Aletho News


What is the truth about jabs and baby deaths?

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | January 20, 2022

LAST October TCW reported on the concerning numbers of miscarriages and stillbirths reported to our drugs watchdog, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

Pregnant women who had received a Covid jab and then lost their baby filled out Yellow Card reports in their hundreds. At that time nearly 600 mothers-to-be had suffered spontaneous abortions, as the MHRA refer to miscarriages, and felt the jab had been responsible. In just three months, that number increased by 100 to a total of 709.

Pfizer’s jab is associated with the highest casualty rate, with 425 miscarriages reported. That figure includes one premature baby death, one miscarriage-related death and 13 stillbirth/foetal deaths. Since May last year, the under-40s have not received the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine because it increases your risk of developing blood clots. AZ, introduced in January 2021, still has 229 reports of miscarriage with five stillbirths, while the Moderna jab, introduced in April 2021, has 51 miscarriage reports. Five mothers reported they did not know which vaccine they had received.

Since February last year, the BBC have been urging pregnant women to take the Covid vaccination despite the fact that no manufacturer was due to complete a scientific trial in expectant mothers before December. Their results are still to be released so all we have is the MHRA’s real-time data, which it seems is being ignored.

Instead, British health chiefs have relied on information from women in the US who accidentally found themselves pregnant having taken the Covid jab and reported the results of their pregnancy to the V-safe app. V-safe is hosted by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) but it is not a scientific study. It is a self-reporting database like the MHRA Yellow Card scheme which Reuters fact checkers like to tell us should not be relied on. So if we cannot rely on the Yellow Card, how can we rely on V-safe?

‘We cannot,’ said an obstetrician who did not want to be named, based in Scotland. ‘Frankly, it’s a mess and when you consider what is at stake, the healthy development of a baby, and the health of the mother, it’s a disgrace.’

This fact has not been acknowledged by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, who updated their advice to pregnant and nursing mothers on 20 December 2021. They said: ‘Covid-19 vaccines are strongly recommended in pregnancy. Vaccination is the best way to protect against the known risks of Covid-19 in pregnancy for both women and babies, including admission of the woman to intensive care and premature birth of the baby.’

Three months ago TCW exposed how figures had been manipulated by the NHS to make unvaccinated pregnant mums think they had a higher risk of ending up in ICU than vaccinated mums. It was not true.

The chief scientific adviser to the Department of Health, Professor Lucy Chappell, has never satisfactorily addressed parents’ concerns about whether the vaccine can harm their unborn babies. Ms Chappell, who is also Professor in Obstetrics at King’s College London, tweeted last November: ‘Covid-19 vaccines have protected millions of women around the world – and are safe for pregnant women and women considering pregnancy.’ The tweet had a cool reception with just 116 likes and Dr Chappell had no data from any vaccine manufacturer to support her claim.

The same applies to MHRA chief executive Dr June Raine, who said in a statement in November: ‘We want to reassure all pregnant women that the Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective for them to use at all stages of pregnancy. Our rigorous safety monitoring of these vaccines in pregnancy shows that the vaccines are safe and that there is no increased risk of pregnancy complications, miscarriage, or stillbirth.’

A British funeral director known only as Wesley tells another story. On camera, he says how he saw newborn baby deaths increase tenfold after vaccination began.

Wesley says: ‘There are a lot of newborn babies in fridges in mortuaries. There were 30 in one hospital. Mortuary fridges usually hold about 6-10 babies maximum and they’re never normally full. ‘Now, they’re full and (the deceased babies) are being kept in the adult section.’ He agreed with the interviewer that the number was ten times higher than normal, and went on: ‘The babies have either been miscarried or they are full term stillbirths but not a lot has been said about it.’

If anyone wants to speak out, we promise we are listening.

Latest Yellow Card scheme figures published below with 1,932 fatalities reported to January 5 2022.

Adult – Primary & Booster/Third Dose, Child Administration

Pfizer – 25.3million people – 47.2m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate – 1 in 162 people impacted

AstraZeneca – 24.9m people – 49.1m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate – 1 in 103 people impacted

Moderna – 1.6m people – 3m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate – 1 in 50 people impacted

Overall, 1 in 120 people injected experiences a Yellow Card adverse event. A significant proportion require urgent medical care, may be life changing or long-lasting in effect. This may be less than 10 per cent of actual figures according to MHRA.

Adult Booster or 3rd Doses = 34,834,288 people

Booster Yellow Card Reports – 24,402 (Pfizer) + 371 (AZ) + 13,156 (Moderna) + 121 (Unknown) = 38,050

Reactions – 446,903 (Pfizer) + 855,968 (AZ) + 106,996 (Moderna) + 4,426 (Unknown) = 1,414,293

Reports – 156,250 (Pfizer) + 241,657 (AZ) + 32,133 (Moderna) + 1,442 (Unknown) = 431,482 people impacted

Fatal – 684 (Pfizer) + 1182 (AZ) + 29 (Moderna) + 37 (Unknown) = 1,932

Spontaneous Abortions – 425 + 1 premature baby death + 1 miscarriage related death/ 13 stillbirth/foetal deaths (9 recorded as fatal) (Pfizer) + 229 + 5 stillbirth (AZ) + 51 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 709 miscarriages

Blood Disorders – 16,056 (Pfizer) + 7,728 (AZ) + 2,228 (Moderna) + 62 (Unknown) = 26,074

Pulmonary Embolism & Deep Vein Thrombosis – 801 (Pfizer) + 2,991 (AZ) + 73 (Moderna) + 25 (Unknown) = 3,890

Anaphylaxis – 615 (Pfizer) + 863 (AZ) + 76 (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 1,556

Acute Cardiac – 10,703 (Pfizer) + 10,766 (AZ) + 2,408 (Moderna) + 83 (Unknown) = 23,960

Pericarditis/Myocarditis – 1,047 (Pfizer) + 414 (AZ) + 256 (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 1,723

Infections – 10,568 (Pfizer) + 19,679 (AZ) + 1,861 (Moderna) + 136 (Unknown) = 32,244

Herpes – 2,048 (Pfizer) + 2,639 (AZ) + 208 (Moderna) + 20 (Unknown) = 4915

Blindness – 142 (Pfizer) + 309 (AZ) + 23 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 478

Eye Disorders – 7,310 (Pfizer) + 14,641 (AZ) + 1,276 (Moderna) + 82 (Unknown) = 23,309

Deafness – 268 (Pfizer) + 418 (AZ) + 40 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 730

