky Gervais faced a censorship mob from his recently aired Netflix Special SuperNature, where he covered the topics of cancel culture, transgender ideology, Hitler, and AIDS.
At some point he says: “The worst thing you can say today is, ‘Women don’t have penises,’ right?”
He was accused of “hate crimes” by some trans campaign campaigners, and would have probably been recorded for NCHIs if the new plans were already in place.
Featured Video
Did the 9/11 Hijackers Really Fly the Planes?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Aaron Siri’s Book: Vaccines, Amen
By Maryanne DemasiMaryanne Demasi | Brownstone Institute | June 15, 2026
For decades, vaccines have been treated as the sacred cow of modern medicine. I was taught that they were the holy grail. To question them was heresy. To raise concerns about safety was to risk professional exile.
Aaron Siri makes it clear in Vaccines, Amen: The Religion of Vaccines that the story we’ve been told about vaccine science rests far more on belief than proof.
“No child should be sacrificed on the altar of the religion of vaccines,” Siri writes, as he turns his focus to America’s overcrowded childhood immunisation schedule.
I assumed little in this book would surprise me. I’ve spent years reporting on drug safety, regulatory capture, and the corruption of science. But Siri showed me how wrong I was.
Siri is not a doctor or a scientist. He is an attorney, and this, he says, is his advantage. In court, rhetoric won’t save you. Evidence does. As he puts it, he doesn’t get to say “trust me” the way many doctors do. “I need to prove claims with real data.”
And he does. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Biden’s Closed Circle on Russia
- Lebanon Accuses Israel Of Violating The Chemical Weapons Convention By Spraying Toxic Herbicide Over Farmland
- Did the 9/11 Hijackers Really Fly the Planes?
- ‘Jewish lobby’ deceived Putin – Lukashenko
- The UK Joins the Pirates
- Israeli government plans to fund extremist occupier group in occupied West Bank with $1.89M: Report
- Press TV reporter wounded in Israeli drone strike on southern Lebanon
- Time for Trump to Tell Benjamin Netanyahu to Go Away!
- Israeli officials: ‘Security zones’ to remain in Lebanon, Syria, Gaza
- Israel Fails to Sabotage Islamabad Accord… At Least for Now
- If Americans Knew
- Jared Kushner’s Israel-linked island, and other dubious projects
- Why Are Crypto Billionaires and AIPAC Spending $8+ Million to Elect Adrian Boafo?
- Why the Mainstream Media Should Stop Using the ADL as Their Go-To Antisemitism Source
- Censorship and Thuggery Won’t Save Israel’s Reputation
- Israel Searches for a Red Sea Foothold in Somaliland
- They Weren’t Convicted of Terrorism, But These Palestine Activists Got Sentenced as Terrorists Anyway
- “Ceasefire” is not in Israel’s vocabulary – Daily Update
- Did Trump just threaten a nuclear attack on Iran? Another merger for Israel-Firster David Ellison –Daily Update
- Israeli Firm Accused of Launching Smear Campaigns During US, European Elections
- As World Cup kicks off, Gaza amputee girls chase football dreams
- No Tricks Zone
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
- European “Expert Commission” Urges COVID-19-Like Global Climate State Of Energency!
- Real-World Observations Do Not Support The Position That Climate Change Is Human-Caused
Aletho News 