Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Virginia AG issues Opinion that public universities lack authority to demand COVID vaccinations of students

By Merly Nass, MD | January 28, 2022

Hallelujah! There are many state entities that are acting as if they have authorities which were never granted to them. They simply usurped the authority and hoped no one would burst their expanding bubble. Well, the AG in this newly-Republican state told the public universities to go pound sand.

Why does anyone think it is okay to force Americans, especially children, to receive experimental inoculations, whenever they say so? It is against the law to force people into an experiment. It is against the law to withhold informed consent. Why do so many bigwigs, like college presidents, think that is okay?

Here is the 3 page Virginia AG’s opinion:

https://files.constantcontact.com/d3e83e11901/e247bd43-59d8-4738-9c1f-5862d916c981.pdf

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | 1 Comment

Nearly 35,000 Reports of COVID Vaccine Injuries Among 5- to 17-Year-Olds, CDC Data Show

By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | January 28, 2022

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,071,856 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 21, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 22,607 reports of deaths — an increase of 414 over the previous week — and 178,994 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 4,130 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 740,000 adverse events, including 10,316 deaths and 67,496 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Jan. 21, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 10,316 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 21, 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 532.4 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of Jan. 21, including 312 million doses of Pfizer, 202 million doses of Moderna and 19 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 21, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old girl (VAERS I.D. 1975356) from Minnesota who died 11 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when she was found unresponsive by her mother. An autopsy is pending.

  • 14 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).
  • 24 reports of blood clotting disorders.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 21, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent deaths involve a 13-year-old male (VAERS I.D. 2042005) from an unidentified state who died from a sudden heart attack seven months after receiving his second dose of Moderna, and a 17-year-old female from an unidentified state (VAERS I.D. 2039111) who died after receiving her first dose of Moderna. Medical information was limited and it is unknown if an autopsy was performed in either case.

  • 68 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 609 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 597 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.
  • 154 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to Jan. 21, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

Unvaccinated man denied heart transplant by Boston hospital

DJ Ferguson, 31, was removed from the top of a heart transplant at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital because he was not vaccinated against COVID.

Ferguson on Tuesday received a mechanical heart pump — called a left ventricular assist device — that should keep him alive for up to five years, but he won’t have much of a life, his father said.

According to ABC News, Ferguson, a father of two children with another baby on the way, didn’t want the vaccine because he feared it would complicate his heart condition. He also said getting vaccinated would go against his basic principles.

“The organs are scarce, we are not going to distribute them to someone who has a poor chance of living when others who are vaccinated have a better chance post-surgery of surviving,” Dr. Arthur Caplan, who runs Medical Ethics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine told MassLive.

Despite the open-heart surgery, Ferguson still needs a transplant due to his rapid deterioration, Ferguson’s parents told “Tucker Carlson Tonight” on Wednesday.

COVID vaccine regime for children under age 4 will include 3 doses, Fauci says

White House chief medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci on Wednesday said the COVID vaccine regime for kids younger than 4 years old will likely include three doses when it’s authorized because two shots did not induce an adequate immune response in 2- to 4-year-olds in Pfizer’s clinical trials.

“Dose and regimen for children 6 months to 24 months worked well, but it turned out the other group from 24 months to 4 years did not yet reach the level of non-inferiority, so the studies are continued,” Fauci said, referencing effectiveness standard comparison to adults.

Fauci said he hopes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will authorize the Pfizer and BioNTech COVID vaccine for children under 5 years old next month, although he can’t say for sure when the agency will render its decision.

Sweden decides against COVID vaccines for children 5 to 11 

Sweden won’t recommend COVID vaccines for kids under 12 years old because the benefits did not outweigh the risks, but will “constantly” reassess the situation, Reuters reported.

The Public Health Agency of Sweden said in a press release on Thursday the medical benefit for a child aged 5-11 who has received a vaccine against COVID “is currently small.”

Britta Bjorkholm, a Sweden health official, said during a news conference, “With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don’t see any clear benefit with vaccinating them.”

Karin Tegmark Wisell, director-general of the Public Health Agency of Sweden, said updated guidance would be provided prior to the fall term.

COVID vaccines causing miscarriages, cancer, neurological disorders among Military

In a hearing organized this week by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), attorney Thomas Renz told a panel of experts data provided to him by three whistleblowers show COVID vaccines are causing catastrophic harm to members of the U.S. military while not preventing them from getting the virus.

Renz summarized data obtained from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database — the military’s longstanding epidemiological database of service members.

The data show miscarriages and cancer increased 300% in 2021 over the previous five-year average. Neurological disorders increased 1000% in 2021 over the past five-year average, increasing from 82,000 to 863,000 in one year.

“Our soldiers are being experimented on, injured and sometimes possibly killed,” Renz said.