Skin Disorders – 31,329 (Pfizer) + 52,749 (AZ) + 11,702 (Moderna) + 308 (Unknown) = 96,088

Psychiatric Disorders – 9,307 (Pfizer) + 18,117 (AZ) + 2,075 (Moderna) + 104 (Unknown) = 29,603

Headaches & Migraines – 33,635 (Pfizer) + 93,545 (AZ) + 8,280 (Moderna) + 323 (Unknown) = 135,783

Vomiting – 4,914 (Pfizer) + 11,594 (AZ) + 1,587 (Moderna) + 59 (Unknown) = 18,154

Nervous System Disorders – 75,192 (Pfizer) + 180,996 (AZ) + 17,398 (Moderna) + 816 (Unknown) = 274,402

Strokes and CNS haemorrhages – 707 (Pfizer) + 2,245 (AZ) + 34 (Moderna) + 13 (Unknown) = 2,999

Guillain-Barré Syndrome – 83 (Pfizer) + 483 (AZ) + 9 (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 581

Facial Paralysis including Bell’s Palsy – 1,001 (Pfizer) + 978 (AZ) + 119 (Moderna) + 10 (Unknown) = 2,108

Tremor – 2,020 (Pfizer) + 9,897 (AZ) + 570 (Moderna) + 50 (Unknown) = 13,538

Seizures – 1,023 (Pfizer) + 2,028 (AZ) + 232 (Moderna) + 16 (Unknown) = 3,299

Paralysis – 463 (Pfizer) + 855 (AZ) + 81 (Moderna) + 8 (Unknown) = 1,407

Respiratory Disorders – 19,633 (Pfizer) + 29,211 (AZ) + 3,489 (Moderna) + 185 (Unknown) = 52,518

Reproductive/Breast Disorders – 27,738 (Pfizer) + 20,196 (AZ) + 4,211 (Moderna) + 177 (Unknown) = 52,322


Suspected side effects reported in individuals under 18

Pfizer – 3,000,000 children (1st doses) plus 900,000 second doses resulting in 2,471 Yellow Cards

AZ – 11,600 children (1st doses) plus 10,000 second doses resulting in 248 Yellow Cards – Reporting rate 1 in 47

Moderna – 21,500 children (1st doses) and 16,000 second doses resulting in 16 Yellow cards

Brand Unspecified – 11 Yellow Cards

Total = 3,033,100 children injected

Total Yellow Cards Under 18s = 2,746

Full reports including 339 pages of specific reaction listings are here. 

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Test, Jab, Boost, Repeat

By Jane M. Orient, M.D. – Association of American Physicians and Surgeons – January 13, 2022

Joe Biden introduced his “new” plan to save us from the dread coronavirus. He will provide 500 million “free” tests (paid for by taxpayers or with borrowed money); 1,000 National Guard troops to overstressed hospitals; and more pressure to get vaccinated and boosted.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, we would need 2.3 billion tests per month to test every person over age 12 twice per week at the recommended frequency of twice per week. What type of test, and where would we get them? Pharmacies are running out of home antigen tests. We have no data on the likelihood of false negative or false positive tests, but we do know that with any test, even very good ones, the vast majority of positive tests will be false positives if only a small percentage of the tested group is diseased. Also, tests may remain positive long after a person has recovered and is no longer infectious.

Can the tests harm? False positives lead to isolation with destruction of livelihoods and educational opportunities. We may be having an epidemic of false positive PCR tests. Using too high a cycle threshold, as some labs have routinely done, gives a meaningless result. And from your lab report, you cannot tell what cycle threshold was used.

It is possible that doing the test itself could be fatal. A few military members reportedly had infections with flesh-eating bacteria after getting swabbed, and some of the swabs were found to be contaminated. At least one patient got meningitis when a nasal swab was inserted too far.

Hospitals are indeed overstressed. According to a talk radio host, patients are dying in the halls and waiting room of a local hospital because of short staffing. Will 1,000 troops help? Mayo alone just fired 700 unvaccinated workers. An Ohio physician reported that the troops were causing chaos. They didn’t even know where supplies were kept, and after a 12-hour shift might be dispatched to another state before they had time to learn the local system. Under CMS waivers covering the declared emergency, minimally qualified personnel may be used. And now the most experienced and dedicated workers, the very ones most likely to exercise independent judgment and stand up for patients, are being culled.

Will more vaccines and boosters help? Biden asserts that it’s a “patriotic duty” to get jabbed, and more jabs are the only way to end the disaster. No matter how much respect you have for his mental abilities, he is likely quoting the American Medical Association. The jabs do not appear to be effective against the new variants, and might even be creating them. There is talk of a fourth shot—but apparently no stopping point for adverse effects such as myocarditis in children.

The U.S. has one of the worst records in the world for controlling COVID-19. Moreover, the most reliable source of statistics, insurance actuaries, shows that deaths in the prime working age group are up 40 percent, and disability claims are also up. A 10 percent increase would be the equivalent of a 200-year flood. The claims are not citing COVID-19 as a cause of death. They could be collateral damage from government policy, including poor medical care for virtually everything, or they could be from vaccination.

States are pushing back against the mandates, which are being imposed by executive order through unaccountable administrative agencies. The U.S. Supreme Court should be considering whether the administrative state has the constitutional or statutory authority to impose a medical dictatorship that overrides the states’ authority and citizens’ basic rights. Some Justices, however, seem to be taking the-end-justifies-the-means approach—and that based on egregiously erroneous information. For example, Justice Breyer asserted that there were 750 million cases (in a population of about 330 million) and Justice Sotomayor asserted that there were 100,000 hospitalized children (instead of fewer than 4,000, mostly not for COVID-19). The harms from the mandated vaccines were simply ignored.

Even if the “experts” Biden is relying upon, under the titular leadership of Anthony Fauci, were right this time, the precedent could grant unlimited power to a medical dictatorship to force disastrous policy on all Americans.

Instead of endlessly repeating failed policy, how about firing the generals who are in charge of the losing war?

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | 2 Comments

37,927 Deaths and 3,392,632 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database as Young People Continue to Die

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | January 19, 2022

The European (EEA and non-EEA countries) database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, verified by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and they are now reporting 37,927 fatalities, and 3,392,632 injuries following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,611,423) are serious injuries.

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

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

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

Here is the summary data through January 15, 2022.

