Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Siemens fails to return turbines to Gazprom

Samizdat | June 15, 2022

German company Siemens has confirmed that Ukraine-related sanctions imposed on Russia have made it impossible for the equipment supplier to return gas turbines to Gazprom after they were repaired in Canada.

The Russian energy company was forced to reduce gas supplies to Germany via the Nord Stream pipeline this week due to the parts shortage.

The gas turbines are currently in Montreal for an overhaul, and could not be returned to the customer due to Canadian sanctions, Siemens Energy said, as quoted by Reuters.

“Due to the sanctions imposed by Canada, it is currently impossible for Siemens Energy to deliver overhauled gas turbines to the customer,” the company said.

The firm also said it had informed the German and Canadian governments of the problem, adding that it was working on a viable solution.

On Tuesday, Russian energy major Gazprom announced a cutback of gas deliveries via the Nord Stream pipeline after Siemens failed to return gas-pumping units to the compressor station on time. Supplies are expected to decrease to some 100 million cubic meters per day from the planned 167 million cubic meters, marking a reduction of 40%.

European prices for natural gas surged 10% on the news.

In March, Siemens announced that it would halt equipment deliveries to Russia. Last month, the German company said it would completely withdraw from the Russian market, and launched procedures to terminate its business activities in the country.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

‘Health misinformation’: the latest addition to the Online Safety Bill

Labour and the SNP are planning on a new amendment

By Mark Johnson | UnHerd | June 14, 2022

Civil libertarians often talk about a phenomenon known as the “ratcheting effect”. This is the idea that when it comes to the erosion of our liberties, the trajectory tends to head in one direction; in favour of state power at the expense of our rights and freedoms.

It is the reason why we draw red lines that should not be crossed. If you breach the principle of non-interference in people’s rights with a relatively minor incursion, what is to stop that minor incursion from escalating to something more significant in the future?

Yet with the Online Safety Bill, a censor’s charter, which has been so long in the making, the ratcheting effect is happening in real time. Last week, SNP and Labour politicians on the Committee currently scrutinising the Bill laid an amendment to include “health-related misinformation and disinformation’ as a recognised form of lawful but ‘harmful’” speech. This threatens to open a Pandora’s box of censorship.

The terms ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ have grown to become part of the political lexicon in recent years. The concepts of being incorrect or misleading have been left behind for alternative terms, with loaded connotations. Yet they are malleable terms, often deployed in ways to discredit or silence another individual’s argument in the course of public debate.

Stoked by these fears, we have seen Big Tech increasingly taking on the role of online speech police in recent years. During the coronavirus era, this reached new extremes. At the beginning of the pandemic, Facebook took the step of removing content which promoted face masks as a tool to combat the spread of Covid-19.

Yet within a short space of time, the medical consensus on masks changed. But rather than acknowledge that it was wrong, Facebook flipped its position and censored in the other direction. A high-profile example saw Facebook label, discredit and suppress an article in The Spectator, written by the Oxford academic Carl Heneghan, disputing the efficacy of masks. What grounds or competency Silicon Valley’s fact-checkers had to overrule reasoned arguments by a Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine remains to be seen.

This approach is a direct threat to the epistemic process, so central to the free and open development of knowledge and ideas in liberal democracies. The fact that not even academics can escape this kind of truth arbitration speaks volumes.

Proponents of the Online Safety Bill perform mental gymnastics in trying to defend the legislation by arguing that hard and soft censorship is already happening online. They fail to provide how an approach which sees the state support these systems and even designate some categories of free speech as ‘harmful’, will do anything but compound this issue.

All of this highlights a problem that the Government are yet to acknowledge; this Bill could end up strangling our rights and freedoms online. The misinformation amendment is unlikely to carry much traction for now, but it is a sign of things to come. We should all be concerned.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Missouri and Louisiana file motion against Biden for suppressing free speech on social media

Samizdat – 15.06.2022

WASHINGTON – Two US states have filed legal motions against President Joe Biden for allegedly colluding with giant social media corporations to suppress free speech, the Missouri Attorney General’s Office said in a press release.

“Today, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry filed a motion for preliminary injunction in their lawsuit against President Biden and other top-ranking government officials for allegedly colluding with social media giants such as Meta [banned in Russia as an extremist organization], Twitter, and YouTube to censor and suppress free speech,” the release said on Tuesday.