Following Renz’s presentation, attorney Leigh Dundas reported evidence of the DOD doctoring data in DMED to conceal cases of myocarditis in service members vaccinated for COVID.

OSHA withdraws COVID vaccine mandate

The U.S. Department of Labor this week announced it is withdrawing the Biden administration’s COVID vaccine-or-test mandate for large employers.

In pulling the rule, the department said it recognized the Emergency Temporary Standard could not be revived after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked it earlier this month and will plan instead to set a permanent standard for the vaccine mandate, according to a notice provided to the court by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

The Labor Department’s decision to withdraw the rule means pending legal proceedings in the 6th Circuit will be dropped.

OSHA could move a version of the vaccine-or-test rule through its rule-making process, but would still likely face legal challenges.

Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | War Crimes | | Leave a comment

Most authors of clinical trials published in JAMA and NEJM in 2017 failed to disclose industry payments

Authors of papers published in JAMA and NEJMreceived millions in undisclosed payments in 2017, an analysis finds.

By Natalia Mesa – THE SCIENTIST – January 24, 2022

A new analysis finds that 81 percent of authors whose work appeared in [two of the world’s most prestigious medical journals–SB] the Journal of American Medical Association and the New England Journal of Medicine in 2017 failed to disclose conflicts of interest in the form of industry payments.

The analysis reviewed 31 clinical trial reports from each of the two journals that were published in 2017 and identified 118 authors who, in total, received $7.48 million dollars in industry payments. The payment information came from Open Payments, a US government website where drug and device makers must report payments to physicians and health care providers. The analysis was posted as a preprint on medRxiv on January 1 and has not yet been peer-reviewed.

Of the 118 authors on the included papers, only a dozen did not receive any payments, according to the preprint. Of the 106 researchers who received payments, the payments ranged from as little as $6.36 to as much as $1.49 million. Researchers received payments for travel, food, speaking, and consulting services, among other things, STAT News reports. The 23 researchers that received the largest payments received a total of $6.32 million, of which $3 million was undisclosed.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends that researchers disclose payments they received in the three years prior to submitting a study for publication, so the analysis included all payments made to researchers between 2014 and 2017.

When publishing in ICMJE member journals, which includes JAMA and NEJM, researchers are required to follow the disclosure guidelines promoted by the ICMJE—which include disclosing payments. But this expectation was not met by many of the authors of the papers included in the analysis. According to STAT, the authors of the preprint say that their results suggest voluntary disclosure may not be adequate for avoiding financial conflicts or ensuring transparency.

“I’m not surprised, but really, I’m saddened and disappointed,” says Brian Piper, a neuroscientist and medical ethicist at the Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, and one of the authors of the preprint, to STAT. “These are high-impact and highly influential journals. For many Americans, these are the centerpieces of evidence-based medicine. Many physicians subscribe to them. Many journalists turn to them for information.”

An NEJM statement to STAT says that the journal “follows the disclosure rules set by the ICMJE. The editors do review all of the more than 5,000 disclosure forms received each year but do not have access to primary records on which the information entered in the forms may be based. We expect the disclosure forms submitted by authors to be accurate and complete.”

JAMA has not yet responded to a request for comment on the preprint, STAT reports. 

According to STAT, Piper notes that disclosures that continue to rely on individuals may be a failed approach. Instead, he suggests that journals review Open Payments and provide a link showing payments made to authors.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | 1 Comment

Digital IDs could easily turn into a dystopian social credit system

By Rachel Marsden | RT | January 28, 2022

The idea of a digital identity and wallet for citizens residing within the European Union may date back to 2020, but pandemic-era restrictions have shown the extent to which governments can shut off access to everyday life, should they so choose – and with ever-changing criteria that can be difficult to appeal when something goes wrong. That’s a frightening prospect when considering how much of one’s life the supranational European government wants to connect to a new system that it’s set to roll out.

As the Covid-19 pandemic shot around the world, the first public utterances of a Europe-wide digital identity system started emerging from EU think tanks and officials. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a speech in September 2020 that “the Commission will soon propose a secure European e-identity. One that we trust and that any citizen can use anywhere in Europe to do anything from paying your taxes to renting a bicycle. A technology where we can control ourselves what data and how data is used.”

At the time, anyone suggesting that one day EU member countries would implement systems of QR codes for access to everyday venues, contingent on a government-dictated number of injections and linked to a larger EU passport system – on which travel around the bloc would be dependent – would have been dismissed as a conspiracy theorist.

So, it’s hardly difficult to see how the QR code system ushered into place due to government health mandates now has the potential to transform into something else more lasting, widespread, and possibly nefarious.

Already, anyone here in France who has logged into the government services website to retrieve their “vaccine mandate” QR code has noticed how that account is already linked with all sorts of data unrelated to health. One can log in using a tax account number that’s normally reserved for accessing your tax returns and assessments, or with a government-approved facial recognition application that associates your face with your pre-existing national ID.