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccineTozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer: 17,054 deathand 1,624,526 injuries to 15/01/2022

  • 45,865   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 238 deaths
  • 53,606   Cardiac disorders incl. 2,459 deaths
  • 500        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 52 deaths
  • 21,641   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 1,727     Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 24,752   Eye disorders incl. 38 deaths
  • 128,813 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 673 deaths
  • 403,800 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 4,871 deaths
  • 1,855     Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 85 deaths
  • 17,690   Immune system disorders incl. 88 deaths
  • 71,334   Infections and infestations incl. 1,829 deaths
  • 31,663   Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 321 deaths
  • 40,469   Investigations incl. 492 deaths
  • 10,933   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 271 deaths
  • 193,866 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 209 deaths
  • 1,534     Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 144 deaths
  • 266,754 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,807 deaths
  • 2,384     Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 72 deaths
  • 241        Product issues incl. 3 deaths
  • 29,339   Psychiatric disorders incl. 198 deaths
  • 5,857     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 261 deaths
  • 63,007   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 69,276   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,833 deaths
  • 74,806   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 140 deaths
  • 3,643     Social circumstances incl. 22 deaths
  • 18,264   Surgical and medical procedures incl. 185 deaths
  • 40,907   Vascular disorders incl. 740 deaths

Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273(CX-024414) from Moderna: 10,782 deathand 510,009 injuries to 15/01/2022

  • 11,363   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 118 deaths
  • 16,962   Cardiac disorders incl. 1,110 deaths
  • 188        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 5,960     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 480        Endocrine disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 7,107     Eye disorders incl. 36 deaths
  • 41,950   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 399 deaths
  • 135,810 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 3,551 deaths
  • 773        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 54 deaths
  • 5,003     Immune system disorders incl. 20 deaths
  • 20,787   Infections and infestations incl. 1,031 deaths
  • 9,730     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 205 deaths
  • 11,563   Investigations incl. 390 deaths
  • 4,660     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 260 deaths
  • 62,441   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 215 deaths
  • 653        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 81 deaths
  • 85,799   Nervous system disorders incl. 1,007 deaths
  • 862        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 8 deaths
  • 96           Product issues incl. 4 deaths
  • 8,976     Psychiatric disorders incl. 178 deaths
  • 2,899     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 211 deaths
  • 11,475   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 9 deaths
  • 22,050   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,142 deaths
  • 26,090   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 95 deaths
  • 2,158     Social circumstances incl. 45 deaths
  • 2,608     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 199 deaths
  • 11,566   Vascular disorders incl. 393 deaths

Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca7,749 deathand 1,136,049 injuries to 15/01/2022

  • 13,763   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 271 deaths
  • 20,678   Cardiac disorders incl. 812 deaths
  • 229        Congenital familial and genetic disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 13,283   Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 8 deaths
  • 673        Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 19,849   Eye disorders incl. 31 deaths
  • 106,411 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 422 deaths
  • 299,266 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,826 deaths
  • 1,017     Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 67 deaths
  • 5,311     Immune system disorders incl. 37 deaths
  • 39,194   Infections and infestations incl. 591 deaths
  • 13,232   Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 195 deaths
  • 25,062   Investigations incl. 200 deaths
  • 12,894   Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 122 deaths
  • 166,466 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 157 deaths
  • 719        Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 38 deaths
  • 231,313 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,142 deaths
  • 605        Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 19 deaths
  • 198        Product issues incl. 1 death
  • 20,856   Psychiatric disorders incl. 69 deaths
  • 4,281     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 72 deaths
  • 16,524   Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 40,829   Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,035 deaths
  • 51,563   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 61 deaths
  • 1,596     Social circumstances incl. 8 deaths
  • 1,804     Surgical and medical procedures incl. 29 deaths
  • 28,433   Vascular disorders incl. 521 deaths    

Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson2,342 deaths and 122,048 injuries to 15/01/2022

  • 1,186     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 48 deaths
  • 2,420     Cardiac disorders incl. 196 deaths
  • 40           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,260     Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 98           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,591     Eye disorders incl. 10 deaths
  • 9,402     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 88 deaths
  • 32,903   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 659 deaths
  • 146        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 13 deaths
  • 527        Immune system disorders incl. 10 deaths
  • 7,442     Infections and infestations incl. 198 deaths
  • 1,092     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 25 deaths
  • 5,756     Investigations incl. 127 deaths
  • 725        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 56 deaths
  • 16,739   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 54 deaths
  • 82           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 8 deaths
  • 22,885   Nervous system disorders incl. 242 deaths
  • 54           Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
  • 29           Product issues
  • 1,677     Psychiatric disorders incl. 21 deaths
  • 506        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 2,720     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 4,322     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 293 deaths
  • 3,652     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 10 deaths
  • 395        Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
  • 822        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 72 deaths
  • 3,577     Vascular disorders incl. 167 deaths

*These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.

Full article

January 19, 2022 Posted by | War Crimes | | Leave a comment

Pfizer-backed CDC Foundation partnered with Facebook to fund social media tactics to increase “vaccine uptake”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 19, 2022

The Pfizer-sponsored CDC Foundation has teamed up with Big Tech and Big Pharma giants Facebook and Merck, among others, in order to promote Covid vaccines.

The pressure group calls itself the Alliance for Advancing Health Online and some details about its purpose and organization are revealed in an email sent to the White House and obtained and shared by the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN).

Other than the CDC Foundation, Facebook’s partners are the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, Sabin Vaccine Institute, the Bay Area Global Health Alliance, and the Vaccine Confidence Project at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

During the fiscal years 2014 through 2018, the CDC Foundation reportedly received $79.6 million from companies Pfizer, Biogen, Merck, and others. Pfizer continues to be listed as a current donor.

ICAN noted that it emerges from the email – sent by Facebook’s US Public Policy head Payton Iheme – that the purpose of the initiative is to use social media and platforms “to build confidence in and drive uptake of vaccines.”

ICAN is a network whose mission is to promote putting authority over health choices in the hands of people whom these decisions affect, and parse out true medical information from that tainted by financial interest and advertising, which, they say, leads to “medical coercion” rather than tangible understanding of issues.

Now the group is suggesting there is conflict in the CDC Foundation forming an alliance to drive home the message of the need to get vaccinated as a matter of public health concern – when those selling the vaccines are members of that alliance. This is particularly pertinent as Facebook has been censoring some criticism of Pfizer vaccines.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the US public health agency, but it is a handy technicality in this and similar instances that the CDC Foundation has been set up as a private nonprofit incorporated in Georgia, established by Congress through the Public Health Service Act.

Facebook and Merck are throwing in $40 million each to start off the operation, and the money will go towards research into “advancing public understanding of how social media and behavioral sciences can be leveraged to improve the health of communities around the world.”