The motion argues that the US government-led online censorship affects enormous segments of the population and that it encompasses social-media accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers, including many thousands of followers in Missouri and Louisiana, the release said.

“We may have forced the Biden Administration to forego its Disinformation Governance Board, but there is still a very real threat to Missourians and Americans’ right to free speech. The federal government must be halted from silencing any more Americans, and this motion for preliminary injunction intends to do just that,” Schmitt said in the release.

The motion also asserts that the censorship affects speech on matters of enormous public concern, including “unquestionably truthful speech,” such as speech relating to COVID-19 policies and speech about election security and election integrity, the release said.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

Israel, Egypt and EU sign gas export deal

Samizdat | June 15, 2022

Egypt, Israel, and the European Union have signed a deal to boost shipments of liquified natural gas (LNG) to EU member states, Sky News Arabia reported on Wednesday. Brussels hopes the agreement will help it to reduce energy dependence on Russia.

“The deal will see Israel sending more gas via Egypt, which has facilities to liquify it for export by sea,” European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said at a joint news conference alongside the Egyptian and Israeli energy ministers.

In 2021, the EU imported some 40% of its gas from Russia. The heavy reliance on energy purchases from the country makes it difficult for the bloc to expand its Ukraine-related sanctions.

The gas destined for European consumers is expected to go from Israel via a pipeline directly to Egypt’s LNG terminal on the Mediterranean coast before being loaded onto tankers and shipped north to the European market.

Some Israeli gas is already being sent by pipeline to liquefaction plants in Egypt, where it is liquefied and re-exported. Israel reportedly operates two gas fields off its Mediterranean coast holding an estimated 690 billion cubic meters of natural gas combined, while a third offshore rig is in the works.

Egypt is also a gas producer, but its exports have been limited by rising domestic demand. At the same time, the country’s large-scale natural gas facilities on the Mediterranean have remained mostly inactive since the country’s 2011 uprising that led to the overthrow of then-President Hosni Mubarak.

The Egyptian government has modernized the facilities in recent years and has ambitions to become a regional energy hub.

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | Leave a comment

The Nine Great Covid Mysteries

From virus origins to the Nordic paradox: the nine great covid mysteries

Swiss Policy Research | June 2022

1) Coronavirus origin

The genetic evidence strongly suggests that SARS-CoV-2 has a lab-related origin. This is due to various unique genetic properties relating to the so-called furin cleavage site (FCS), such as a CGG-coded double-arginine codon (the “smoking gun” according to Nobel Prize winning US virologist David Baltimore), an amino acid sequence identical to the human alpha-ENaC protein subunit, and a so-called Golden Gate seamless cloning site right next to the FCS. In addition, large investigations both inside and outside of China found no animal origin of SARS-CoV-2.

Such a lab-related origin is consistent with a lab leak either in China or in the US, or with a deliberate release of the virus (similar to the 2001 US anthrax letters). Indeed, leaked documents show that in the years prior to the 2019 outbreak, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), several US labs, and Pentagon contractor “EcoHealth Alliance” were working on, or considering, the insertion of an FCS into SARS-related coronaviruses to “defuse the threat of bat-borne coronaviruses” (project DEFUSE).

Claims that SARS-CoV-2 is unlikely to have a lab origin (by some US/Western virologists linked to NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci), or that a lab leak could only have occurred in Wuhan (e.g. by former British intelligence chief Richard Dearlove), are scientifically unfounded or deceptive.

Read more:

Figure: US and Chinese coronavirus researchers at a 2018 symposium in Wuhan

US and Chinese coronavirus researchers at a 2018 symposium in Wuhan (CAS)

2) 2019 US respiratory disease wave

In mid to late 2019, the US experienced several mysterious and unresolved events that may or may not be linked to each other and to the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

For instance, in early July 2019 the US CDC closed the biodefense research lab at Fort Detrick over “containment breaches” and “safety concerns”.

Also in July 2019, some nursing homes in northern Virginia, about 50 miles from Fort Detrick, reported an outbreak of a “mystery respiratory disease”, typically “starting with a cough”, that claimed several lives. At the time, the US CDC could not identify the pathogen causing the respiratory disease. In 2020, both the CDC and the nursing homes turned down requests to re-investigate the pathogen that caused the mysterious outbreaks.