But what if there’s a glitch or a bug? Or someone steals your ID? We’ve already seen during the pandemic what can happen when the government’s system gets overwhelmed by a pre-long-weekend rush to validate and download QR codes, and those with booked flights are forced to cancel or postpone their plans because they lack a scannable form of the pass. Speaking of which, how about the poor folks whose smartphone simply malfunctions or runs out of battery juice at the moment of boarding or venue access?

Now imagine if such a QR code digital ID system is expanded, as the EU plans to do, to include access to university applications, hotel check-ins, car rentals, bank account opening and access, public services, or bank loan applications. While many of these already have digital components, they’re piecemeal, decentralized, and not linked to a single government-run entity. When factoring in that cybersecurity researchers have reported that “89% of EU government websites” employ trackers meant to “associate web activity with the identities of real people,” it’s not a stretch to imagine how your online activity profile could be used – in addition to your financial documents – to approve or deny your bank loan application from your digital ID.

And what happens when things go really wrong in ways that many of us still can’t even imagine? For instance, according to a report published this month by the EU’s own Agency for Cybersecurity, “foolproof” digital IDs, even those that use facial recognition, are rife with susceptibilities that include photo attacks, video of user replay attacks, 3D mask attacks, and deepfake attacks.

Yet another report published by the same agency just two days earlier evokes the need for decentralizing such IDs.

It’s a tacit admission that perhaps governments – which constantly whine about being susceptible to cyberattacks by both state and rogue actors – aren’t really best placed to be encouraging citizens to upload and entrust as much of their life as possible to them under the guise of convenience and so-called ‘security’.

For now, it’s all optional, or so we’re told. Completely voluntary and opt-in. Right – and we’ve already seen exactly how that kind of pledge has panned out amid the pandemic. There is no ‘obligation’ here in France to possess a valid QR code, for example, because restaurants, gyms, your chosen profession, trains, and planes are all ‘optional’.

Is there any doubt that when the EU decides to go full throttle to on-board control over your entire life, you’ll then be fully dependent on their competence or lack thereof? The most incompetent panopticon in human history seems keen to welcome us all aboard a voyage into dystopia.

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

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Australian state of Victoria demands removal of online police body cam footage

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 28, 2022

Rebel News journalist Avi Yemini is having to defend himself after deciding not to remove an online video the police in Australia’s state of Victoria want taken down.

Yemini revealed that he had a letter, signed by a Victoria Police Crime Squad detective sergeant, sent to his home, threatening that unless he complied and deleted the video, he could end up serving two years in prison.

The journalist published photos of the letter, which notified him of committing an “apparent” breach of the Surveillance Devices Act.

The letter asserts that information protected under this act appeared in a video Yemini uploaded to his YouTube channel in September, under the title, “Police bodycam proves the mainstream media is HIDING the truth.”

The police letter further states that knowingly publishing information obtained from police bodycams is an offense, and demands that he immediately remove the video from all public forums, or face charges.

If found guilty, Yemini could be sent to prison for two years maximum, be forced to pay a fine, defined as “240 penalty units maximum” – or both.

But Yemini, who says he has previously been arrested, assaulted, and intimidated by the police for his work, has decided to fight back, as another letter, this one penned by his legal representative, shows. It reads that under a subsection of the act the police refer to as being violated, the footage used in the report was already in the public domain.

“In a free country, that would be the end of it. In fact, in a genuinely free country, I never would have received that threat letter from the police in the first place,” Yemini writes.

But the journalist doesn’t expect this outcome, and is instead ready to engage in a legal battle with the Victoria police, whom he says have “unlimited resources to bully anyone who doesn’t submit to them.”

“We’ve never lost a case yet, and I’ve never removed a story, even when a gangland lawyer tried to sue me. With your help, I promise not to cower in 2022 either,” Yemini concludes.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , | 3 Comments

Reuters has finally dropped the misleading ‘Houthi rebels’ narrative

By Omar Ahmed | MEMO | January 28, 2022

After several years in being at the forefront of Western mainstream media’s coverage of the war on Yemen, describing it as being between the Saudi-led coalition and the “Iranian-backed Houthi rebels”, the news agency Reuters appears to have stopped using this phrase, and even ceased referring to the Houthis as “rebels” altogether.

With the exception of some image captions, the last time the news agency used the phrase in a body of text was as recent as a month ago, with subsequent articles now referring to the group as the Iran-aligned “Houthi movement“(formally the Ansar Allah). Though they have on occasion previously referred to the group as such, throughout the course of the seven-year war the dominant narrative has been that of troublesome “rebels”. Reuters, of course, is not alone in this regard as a plethora of news sites and agencies continue with this slant, including the Associated Press. Leading news services such as Reuters influence other news organisations and therefore how we perceive events, in effect acting as “wholesale news providers”.