The first grants will be given to researchers and organizations who are exploring ways of using social media and digital platforms to build confidence in and drive uptake of vaccines, the email said.

Facebook’s representative also wrote that the corporation and its partners in the alliance are looking to expand their work.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | 2 Comments

Rather than rivals, Iran and Russia are partners against US energy order

Press TV – January 19, 2022

Iran and Russia are thought to have conflicting interests in the economic field, especially in energy, but that’s not the case.

The public opinion has been shaped in such a way to believe that Iran and Russia have conflicting interests in the economic field, especially in energy, but this article is arguing that it is not the case.

Iran’s Minister of Petroleum Javad Owji and his Russian counterpart Nikolay Shulginov on Tuesday discussed energy cooperation in a meeting in Moscow which is hosting President Ehrahim Raisi on his most important visit abroad since taking office in August.

Oil and gas cooperation, the OPEC+ agreement, and transfer of technology featured in their discussions.

Owji planned to discuss options for shipping Iranian natural gas to Pakistan and India with the participation of Russian companies, and manufacturing of oil industry equipment. He will also hold talks with Russia’s main OPEC+ representative, according to deputy prime minister and former energy minister Alexander Novak.

The two sides further discussed preparation and the agenda for the next meeting of the Russian-Iranian government commission on trade and economic cooperation, the Russian energy ministry said in a statement.

Iran’s foreign, petroleum and economy ministers are accompanying President Raisi in his two-day visit to Moscow.

The two sides plan to discuss a whole gamut of bilateral cooperation. The economic topics could be the fate of a promised $5 billion Russian loan, supplying some Iranian oil to global markets through Russian companies, devising new oil-for-goods deal, increasing the current record $3 billion bilateral trade to $5 billion and doing business in national currencies.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian wrote in Russia’s Sputnik news agency that the two sides are determined to update a 20-year cooperation treaty they signed in 2001.

They plan “a new road map based on a balanced, active, dynamic and smart foreign policy, which lays an emphasis on cooperating with all neighbors, especially the Russian Federation, and advancing economic diplomacy”, he said.

“For their bilateral relations, the two countries are determined to update the Treaty on the Basis of Mutual Relations and Principles of Cooperation between Iran and Russia in harmony with global developments,” Amir-Abdollahian said.

The agreement, signed in March 2001, was originally meant to last four 10 years, but it has twice been extended for five years.

The visit comes as Iran and the remaining signatories to a 2015 nuclear deal which include Russia are working strenuously to revive the JCPOA agreement which has been on life support since the US abandoned it in 2018.

Among Russian energy companies, Lukoil has already said it would be “happy” to return to talks to develop Iran’s Ab Teymour and Mansouri oil fields, which were put on hold in late 2018 after the US reimposed sanctions on the country’s oil industry in the wake of its withdrawal from the nuclear deal.

President Raisi, however, has signaled hedging its bets on the success of the Vienna talks and instead pushed for maximum engagement with Iran’s neighbors and the countries which are less at Washington’s beck and call.

Iran and Russia are interchangeably estimated to hold the first and second largest gas reserves in the world. The two countries are also major oil producers, meaning both countries are energy superpowers in terms of their hydrocarbon reserves combined.

According to the head of the Iranian Ministry of Petroleum’s Institute for International Energy Studies, Iran, Russia and the countries supplying hydrocarbon resources will suffer from the new American order in the energy market, and as a result the great interests of Russia and Iran in the energy market will be in working together against this order.

“Unfortunately, the former officials of the country have shaped the mentality of public opinion in such a way that Iran and Russia are thought to have conflicting interests in the economic field, especially in energy. As a result, according to this analysis of the conflict of interests of the two countries, no effective action has been taken so far to increase economic cooperation with Russia,” Mohammad Sadeq Jokar told Fars news agency.

To prove the conflict of interests between Iran and Russia, he said, it is always argued that the two countries compete in the European gas market and that Russia does not want to lose its monopoly on the European market and share it with Iran.

“This analysis has a fundamental drawback. In fact, the question is whether the targeted markets of Iran and Russia are still common markets. Given the developments in the energy market, the answer to this question is no, and it must be said that at present the two countries do not have a common target market in which to compete,” Jokar said.

According to the energy specialist, those defending Iran’s gas exports to Europe justify the trade for its political benefits, arguing that they would make Europe dependent on Iranian gas.

“My first question is what market share Iran can gain from such exports,” he said, noting that Russia plans to export 200 billion cubic meters of gas a year. “Do they really think that, for example, with the annual export of 10 billion cubic meters, Europe will become dependent on Iranian gas?”

Given that 90 percent of the gas produced in Iran is consumed domestically and the fact that the country currently does not have any LNG plants, its best option is to export its surplus output to neighbors through pipelines.

“If Iran has gas for export, the priority is definitely to export gas to Oman, for example. When the Oman gas market is available to Iran, why should we export gas to Europe, which has a lower price and we have to pay transit fees to Turkey” Jokar asked.

“Why should we take gas to Europe when the Iraqi and Kuwaiti gas markets are available to Iran for export? This is not economically viable at all,” he said.

“If Iran, according to its economic and political priorities in the gas market, moves to own the market in Pakistan and the southern Persian Gulf, Russia will not have a fundamental issue with that. Of course, in some markets there is still competition between Iran and Russia – in the Turkish gas market, for example.”

Jokar touched on the legacy of the “America first” agenda initiated by former president Donald Trump aimed at transforming the US into a global energy superpower.

Like other international economists, Jokar believers the global energy system is in transition to a new energy order characterized by the emergence of the United States as a net oil exporter, the shale revolution and the gradual shift towards low-carbon sources and renewables.

“This will hurt traditional suppliers of hydrocarbon resources such as Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia,” he said. “This is where it can be seen that the greater interests of Russia and Iran in the energy market lie in standing together against this new order.”

The economist touched on some of the grounds for cooperation between Iran and Russia, citing the mini-LNG technology which the Russians have recently acquired.

“Also after the sanctions, Rosneft has localized more than 70% of the required oil import services. Due to the technology sanctions of Western companies against the two countries, Iran and Russia can also exchange technology in this field,” he said.

Jokar also cited leading Iranian industrial group Mapna, saying it has a high capacity to overhaul Russian power plants.

“Or we have achieved some successes in some upstream technologies that can be exchanged with the Russians. Some Iranian companies cooperated with the Russians on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This means that we also have capabilities to offer to the Russians, and it is not the case that the game is one-sided.”