Beginning in June 2019, the US experienced a mysterious wave of respiratory disease, later termed “EVALI”, with symptoms almost identical to covid, including pneumonia even in young people. The official explanation of “vitamin E acetate” as a filler in illegal THC vapes was not convincing, as the addition of this substance hadn’t been a new phenomenon. Moreover, “EVALI” essentially disappeared in parallel to the onset of the covid pandemic in early 2020. Nevertheless, the CDC never (publicly) re-investigated the 2019 “EVALI” cases for the presence of SARS-CoV-2.

On 18 October 2019, the Military World Games were held in Wuhan, during which several participants contracted a covid-like disease, according to later reports. China would later argue that SARS-CoV-2 may have been imported to Wuhan by US participants of the military games.

Also on 18 October 2019, a one-day coronavirus pandemic simulation exercise called Event 201 was held in New York City. The event was organized by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security and was sponsored by the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum.

When doctors in Wuhan noticed unusual cases of pneumonia in young people, they quickly suspected that this could be another SARS coronavirus outbreak. In contrast, when US doctors noticed very similar cases a few months earlier, they first thought of illegal drugs.

Read more:

Figure: July 2019 nursing home respiratory disease outbreaks and US military biolabs

July 2019 nursing home respiratory disease outbreaks and US military medical labs (source)

3) The Wuhan lockdown

The ostensible success of the Wuhan lockdown in January 2020 was instrumental in justifying the many failed and highly disruptive lockdowns in other countries. Only in 2022 did China impose new lockdowns on major cities such as Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing.

Did the Wuhan lockdown in January 2020 really end coronavirus infections in the city, or did the covid winter wave in Wuhan simply end by itself, as it did in many other countries? But why did covid not return to Wuhan in 2020 or 2021, in contrast to most other countries? And why did coronavirus spread internationally, but not, initially, within China, despite the fact that Wuhan was a travel hub during the Chinese New Year in January 2020? By spring 2020, less than 5% of Wuhan citizens had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared to about 25% of citizens in New York City.

Furthermore, who was behind the creation and distribution of the fake videos and photos supposedly showing coronavirus-infected people “keeling over” in the streets of Wuhan? In January 2020, about a dozen of these videos and photos were shared by Western news agencies, major media outlets and on social media, ramping up fear and panic during the early days of the pandemic.

Read more: Did China stage the videos of people collapsing in Wuhan? (SPR)

Figure: AFP photograph of a “man dead in the streets of Wuhan”.

“Wuhan: a man lies dead in the street” (AFP/Getty, January 30, 2020)

4) Omicron origin

In November 2021, the so-called omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 emerged in South Africa. Unlike previous coronavirus variants, the genetic evidence strongly indicates that omicron did not evolve naturally from previous variants, but emerged from virological or vaccine research. In fact, the omicron variant goes back to the earliest coronavirus strain and includes about two dozen mutations mysteriously “copied from scientific publications”. Omicron turned out to be highly infectious and strongly immune evasive, but much milder than previous SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Read more: Synthetic origin of SARS-CoV2 Omicron (StopGOF)

Figure: Non-natural emergence of omicron variant

Non-natural emergence of omicron variant (more)

5) Coronavirus transmission (small-scale)

Initially, most health authorities argued that SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted primarily via respiratory droplets (“wear your mask”) and via object surfaces (“wash your hands”). In reality, these are likely the least important modes of transmission. Instead, indoor respiratory aerosols emerged as the most important mode of transmission, despite denials by most health authorities for over a year.

Aerosol transmission likely explains why face masks and even N95/FFP2 masks (if worn by non-professionals) had essentially no effect on infection rates.

Nevertheless, several important questions concerning modes of transmission remain unsolved.

For instance, why are outdoor infections extremely rare, even if people are standing very close to each other and are singing or shouting? Is it because of aerosol dilution?

Why is infectious virus measurable for hours or even days on many surfaces (in lab studies), but actual infections via surfaces appear to be extremely rare in most real-world studies? Is it because transmission via hands and surfaces is much less effective than via respiratory aerosols?