While this slight editorial amendment may not seem like that much of a big deal, for those of us who have been monitoring the developments of the conflict over the years, including its coverage in the media, this is quite a significant step forward in how members of the international community perceive and understand the war in Yemen. Crucially, this also could be a nod towards the eventual recognition of the Houthi-led National Salvation Government (NSG), which has been the de facto revolutionary government for most of the densely populated north of the country since it was established in 2016.

The shift away from the framing of the Ansar Allah movement as a rag-tag bunch of rebels is important, because contrary to what has often been stated, the conflict wasn’t sparked by the mere seizing of the capital Sanaa by Houthi militiamen alone in 2014. They had the support of most of Yemen’s armed forces – once long-time former foes following six round of wars since 2004 when the Houthis were indeed a rebel faction. Many of these armed forces were loyalists to the late President Ali Abdullah Saleh and have remained in this alliance despite Saleh’s demise at the hands of Houthis over attempts to return to the Saudi fold.

This event, the fall of Sanaa, is referred locally and popularly at least in the north, as the September 21 Revolution and itself was ignited by the failures of the so-called Gulf Initiative whereby President Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi was to serve as an interim leader for two years (which was extended to the present after he won an uncontested election), and the fateful decision by Hadi to cut fuel subsidies, which the Houthis and other oppositionists united against in mass protests.

This was actually the region’s sole genuine “revolution” in so far as post-Arab Spring political upheavals are concerned, despite being incomplete and not supported in the south, which has its own complex history and political aspirations. The potent mix of military support and alliances with the majority faction of political elites of the old order belonging to Saleh’s former ruling General People’s Congress (GPC) party has helped explain and maintain the Houthis’ hold on power over the capital and elsewhere in the north, with most of the media attention focused on an exaggerated role of Iran, which recognises and supports the NSG authorities.

However the fact that Yemeni armed forces are fighting against the Saudi-led coalition and its disparate mercenary and militia forces on the ground is more often than not overlooked or omitted from reports by press agencies who tend to simplify the conflict as being one between the Saudi-led coalition – which was called upon by the Saudi-based, exiled President Hadi – against an Iranian-backed rebel group. While it could be that the average consumer of these reports are not looking for in-depth, political analysis, which of course can be found elsewhere, it certainly doesn’t help in our comprehension of who is who, and therefore obscures the political reality and helps prolong the conflict.

The obfuscation caused by painting the joint military and Houthi “popular committees” forces as mere “Houthi rebels” in the mainstream media is an issue I have raised and have written about on several occasions since writing for MEMO and it is promising to finally see this being corrected.

What really caught my attention recently on this change, was a Reuters explainer piece on the war in Yemen, which has also been republished on the MEMO site. It states: “In late 2014, the Houthis seized Sana’a with help from pro-Saleh army units, initially forcing Hadi to share power, then arresting him in early 2015”, which as far as I’m aware is the perhaps the closest the agency has come to acknowledging the Yemeni military’s role in the revolution.

It has only been a month since Reuters has dropped the “Houthi rebels” trope and is still early days, but there is a chance that discontinuing this unhelpful and inaccurate narrative will be replicated in other news sites and international organisations. The recent retaliatory attacks against coalition partner the UAE – an important global hub, by Yemen’s Houthi-aligned armed forces, has brought the world’s attention back onto the movement and their increasingly sophisticated military capabilities. They are clearly being taken more seriously, with further warnings that the Dubai Expo could be targeted if the Emiratis continue their war efforts against Yemen, which includes occupying Socotra and backing the separatist Southern Transitional Council (STC). Strategically and a major escalation for the Houthis, the UAE is also supporting the formidable Giants Brigade forces who have been undermining the Houthi advance onto Marib city, the last pro-Hadi stronghold in the north.

This all contributes to the renewed interest in the Houthis, who they are and where they stand in this war. As the NSG wields the most power and authority in the country, and most of the armed forces are fighting with the Houthis against foreign aggressors amid continued war crimes and a humanitarian crisis, it becomes more imperative than ever for the world to be more informed and at least get a better idea of the conflict. Moving on from the idea that this is a war against a group of rebels is a start in the right direction, albeit long overdue.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , | 4 Comments

Blinken’s response to Russia NATO demand is frankly disturbing

By Marcus Stanley | Responsible Statecraft | January 27, 2022

Yesterday the U.S. State Department submitted written responses to Russian negotiating positions in the ongoing U.S.-Russia negotiations over the Ukraine crisis. The exact text and details of the responses are confidential. However, Secretary of State Blinken’s statement regarding the content of the U.S. response is disturbing. At a press briefing, Blinken reaffirmed the U.S. refusal to engage with the core Russian position that the Ukraine should not be permitted to enter NATO, adding that in the written response “we make clear that there are core principles that we are committed to uphold and defend — including Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right of states to choose their own security arrangements and alliances.”