Moreover, the Russians have good experience in “clean coal” projects which include capturing carbon emissions from burning coal and storing them under the Earth.

“It is not clear why we do not pay attention to the use of coal at all. Coal can be used to generate electricity in some areas that do not have air pollution problems, and the Russians, and especially the Chinese, have good experience in this area,” Jokar said.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | 1 Comment

On The Impossibility Of Electrifying Everything Using Only Wind, Solar And Batteries

Two More Contributions

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | January 17, 2022

My post on Friday highlighted the work of Ken Gregory, who has attempted to quantify the costs of fully electrifying the U.S. energy system using as sources only wind, solar, and batteries. My post got circulated among my excellent colleagues in the CO2 Coalition, two of whom then provided me with links to their own work on closely-related subjects.

The two pieces are: (1) “How Many km2 of Solar Panels in Spain and how much battery backup would it take to power Germany,” by Lars Schernikau and William Smith, posted January 30, 2021 (revised April 23, 2021) at SSRN; and (2) “On the Ability of Wind and Solar Electric Generation to Power Modern Civilization,” by Wallace Manheimer, published October 7, 2021 in the Journal of Energy Research and Reviews.

Both pieces consider various cost and engineering issues involved in trying to develop a fully solar/battery or wind/solar/battery system to power a modern economy; and both quickly conclude for many reasons that such a project is completely infeasible and will surely fail. And yet the U.S. and Europe are both marching forward to implement such plans, without any detailed feasibility studies or cost estimates, let alone even a small scale demonstration project to show that this can work.

Schernikau and Smith consider a case of trying to power just Germany using solar power generated in Spain (Spain having the best conditions in Europe for generating power from the sun). The conclusion:

It appears that solar’s low energy density, high raw material input and low energy-Return-On-energy-Invested (eROeI) as well as large storage requirements make today’s solar technology an environmentally and economically unviable choice to replace conventional power at large scale.

S&S mainly focus on the incredible material requirements that would need to be met for this solar/battery project. First, as to the solar panels:

To match Germany’s electricity demand (or over 15% of EU’s electricity demand) solely from solar photovoltaic panels located in Spain, about 7% of Spain would have to be covered with solar panels (~35.000 km2). . . . To keep the Solar Park functioning just for Germany, PV panels would need to be replaced every 15 years, translating to an annual silicon requirement for the panels reaching close to 10% of current global production capacity (~135% for one-time setup). The silver requirement for modern PV panels powering Germany would translate to 30% of the annual global silver production (~450% for one-time setup). For the EU, essentially the entire annual global silicon production and 3x the annual global silver production would be required for replacement only.

And then there is the question of the battery storage requirement. S&S do not do an hour-by-hour spreadsheet like Gregory to come up with the storage requirement, but rather assume a need for 14 days’ worth of storage based on the possibility of 14 consecutive cloudy days in Spain. (The hour-by-hour analysis done by Gregory and by Roger Andrews would suggest that due to seasonality of solar generation, 30 days of storage would be more realistic.). But even with the 14 day assumption, S&S get these startling results:

To produce sufficient storage capacity from batteries using today’s leading technology would require the full output of 900 Tesla Gigafactories working at full capacity for one year, not counting the replacement of batteries every 20 years. . . . A 14-day battery storage solution for Germany would exceed the 2020 global battery production by a factor of 4 to 5x. To produce the required batteries for Germany alone (or over 15% of EU’s electricity demand) would require mining, transportation and processing of 0,4-0,8 billion tons of raw materials every year (7 to 13 billion tons for one-time setup), and 6x more for Europe. . . . The 2020 global production of lithium, graphite anodes, cobalt or nickel would not nearly suffice by a multiple factor to produce the batteries for Germany alone.

Manheimer’s piece is more general in its discussion of the problems of intermittency and storage, but then focuses particularly on the problem of disposing of the vast wind and solar facilities at the ends of their useful lives:

Let us first consider solar panels. These panels last about 25 years, so the 250,000 tons we have to recycle this year is just a trickle compared to the deluge coming at us in 2050, when we will have had a total of 78 million tons to dispose of. These are not appropriate for landfills, as they contain hazardous and poison materials such as lead and cadmium, which can leech into the soil. However, recycling is expensive. The cost of the recycled materials is considerably more than the cost of the raw materials.

For wind turbines, the blades and the towers pose separate problems:

Since the blades are fiber glass and last only about 10 years, we have had considerable experience here. These blades are gigantic, and are very costly to ship and dispose of. . . . The difficulty of disposing of the blades pales in comparison with disposing of the towers, which last ~25 years. . . . [T]he Washington Times estimates that a [realistic] cost estimate is $500,000 [per turbine].

Go ahead and look through the plans being put forth today by the likes of California, New York, Germany or the UK, and see how they address any of these issues. The answer is, they don’t.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Environmentalism, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular | 1 Comment

Is The TAPI Pipeline Finally Ready To Go?

Zero Hedge | January 19, 2022

Submitted by James Durso, Managing Director of Corsair LLC, a supply chain consultancy.

The Turkmenistan–Afghanistan–Pakistan–India (TAPI) natural gas pipeline has been long aborning, but its prospects recently got a shot in the arm.

The 1100-mile, $10 billion project has seen numerous delays since the pipeline consortium was announced in late 2014, though the project was first mooted in 1991. Construction started in early 2018 with a projected in-service date of 2021, but halted later that year after workers clearing the route were killed by unknown assailants. Also, the project’s $10 billion cost estimate is a decade old, and an update may cause further delay to the Asian Development Bank-funded effort that is now slated to resume work in September 2022. Turkmenistan will loan Afghanistan the funds for its share of the project, to be repaid from gas transit revenues.

Representatives of the government of Tajikistan recently met officials in Afghanistan, and the Taliban announcement that it will dedicate 30,000 troops to pipeline security may motivate the parties to start construction.

The completed pipeline will allow Turkmenistan to reduce its reliance on its biggest gas customer, China, which has recently taken most of Turkmenistan’s gas exports, though in 2021 the country doubled its gas exports to Russia, which used to be the biggest importer of Turkmen gas until it was displaced by China in 2010. The pipeline will generate additional income that Ashgabat can use to improve services to citizens, a priority after the recent unrest in neighboring Kazakhstan.