Finally, what role does the dreaded fecal-aerosol mode of transmission play (e.g. via public toilets, air conditioning or sewage systems)? It is well known that infectious coronavirus is excreted via stool for longer periods than via respiration, but only China took this potential mode of transmission seriously (e.g. by applying toilet disinfection and the infamous “anal swabs”).

Read more: The face mask folly in retrospect (SPR)

Figure: US mask mandates without benefit

United States: mask mandates without benefit (IanMSC)

6) Coronavirus transmission (large-scale)

Ever since the discovery of influenza virus in the early 1930s, fundamental questions concerning respiratory virus epidemiology have remained unanswered.

During the coronavirus pandemic, it was observed that SARS-CoV-2 fully displaced influenza viruses and many other respiratory viruses. Influenza viruses only returned once a country had achieved a SARS-CoV-2 population infection rate of about 75%, regardless of interventions like face masks or lockdowns. Similarly, new SARS-CoV-2 variants repeatedly displaced previous variants, often within weeks.

Already during previous flu pandemics, new flu strains permanently displaced previous flu strains. How do viral interference and viral displacement work? Why do these viruses not coexist in parallel? There seems to be some kind of “the winner takes it all” principle at work, possibly linked to exponential, aerosol-mediated transmission and host immunity properties. Whatever the mechanism, the speed of global viral displacement is truly astounding.

Seasonality of respiratory virus transmission is also still largely unexplained. Is it driven by temperature, air humidity, vitamin D status or other factors? Why is there seasonality in northern and southern temperate climate zones, but not in tropical and subtropical climate zones? Why do some viruses breach seasonal patterns, such as the swine flu virus in 2009 and the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variants in 2021/2022? It may once again have to do with aerosol transmission and relative infectiousness of a virus.

There are also mysterious virus transmission patterns at continental scales. For instance, in Europe both flu waves and SARS-CoV-2 waves typically start at the western end of the continent (e.g. in Portugal, Spain and Britain) and move eastwards. In the US, SARS-CoV-2 infections have oscillated between states in the southeast (e.g. Florida) and in the northwest (e.g. Washington and Montana). These mysterious but natural patterns caused confusion because, coincidentally, covid vaccination rates were higher in western Europe than in eastern Europe, and higher in northern US states than in southern US states.

Another deep mystery is why respiratory virus infection waves are ending all by themselves, long before having infected the entire population of a country or region. This is a phenomenon that has been known for many decades (or indeed centuries), yet during the coronavirus pandemic, many health authorities falsely believed or asserted that without interventions such as lockdowns, infections would simply continue increasing exponentially. Some researchers have argued that respiratory viruses circulate within social networks (e.g. households and schools), and that transmission breaks down as soon as a network has been exhausted.

Read more: The return of the flu (SPR)

Figure: Displacement and return of the flu in India

Flu waves in India (WHO FluNet)

7) The East Asian paradox

Until the arrival of the omicron variant, most East Asian countries and some Southeast Asian countries have avoided major coronavirus waves. In countries like North Korea, South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan, one might argue that this was due to rapid and strict border controls. But this doesn’t explain the case of Japan, which hosted the Summer Olympic Games in 2021 and never introduced any major restrictions on social and business life. It also doesn’t explain the case of Indochinese countries with very low infection and death rates prior to 2022.

Initially, it was believed that face masks made the difference, but face masks failed everywhere else, and they also failed in East Asia with the arrival of the delta and omicron variants. Furthermore, they had failed during previous flu epidemics in East Asian countries.

Another explanation was some kind of pre-existing immunity against coronaviruses similar to SARS-CoV-2. But such pre-existing immunity could never be confirmed, and it wouldn’t necessarily be expected in very urban countries such as Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Even in Laos, where SARS-related bat coronaviruses originate, a study found cross-reactive (but not necessarily neutralizing) antibodies in only 5% of the general population and in about 20% of people with direct contact to bats and wildlife.

Other explanations include genetic or metabolic differences. For instance, it has been noted that the countries most resilient against SARS-CoV-2 are the very countries with the lowest obesity rates in the world, whereas countries with high obesity rates were most severely affected by covid (e.g. in Europe and the US, Latin America, South Africa and Arab countries), unless they applied strict border controls (e.g. Australia, New Zealand, Canada). Indeed, obesity may contribute not just to coronavirus disease, but also to coronavirus transmission (via higher viral loads and higher levels of exhaled bioaerosols).