This is problematic from several perspectives. At the most basic level, it indicates that the U.S. is refusing to seek compromise regarding what Russia believes to be a core national security interest, namely that the U.S. should not make an alliance commitment to the military defense of Ukraine. Russia views Ukraine as a strategically critical nation due to its location directly on the Russian border and deep historical and cultural ties to Eastern Ukraine.

As Secretary Blinken must understand, NATO membership is not a decision made by Ukraine alone, and his claim that NATO membership is simply a matter of the Ukraine’s “right to choose” its own security arrangements is deeply misleading. NATO membership involves a two-way commitment, not simply the free choices of the entering member. Current alliance members must commit to mutual defense of the new member. Since the U.S. has by far the largest and most effective military forces in NATO, the most vital element of NATO membership is the American commitment to defend member borders. So Russia’s negotiating position is directed at a potential American commitment to defend Ukraine. Rather than engage honestly with the question of whether such an American military commitment really makes sense, Blinken deflects and reframes it as a matter of “core principles” around Ukraine’s choices and sovereignty.

In the long term, this indicates an unwillingness to grapple with the question of how to align American military commitments and resources with our long-term strategic interests, and whether Ukraine represents a core interest which justifies the placement of many tens or even hundreds of thousands of new troops in Europe and risking a major war with another nuclear power.

More importantly in the short term, it digs the U.S. into a position “on principle” that no compromise whatsoever is available on the critical question of Ukrainian membership in NATO. This is particularly confusing because the Biden Administration has been clear that it is currently unwilling to directly commit the U.S. military to the defense of Ukraine – which is precisely what would be immediately required if Ukraine became a NATO member. A credible defense for Ukraine would require a massive increase in U.S. forces in Europe, possibly approaching Cold War level ground and air forces. It is hard to see any domestic appetite for expending this level of resources, and internationally an immediate beneficiary would be China.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | 1 Comment

One third of Biden’s Cabinet are Jewish Zionists

By Gideon Polya | Dissident Voice | January 27, 2022

The US became increasingly Zionist subverted in the 1960s after Apartheid Israel gained nuclear weapons and after the assassinations of JFK and Robert Kennedy. Support for Apartheid Israel (and hence for  the repugnant crime of Apartheid) is now a pillar of US politics, with anti-racist critics of Israeli Apartheid ferociously attacked, side-lined, and falsely defamed  as anti-Semitic. However Zionist control and hubris are now blatant: 32 percent or about one third of President Joe Biden’s Cabinet are Jewish Zionists and the remainder are moderate Christian Zionists.

(a). Jewish Americans are an astonishing 17-fold over-represented in the Biden Cabinet. Jewish Americans total 6.4 million people, or  1.9% of the total US population of 333 million. However Jews represent 8 of the 25 people in President Joe Biden’s Cabinet (including Joe Biden himself) or 32% of the Cabinet. If we consider people who are Jewish or have Jewish spouses we must add Kamala Harris to get 9 out of 25 or 36% of the Cabinet. Thus Jews are over-represented in the Biden Cabinet by an astonishing factor of 32%/1.9% = 16.8-fold. The sine qua non of US politics is fervent support for theism, America first, neoliberalism and Apartheid Israel (and therefore for Apartheid) — accordingly the non-Jewish 68% of the Biden Cabinet fervently support Apartheid Israel, albeit as moderate Christian Zionists as opposed to the ferocious, Biblical literalist, and genocidal evangelical Christian Zionists who support Trump. If we realistically assume that 50% of Jewish Americans are anti-racist and reject the genocidal racism of Zionism and Israeli Apartheid, then Zionist Jewish Americans are 34-fold over-represented in the Biden Cabinet.

(b). African Americans are about 2-fold  over-represented in the Biden Cabinet. African Americans total 46,936,733 or 14.2% of the total US population, but comprise  6 out of 25 or 24% of the Biden Cabinet. Thus African Americans are over-represented in the Biden Cabinet by a  factor of 24%/14.2% = 1.7-fold.

(c).  Hispanic and Latino Americans are equitably represented in the Biden Cabinet. Hispanic and Latino Americans total 65.3 million or 19.5% of the overall US population, but comprise 4 out of 25 or 16% of the Biden Cabinet. Thus Hispanic/Latino Americans are under-represented in the Biden Cabinet by an unexceptionally modest degree of 16%/19.5% = 0.8-fold i.e. their representation in the Biden Cabinet is a modest 0.8 times less than expected.