But there may be competing opportunities. For example, Iran, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan recently signed a trilateral gas swap deal for up to 2 billion cubic meters (bcm) per year. It’s not a large amount – Turkmenistan exports about 40bcm to China every year – but it’s another income stream that should be managed with an eye to future growth. Then there’s the possibility of a connection to the proposed Trans-Caspian Pipeline (TCP) to supply Europe via the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC). Connecting to the SGC would require a 200-mile subsea pipe between Baku and Türkmenba?y, but may face opposition from Iran and Russia on (probably spurious) environmental grounds. Once the politics are resolved, the project would likely be cheaper and carry less of a security burden than the overland TAPI route, and build on the January 2021 agreement between Baku and Ashgabat to jointly develop the Dostluq (“friendship”) oil and natural gas field in the Caspian Sea.

For Afghanistan, the project would provide transit fees of about $500 million per year, along with an annual share of 500 million cubic meters of gas for the first ten years, ultimately increasing to 1.5 bcm per year.

For the Taliban government, a successful project would: demonstrate it can be a reliable partner in a major infrastructure project, employ demobilized Taliban troops so they don’t defect to the Islamic State or Al-Qaeda, earn revenue to pay for electricity imports (the country relies on imports for 78% of its power), demonstrate to China it is safe to invest in Afghanistan, and be an opportunity for cooperation with Pakistan despite the dispute over their shared border.

Of course, Kabul will have to figure out what to do with that natural gas, in addition to its one trillion cubic feet of reserves. The U.S.-driven development plan for the country emphasized renewables, like solar and wind, and the U.S.-funded $335 million Tarakhil Power Plant near Kabul, which relied on expensive, imported diesel fuel, is now used as a back-up facility when hydropower and imported power aren’t available. An International Finance Corporation-sponsored 59-megawatt gas-to-power plant in Mazar-i-Sharif would have boosted the country’s current total domestic generation by up to 30 percent, but can it be revived under the Taliban?

And time is of the essence as Uzbekistan recently reduced its power exports by 60%, possibly due to increased domestic demand as winter sets in, possibly to nudge Kabul (or the UN) to start paying the $90 million owed to power suppliers in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Iran.

For Pakistan, the pipeline would help solve the country’s persistent energy shortfalls, such as the deficit between current gas production of 4 Billion Cubic Feet per Day (BCFD) against demand of 6 BCFD. By 2025, gas production is expected to fall to less 1 BCFD due to depletion of gas reserves while demand increases to 8 BCFD.

And Pakistan won’t have to wait to 2025 for an economic impact: Between 2008 and 2012, 40 percent of Pakistan’s textile sector moved to Bangladesh, one reason being the uneven supply of gas and electricity.

Then there’s Pakistan’s view of its regional interests and its endless search for “strategic depth.” The pipeline would be an independent source of revenue for Afghanistan, just when Pakistan feels the Taliban government should be beholden to it. And India would be able to increase the share of gas in its energy mix from 6.5% to 15%, possibly encouraging more trade between Kabul and New Delhi. To Islamabad, it will add to an already bad outcome: the ungrateful Taliban still aren’t helping Pakistan isolate the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, while India is expected to be the world’s fastest growing economy in 2022, according to the World Bank.

They say “all politics is local” and that may be the case here. One Pakistani observer, Hina Mahar Nadeem, noted the country’s gas shortfalls have a silver lining – for the interests that control the import of expensive liquefied natural gas (LNG). Accordingly, TAPI and the much-delayed (mostly by U.S. sanctions on Iran) Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline are a threat to their economic and political power.

In late 2020, Pakistan and Russia signed a deal to complete the 700-mile Pakistan Stream Gas Pipeline, to move LNG from Port Qasim (Karachi) to Kasur, in the Punjab. Pakistan may be treating with Russia to balance against China, or maybe the deal was decided on strictly dollars-and-cents terms. Regardless, this project may crowd out attention and funding for Pakistan’s phase of TAPI.

A richer energy mix and pipeline transit revenues would strengthen Pakistan as it negotiates new efforts with China under the umbrella of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor. Pakistan’s leaders will need to strengthen their position vis-à-vis China while demonstrating to Beijing they are a reliable partner that will develop energy resources that can accommodate China’s projects. But first, those leaders must take on entrenched business and national security interests to successfully support TAPI, despite the economic benefits to its neighbors. But this assumes the country’s leaders aren’t captive (willing or otherwise) to their business confederates  and the securicrats.

For India, TAPI would add to the country’s energy mix, propelling its impressive economic growth. India is the world’s third-largest energy consuming country, and has doubled energy use since 2000, with 80% of demand still being met by coal, oil and solid biomass. TAPI gas would allow India to use less coal, helping it meet its COP26 carbon emission goal, and satisfy increased energy demand by 2030 of 25% to 35% according to the International Energy Agency.

India has built a connection for TAPI at Fazilka at the Indo-Pakistan border in the Punjab region, a location on the border with Pakistan that may be subject to cross-border attacks by Pakistan-affiliated groups. Will Pakistan or its proxies be able to resist attacking such a key piece of infrastructure if India-Pakistan relations fail to improve?

For India, the best approach may be “wait and see” if the U.S. threatens sanctions against TAPI partners, whether the Taliban can prove they know how to govern and secure the country against the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, and how serious is the announced Russia-Pakistan pipeline deal.

Where does this leave Turkmenistan?

It, too, should take it slow. It is no longer 2014, and it now has opportunities for increased swaps with Iran and Azerbaijan, and further opportunities with Iran may blossom if Tehran and Washington can secure a nuclear deal. The opportunity to connect to Europe via the TCP/SGC may present more revenue with fewer security concerns, or iffy partners like Pakistan and Afghanistan. Also, Washington needs to clear the way regarding sanctioned officials in Kabul, though the acting minister of defense, Mullah Muhammad Yaqub, who declared “I am directly responsible for and overseeing the security of the TAPI project” hasn’t been sanctioned by Washington… yet.

Washington might get behind TAPI in the wake of the recent deployment of Collective Security Treaty Organization peacekeeping troops to Kazakhstan, which has increased Russia’s clout in Central Asia. Increased revenue for Ashgabat that can be directed to services for its citizens may prevent the public unrest that gave Moscow an opening to intervene, and Turkmen leader Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow may not need much convincing in this regard.

But it may serve Ashgabat well to ask Washington for a blanket sanctions exemption for all project principals and suppliers, and any government officials in the mix, to make it clear who bears responsibility if the project again fails to launch. If this happens, it will be a shabby way to treat ally India, and in Pakistan it will be interpreted as U.S. revenge against the country for supporting the Taliban.