(d). Asian Americans are equitably represented in the Biden Cabinet.  Asian Americans (mainly  Chinese, Indian, and Filipino Americans but also notably  including  Korean, Vietnamese, Afghan, Arab and Japanese Americans) total 24 million or 7.2% of the US population, but comprise 2 out of 25 or 8% of the Biden Cabinet. Thus Asian Americans are over-represented in the Biden Cabinet by an unexceptionally modest factor of 8%/7.2% = 1.1-fold. Chinese, Indian, and Filipino Americans total 5 million, 4.3 million, and 4 million people, respectively, or 1.5%, 1.3% and  1.2% of the total US population.

(e). Indigenous Americans are equitably represented in the Biden Cabinet. Indigenous Americans total 9,666,058 or 2.9% of the total US population, but comprise 1 out of 25 or 4% of the Biden Cabinet. Thus Indigenes are over-represented in the Biden Cabinet by a modest factor of 4%/2.9% = 1.4-fold (the lowest figure possible short of having no Indigenous people in the Biden Cabinet).

(f). Non-Jewish and non-Latino White Americans are 2.5-fold under-represented in the Biden Cabinet. Thus from the 2020 US Census, 61.6%, or 204,277,273 people, were White alone, and 71.0%, or 235,411,507 people, were White alone or combined with another race. Non-Latino White Americans totalled roughly 191,697,647, or 57.8%. White Latino Americans totalled about 12,579,626, or 3.8% of the population. Non-Jewish and non-Latino White Americans total 191,697, 647 – 6,400,000 = 185,297,647  or 55.6% of the US population, but comprise only 6 out of 25 or 24% of the Biden Cabinet. Thus non-Jewish and non-Latino White Americans are substantially under-represented in the Biden Cabinet by a significant degree of  24%/55.6% = 0.4 fold i.e. their representation in the Biden Cabinet is 0.4 times less than their “fair share.” However the even more remarkable thing about these 6 non-Jewish and non-Latino White members of the Biden Cabinet is that they are all Catholics. Of the 17 non-Jewish members of the Biden Cabinet all but 5 (i.e. 12) are Catholics.

(g). Female Americans are slightly under-represented in the Biden Cabinet by a factor  of 0.9.  Thus females represent 50.5% of the American population, but comprise 11 out of 25 or 44% of the Biden Cabinet. Women are thus slightly under-represented in the Biden Cabinet by a factor of 44%/50.5% = 0.9.

(h). Catholic Americans are 3-fold over-represented in the Biden Cabinet. The US has the world’s largest Christian population. About 48.9% of Americans are Protestants, 23.0% are Catholics, and 1.8% are Mormons. In 2016, 74% of Americans identified as Christians while 18% claimed no religious affiliation. However, all (100%) of the 6 non-Jewish and non-Latino White members of the Biden Cabinet are Catholics. Of the 17 non-Jewish members of the Biden Cabinet, 12 (71%) are Catholics, i.e. while Catholics are 23.0% of the US population they are 71% of the non-Jewish members of the Biden Cabinet, and thus are disproportionately over-represented by a factor of 71%/23% = 3.1-fold.

(i). Protestant Americans are 2–fold under-represented in the Biden Cabinet. While Protestants are  48.9% of the US population, a maximum of only 6 out of 25 (24%) of the members of the Biden Cabinet are Protestants i.e. they are 48.9%/24% = 2.0-fold under-represented in the Biden Cabinet.

(j). Republicans, Pentecostal Christians (Evangelical Christians), and Racist Religious Right Republicans (R4s) are totally absent from the Biden Cabinet.  Not surprisingly there are no Republicans in the Biden Cabinet, and despite its representational inequities, the Biden Cabinet is blessed by the absence of Biblical literalist and genocidally pro-Zionist Pentecostal Christians (Evangelical Christians), and of Racist Religious Right Republicans (R4s) in general. Biblical literalists are simply nuts.

(k). All of the members of the Biden Cabinet are fervently theist, nationalist, neoliberal, pro-market, pro-One Percenter, anti-socialist, pro-nuclear terrorism, pro-US hegemony, pro-militarism, pro-US interventionism, pro-Apartheid Israel (and hence pro-Apartheid) and pro-Zionist. To state the obvious, American politicians have to observe the sine qua non pillars of US politics of theism, capitalism, nationalism and support for Apartheid Israel (and hence for Apartheid).

America portrays itself as a “democracy” but this assertion is highly flawed because of differential representation and influence as illustrated here, neoliberal One Percenter domination, and entrenched lying by commission and omission by mass media journalist, editor, politician, academic and commentariat presstitutes. A Zionist-subverted and obscenely neoliberal US has transmuted from a one-person-one-vote democracy to a kleptocracy, plutocracy, Murdochracy, lobbyocracy, corporatocracy, and dollarocracy in which Big Money purchases people, politicians, parties, policies, votes and hence more political power and more private profit. The support for Apartheid Israel and hence for Apartheid by the non-European members of the Biden Cabinet is particularly disgusting.

This Zionist perversion and subversion of America is deadly serious because 1.7 million Americans die preventably each year from “life-style choice” and “political choice” reasons, and since 9/11 about 33 million Americans have died thus in this ongoing American Holocaust. The long-term accrual cost of the War on Terror has been about $6 trillion. About 32 million Muslims have died from violence, 5 million, or from imposed deprivation, 27 million, in 20 countries invaded by the US Alliance since the US Government’s 9/11 false flag atrocity. Thus Zionist-subverted America has committed $6 trillion to killing over 30 million Muslims abroad instead of trying to save over 30 million American lives at home. For a very detailed and documented analysis see Gideon Polya, “Zionist-subverted America: Jewish Zionists Are One Third Of The Biden Cabinet,” Countercurrents, 27 January 2022. Wake up America!

Gideon Polya taught science students at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia over 4 decades.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , | 9 Comments

Russia comments on risk of war with West

RT | January 28, 2022

With tensions running high between Russia and the US, Moscow’s top diplomat has insisted that his country does not want a full-blown conflict to break out, but also warned it will not stand aside and watch well-flagged security concerns be ignored.

Speaking to news outlets as part of a broadcast interview on Friday morning, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was asked whether fighting could break out after talks over guarantees that NATO will not expand ended in deadlock.

“If it is up to the Russian Federation, there will be no war,” he declared.“We do not want wars,” he went on, stressing, however, that officials “will not allow our interests to be brutally attacked or to be ignored either.”

According to Lavrov, Washington’s response to Moscow’s proposals is “almost a model of diplomatic decency.” However, he said that NATO’s answer to the two Russian draft documents “is so ideologized, it breathes the exclusivity of the Alliance, its special mission, its special purpose.”

Lavrov went on to add that if the US is not willing to reconsider its stance on security matters, then Moscow is equally not prepared to make any compromises on its demands. “If they insist that they won’t change their position, we won’t change our position either,” he declared.

The comments come shortly after Moscow received long-awaited answers to its requests for security guarantees, including a pledge that Ukraine will not be admitted to the bloc.

On Thursday, Lavrov said that “there has been no positive response” to Moscow’s core concerns in the document provided by the American side following weeks of talks with their counterparts.

“The main issue is our clear position on the unacceptability of further NATO expansion to the East and the deployment of highly destructive weapons that could threaten the territory of the Russian Federation,” Lavrov explained.

The Kremlin also poured scorn on the response, arguing that the requests from Moscow’s officials had not been fully taken into account by Washington and the US-led military bloc.

At the same time though, according to Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov, “there are and should always be prospects… for further dialogue.”

“But as for the substantive dialogue on the draft documents, there are issues of a different nature, but I will not get ahead of myself,” he said.

Last month, Russia handed over two draft treaties, one addressed to Washington and the other to NATO, which it says are aimed at reducing the risk of conflict on the European continent.

Moscow requested that the bloc refrains from any military activity on the territory of the former Warsaw Pact states that joined after 1997, following the fall of the Soviet Union. The US-led military bloc’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, has said it would unacceptable to create a “two tier” system that prevents it from engaging in activity with some member states.

A separate clause also demanded that Kiev’s ambitions to join the US-led bloc should not be granted. Ruling out NATO expansion closer to Russia’s borders has been a key demand from the country’s officials, with Peskov arguing that it is a question of “life or death.”

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

Big War CEOs: There’s chaos in the world and our prospects are excellent

By Eli Clifton | Responsible Statecraft | January 28, 2022

According to chief executives of the top taxpayer-funded weapons firms, their balance sheets will benefit from the U.S. engaging in great power competition with Russia and China, the recent escalations in the Yemen war, and the potential for a Russian invasion of Ukraine. But at least one CEO didn’t want to give the impression that weapons firms are simply merchants of death, claiming that her firm, the third largest weapons producer in the world, “actually promote[s] human rights proliferation.”

Those comments were all made on quarterly earnings calls this week, at which executives for publicly traded companies speak to investors and analysts who follow their industries and answer questions about their financial outlook.

The occasion brings out a degree of candor about companies’ fundamentals and their business interests that aren’t always disclosed in marketing materials and carefully worded press releases.

For example, CEOs from both Lockheed Martin and Raytheon outright acknowledged that a deteriorating state of global peace and security and an increase in deadly violence are very much in the interest of their employees and investors.

Lockheed CEO James Taiclet assured investors that the $740 billion defense budget — twelve times the budget provided to the State Department to conduct diplomacy — could continue to grow in 2023, a critical metric for weapons contractors, the ultimate recipient of nearly half of all defense spending.