The “push” of increased regional influence for Moscow and the “pull” of clean energy for ally India will hopefully make Washington green-light (or get out of the way of) the long-delayed project.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Last Days of the Covidian Cult

By CJ Hopkins | Consent Factory | January 18, 2022

This isn’t going to be pretty, folks. The downfall of a death cult rarely is. There is going to be wailing and gnashing of teeth, incoherent fanatical jabbering, mass deleting of embarrassing tweets. There’s going to be a veritable tsunami of desperate rationalizing, strenuous denying, shameless blame-shifting, and other forms of ass-covering, as suddenly former Covidian Cult members make a last-minute break for the jungle before the fully-vaxxed-and-boosted “Safe and Effective Kool-Aid” servers get to them.

Yes, that’s right, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, the official Covid narrative is finally falling apart, or is being hastily disassembled, or historically revised, right before our eyes. The “experts” and “authorities” are finally acknowledging that the “Covid deaths” and “hospitalization” statistics are artificially inflated and totally unreliable (which they have been from the very beginning), and they are admitting that their miracle “vaccines” don’t work (unless you change the definition of the word “vaccine”), and that they have killed a few people, or maybe more than a few people, and that lockdowns were probably “a serious mistake.”

I am not going to bother with further citations. You can surf the Internet as well as I can. The point is, the “Apocalyptic Pandemic” PSYOP has reached its expiration date. After almost two years of mass hysteria over a virus that causes mild-to-moderate common-cold or flu-like symptoms (or absolutely no symptoms whatsoever) in about 95% of the infected and the overall infection fatality rate of which is approximately 0.1% to 0.5%, people’s nerves are shot. We are all exhausted. Even the Covidian cultists are exhausted. And they are starting to abandon the cult en masse.

It was always mostly just a matter of time. As Klaus Schwab said, “the pandemic represent[ed] a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world.”

It isn’t over, but that window is closing, and our world has not been “reimagined” and “reset,” not irrevocably, not just yet. Clearly, GloboCap underestimated the potential resistance to the Great Reset, and the time it would take to crush that resistance. And now the clock is running down, and the resistance isn’t crushed … on the contrary, it is growing. And there is nothing GloboCap can do to stop it, other than go openly totalitarian, which it can’t, as that would be suicidal. As I noted in a recent column:

“New Normal totalitarianism — and any global-capitalist form of totalitarianism — cannot display itself as totalitarianism, or even authoritarianism. It cannot acknowledge its political nature. In order to exist, it must not exist. Above all, it must erase its violence (the violence that all politics ultimately comes down to) and appear to us as an essentially beneficent response to a legitimate ‘global health crisis’ …”

The simulated “global health crisis” is, for all intents and purposes, over. Which means that GloboCap has screwed the pooch. The thing is, if you intend to keep the masses whipped up into a mindless frenzy of anus-puckering paranoia over an “apocalyptic global pandemic,” at some point, you have to produce an actual apocalyptic global pandemic. Faked statistics and propaganda will carry you for a while, but eventually people are going to need to experience something at least resembling an actual devastating worldwide plague, in reality, not just on their phones and TVs.

Also, GloboCap seriously overplayed their hand with the miracle “vaccines.” Covidian cultists really believed that the “vaccines” would protect them from infection. Epidemiology experts like Rachel Maddow assured them that they would:

“Now we know that the vaccines work well enough that the virus stops with every vaccinated person,” Maddow said on her show the evening of March 29, 2021. “A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus, the virus does not infect them, the virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else,” she added with a shrug. “It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people.”

And now they are all sick with … well, a cold, basically, or are “asymptomatically infected,” or whatever. And they are looking at a future in which they will have to submit to “vaccinations” and “boosters” every three or four months to keep their “compliance certificates” current, in order to be allowed to hold a job, attend a school, or eat at a restaurant, which, OK, hardcore cultists are fine with, but there are millions of people who have been complying, not because they are delusional fanatics who would wrap their children’s heads in cellophane if Anthony Fauci ordered them to, but purely out of “solidarity,” or convenience, or herd instinct, or … you know, cowardice.

Many of these people (i.e., the non-fanatics) are starting to suspect that maybe what we “tin-foil-hat-wearing, Covid-denying, anti-vax, conspiracy-theorist extremists” have been telling them for the past 22 months might not be as crazy as they originally thought. They are back-pedaling, rationalizing, revising history, and just making up all kinds of self-serving bullshit, like how we are now in “a post-vaccine world,” or how “the Science has changed,” or how “Omicron is different,” in order to avoid being forced to admit that they’re the victims of a GloboCap PSYOP and the worldwide mass hysteria it has generated.

Which … fine, let them tell themselves whatever they need to for the sake of their vanity, or their reputations as investigative journalists, celebrity leftists, or Twitter revolutionaries. If you think these “recovering” Covidian Cult members are ever going to publicly acknowledge all the damage they have done to society, and to people and their families, since March 2020, much less apologize for all the abuse they heaped onto those of us who have been reporting the facts … well, they’re not. They are going to spin, equivocate, rationalize, and lie through their teeth, whatever it takes to convince themselves and their audience that, when the shit hit the fan, they didn’t click heels and go full “Good German.”

Give these people hell if you need to. I feel just as angry and betrayed as you do. But let’s not lose sight of the ultimate stakes here. Yes, the official narrative is finally crumbling, and the Covidian Cult is starting to implode, but that does not mean that this fight is over. GloboCap and their puppets in government are not going to cancel the whole “New Normal” program, pretend the last two years never happened, and gracefully retreat to their lavish bunkers in New Zealand and their mega-yachts.

Totalitarian movements and death cults do not typically go down gracefully. They usually go down in a gratuitous orgy of wanton, nihilistic violence as the cult or movement desperately attempts to maintain its hold over its wavering members and defend itself from encroaching reality. And that is where we are at the moment … or where we are going to be very shortly.

Cities, states, and countries around the world are pushing ahead with implementing the New Normal biosecurity society, despite the fact that there is no longer any plausible justification for it. Austria is going ahead with forced “vaccination.” Germany is preparing to do the sameFrance is rolling out a national segregation system to punish “the Unvaccinated.” Greece is fining “unvaccinated” pensionersAustralia is operating “quarantine camps.” Scotland. Italy. Spain. The Netherlands. New York City. San Francisco. Toronto. The list goes on, and on, and on.

I don’t know what is going to happen. I’m not an oracle. I’m just a satirist. But we are getting dangerously close to the point where GloboCap will need to go full-blown fascist if they want to finish what they started. If that happens, things are going to get very ugly. I know, things are already ugly, but I’m talking a whole different kind of ugly. Think Jonestown, or Hitler’s final days in the bunker, or the last few months of the Manson Family.