Taiclet said:

But if you look at [defense budget growth] — and it’s evident each day that goes by. If you look at the evolving threat level and the approach that some countries are taking, including North Korea, Iran and through some of its proxies in Yemen and elsewhere, and especially Russia today, these days, and China, there’s renewed great power competition that does include national defense and threats to it. And the history of [the] United States is when those environments evolve, that we do not sit by and just watch it happen. So I can’t talk to a number, but I do think and I’m concerned personally that the threat is advancing, and we need to be able to meet it.

Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes took a cruder approach, appearing to celebrate a potential war over Ukraine and Houthi drone attacks on the UAE as good indicators for future weapons sales, responding to an analyst’s question about increased demand for weapons “from international countries just given the rising tensions.”

Hayes said:

… [W]e are seeing, I would say, opportunities for international sales. We just have to look to last week where we saw the drone attack in the UAE, which have attacked some of their other facilities. And of course, the tensions in Eastern Europe, the tensions in the South China Sea, all of those things are putting pressure on some of the defense spending over there. So I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it.

But in a moment of rare self-awareness in the calls, Northrop Grumman’s CEO attempted to distance herself from the celebration of increased global conflict by making the bold claim that the world’s  fifth largest weapons manufacturer — and a trainer of Saudi troops accused of war crimes in Yemen — is a promoter of “global human rights.”

Northrop Grumman CEO Kathy Warden said:

I do want to be clear. We are a defense contractor. And so we are supporting global security missions, largely in areas of deterrents, but also inclusive of weapon systems. And we expect to continue in those businesses because we believe they actually promote global human rights proliferation, not the contrary. But with that said, we have evaluated some portions of our portfolio that I’ve talked about in the past like cluster munitions. And today, making the confirmation that we plan to exit depleted uranium ammo as parts of the portfolio that we no longer wanted to support directly.

No doubt, their departure from the cluster munitions and depleted uranium ammunition business is a positive step for human rights, but the idea that one of the world’s biggest producers of missiles, bombers, drones, and nuclear weapons “promote[s] global human rights” tests the limits of credulity. Time and time again, the earnings calls spotlight the true interests of the weapons industry: an increase in global insecurity and violence leads to an increase in governments’ demands for lethal weapons, which in turn produce an increase in profits for investors in arms production.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Cancer patients sue company behind Fukushima radiation

RT | January 28, 2022

Six people were children living near the Fukushima nuclear power plant at the time of the 2011 disaster, when the facility was heavily damaged in an earthquake and subsequent tsunami.

The plaintiffs have since developed thyroid cancer, blaming radiation that seeped from the power plant for their condition.

“Some plaintiffs have had difficulties advancing to higher education and finding jobs, and have even given up on their dreams for their future,” the group’s chief lawyer, Kenichi Ido, told AFP.

The plaintiffs, now aged between 17 and 27, are seeking compensation from the Fukushima operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO). They demand the company pay a total of 616 million yen ($5.4 million). The plaintiffs have experienced prejudice against thyroid cancer patients, with the illness heavily affecting their lives, one of the group members – identified only as a woman in her 20s – has said.

“I decided to come forward and tell the truth in hopes of improving the situation for nearly 300 other people also suffering like us,” she stated.

The lawsuit has become the first class-action against TEPCO over health problems allegedly linked to the Fukushima disaster. Establishing a solid link between thyroid cancer and the meltdown is likely to become a focal point of the case, since no relationship between cancer cases and the disaster was recognized by an expert team previously established by the regional government. At the same time, radiation exposure is a well-proven risk factor for developing such type of cancer.

Over 290 people who lived in the area at the time of the meltdown have been diagnosed with or are suspected of having thyroid cancer. Some 266 of them were found during a provincial health survey of people aged 18 and younger at the time of the disaster, which affected some 380,000 residents.

The plaintiff’s legal team argues that such rates – 77 per 100,000 – are significantly higher than the usual one to two cases per one million people. Regional authorities and experts, however, have blamed the unusual rates on excessive screening and over-diagnosing.

The Fukushima power plant got crippled following the 2011 9.0-magnitude Tohoku earthquake and a subsequent devastating tsunami. The plant suffered a major meltdown, which became the worst nuclear disaster since the 1986 Chernobyl incident. The catastrophe prompted an evacuation order for nearby towns and villages, which has been gradually lifted over the past few years. The last deserted settlement – the town of Futaba located in an immediate vicinity of the damaged plant – is expected to welcome residents willing to return later this year.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Nuclear Power | | Leave a comment

Registered nurse Nicole Sirotek shares what she saw on the front lines in NYC

January 25, 2022

Nurse Nicole Sirotek testified before the House regarding the way the medical establishment is mistreating COVID patients, who aren’t dying from COVID but, instead, die from medical malpractice, including the insistence on vaccines and Remdesivir and the refusal to provide safe, affordable therapeutics.

January 28, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , | 2 Comments