That is what happens to totalitarian movements and death cults once the spell is broken and their official narratives fall apart. When they go down, they try to take the whole world with them. I don’t know about you, but I’m hoping we can avoid that. From what I have heard and read, it isn’t much fun.


January 19, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , | 2 Comments

New data on vaccine efficacy from scotland and more evidence on bayesian datacrime…

… and more bad news for “the experts”

el gato malo – bad cattitude – january 19, 2022

it’s becoming a bit like beating a dead horse to keep highlighting more and more data that shows the failure of the vaccines to act as promised, but this one highlights something else i was discussing recently and provides a tangible example of the math and definitional manipulation that’s going on.

so let’s take a quick spin:

(all data from HERE)

first, cases:

as is becoming endlessly apparent and replicable, “unvaxxed” is outperforming every other category.

vaccines are not stopping spread, they are most likely (subject to the limitations of non randomized society scale data) accelerating it.

this becomes readily apparent when we calculate risk ratios. (incidence of group divided by incidence in unvaxxed control, so any number >1 = more risk)

risk in the double vaxxed is well over twice as high as in the unvaxxed. boosters seem to help, but still cannot get you back to baseline and i want to emphasize the word “seem” here because i think this data is misleading and is vastly overstating booster efficacy and likely making double vaxxed look worse than it is. (more in a minute)

we can also look at hospitalization:

what’s most interesting here is that it seems like there was some vaccine efficacy against hospitalization but that it inverted as 2022 began.

we can see the risk ratio on 2 doses rise sharply from 0.76 (24% VE) to 1.39 (-39% VE). this is an 82% jump in risk ratio and it was durable into the following week. i have emphasized this in red.

boosters seem effective (but there’s that word again) but even this seeming efficacy is rapidly dropping and risk ratio is up from 0.15 in week 3 dec to 0.38 in week 2 jan, a 150% change.

i see 2 likely explanations here and they are not mutually exclusive:

  1. this is omicron, the OAS/vaccine (Original Antigenic Sin) evading variant showing up and taking over. as it does, vaccine efficacy drops like a rock because you are antigenically imprinted for the wrong spike proteins. what had been a help becomes actual harm because a bad response is worse for you than making one up on the fly and omicron is the optimized output of selection by leaky vaccine for vaccine evasion and superspread. we’re now into OAS territory, just as certain gatos told you we would be
  2. this is bad math and bad definitions being used to hide properties of these vaccines and shift risk. defining as “3 doses” only those 2 weeks after their 3rd jab is bayesian datacrime, especially when the jab itself is known to cause ~2 weeks of immunosuppression and higher risk. the jab itself generates a high risk cohort but then attributes that risk to the cohort before it. it’s like blaming getting hit by a car crossing the street on having stayed on the sidewalk, and the effects can be gigantic. you can hide ANYTHING in that. it’s bad definitions leading to bad math and it’s been widespread practice since pfizer ginned it up to slant their trials.

you can get a full walk through on this issue and the various forms in which is can manifest here:

bayesian datacrime: defining vaccine efficacy into existence

the examples linked about lay it out clearly: you can make a zero efficacy vaxx look like it works and this works even better if it causes a rise in risk in the 2 week period you lump into the prior group.

thus, boosters make “full vaxxed” look bad. fully vaxxed made unvaxxed look bad. so much of what has been claimed to be vaccine efficacy is just a mathematic rig job from poorly chosen definitions and there is simply no way that that was an accident.

pfizer does not make mistakes like that or like vaxxing the whole control group right when vaxx fade started to get bad. they make choices and those choices have been aided and abetted by regulators and public health agencies.

they all signed off on and adopted these misleading definitions and have been providing information and making policy based upon them.

i’m willing to believe that the CDC was too inept to spot this. it’s sad, but it’s plausible.

but the NIH should have seen it and the FDA not only should have spotted it instantly but should have disallowed a trial using such a shady tactic. it’s pure manipulation.

they both let it go because they were both involved. NIH licensed the IP for the vaccine payload to moderna. former FDA head gottlieb stepped down mid-term to join the pfizer board of directors.

this is what full blown regulatory capture looks like… Full article

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

The Covid narrative is falling apart, piece by piece

The momentum feels to me like it is accelerating…

By Steve Kirsch | January 19, 2022

Some narrative pieces have been falling apart were recently brought to my attention.

Here are the four new truths:

  1. The vaccines make you more likely to get COVID: It was supposed to make things better, but we’re basically mandating you get a shot that makes you more likely to get infected. That is totally insane, but that’s what we are doing. Check out the graphs here. No age confounding this time: UK Government Data proves the Covid-19 Vaccines DOUBLE your chances of catching Covid-19.
  2. The vaccines aren’t safe: I’m now hearing a lot from prominent formerly pro-vax docs that they are turning on the vaccine. This is great news. Nobody is going public yet, but they are all pissed and realize they have been misled. It will not be pretty. This is of course great news.
  3. Cloth masks don’t work: The CDC finally admits that cloth masks that they said worked before and that everyone wore (including Rochelle Walensky) don’t actually work. The other mask types don’t work either, but it will take them longer to figure out the obvious. P100 respirators do work but only a small percentage of people know that. I can’t wait to see Rochelle Walensky wear a P100 respirator; after all, she should be modelling best practices.
  4. Kids shouldn’t have boosters shots: Top WHO scientist finally admits that kids shouldn’t get boosted!!!! Yet the US colleges and universities aren’t going to back off. Someone is very wrong here and for once it isn’t the WHO.

Here are some older truths that should have been realized by now, but are still going on:

  1. Remdesivir is killing patients, not saving them: RDV is standard operating procedure in the US, but everyone I talk to says it doesn’t work and is much more likely to kill patients than save them. Doctors are forced to give it by hospital policy.
  2. Social distancing doesn’t work: The MIT study came out in April, 2021 that showed social distancing makes no difference. 6 feet or 60 feet made no difference. People still haven’t figured this out.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 3 Comments

Prof Dr. Michael Palmer PHD “MRNA Injections Cause Injury Comparable To Radiation Damage”

JVWing | December 31, 2021

The lipid nanoparticals used as the delivery system for mRNA are toxic. These are cataonic, so positively charged. When the mRNA espcapes from the nano partical it disrupts the mytochondrien and causes damage similar to ionising radiation damage to the cells.

January 19, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | | Leave a comment