Already in 2020 it was observed that on average just 10% of infected individuals were responsible for about 80% of coronavirus transmission (so-called overdispersion factor, k), and secondary infection rates even within households were at most 15%. Even small differences in these parameters between populations – because of obesity rates or other factors – may have a major impact on transmission dynamics.

Whatever the cause or the causes of the paradox, the highly infectious and immune-evasive omicron variant eventually overwhelmed even East Asian countries.

Read more: The zero-covid countries (SPR) and Obesity and Pandemic (SPR)

Figure: Mask compliance and infections in Taiwan

Mask compliance and infections in Taiwan (IanMSC)

8) The Nordic paradox

The Scandinavian or Nordic paradox is not about no-lockdown Sweden, as Sweden showed a pandemic excess mortality very similar to (or even lower than) other countries in Western Europe. Thus, Sweden neither “failed” nor did it have the “lowest excess mortality in Europe”.

Rather, the Scandinavian or Nordic paradox is about the very low pre-omicron covid infection and death rates in other Nordic countries, i.e. Iceland, Denmark, Norway and Finland. The paradox arises because during most of the pandemic, these countries had fewer domestic restrictions than most other Western countries, including Sweden.

It could be argued that in all of these countries, remote geography and early border controls, supported by preemptive lockdowns, may have played a key role in keeping domestic infections at very low levels. In addition, Iceland, Norway and Finland – but not Denmark – have by far the lowest population weighted densities among European countries (about four times lower than Sweden, which is quite similar to other European countries, such as Belgium and Germany). This might have helped slow down domestic coronavirus transmission.

Nevertheless, the Nordic paradox may not yet be fully resolved. Could Sweden have been “like Finland”? Could other European countries have been “like Norway”?

Read more: Sweden vindicated (SPR)

Figure: Covid mortality in European countries

Covid mortality in European countries (OWD)

9) Covid and Kids

In contrast to many other virus infections, children have been least affected by SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, prior to delta and omicron, small children had a significantly lower infection and transmission rate than adults, as the transmission rate increased linearly with age up to the age of 20.

It has been proposed that lower expression of ACE2 cell receptors or a different immune response might have explained these differences, but the question has never really been settled. One may also wonder if the lower transmission rate in (Western) children and in East Asian people (prior to omicron) may have had the same biological cause.

At any rate, the fact that covid generally remains mild in children, and that schools were not “drivers of the pandemic”, means that closing schools was one of the worst blunders of the pandemic response.

Read more: Covid and Kids: The Evidence (SPR)

Figure: Lower covid infection/transmission in children (pre-delta/omic

Population share and contribution to covid infections per age group in the US (Monod, Science, March 2021)

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

HOLD THE LINE

Computing Forever | June 11, 2022

Visit: https://sovereignpeople.ie/index.html
Music: Peaceful Mind by Astron

Support my work on Subscribe Star: https://www.subscribestar.com/dave-cullen
Support my work via crypto: https://computingforever.com/donate/
Follow me on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/hybM74uIHJKg/

http://www.computingforever.com

KEEP UP ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Gab: https://gab.ai/DaveCullen
Subscribe on Gab TV: https://tv.gab.com/channel/DaveCullen
Minds.com: https://www.minds.com/davecullen
Subscribe on Odysee: https://odysee.com/@TheDaveCullenShow:7
Telegram: https://t.me/ComputingForeverOfficial

June 15, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism, Solidarity and Activism, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Injecting 6 mo. olds to 5yo’s? – NO!

Murder has no statute of limitations

By Coquin de Chien | June 13, 2022

The United States Government, at the behest of Pharma oligarchs and government employees who own stock in the Pharma companies, hopes to approve an amendment to the EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) to inject babies 6-months-old to toddlers 4-years-old with the C19 faux-vaccine.

Before the committee meets to recommend the amendment, the FDA allows people to comment on the FDA government web site. One such comment was provided to this author and is offered to you below. The United States of America is indeed facing a government #ClotShot plot.

This comment is NOTICE of possible criminal liability to Lauren K. Roth and members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee who owe duties of care, diligence, good faith, and loyalty in recommending “for” or “against” the EUA amendment for COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in children 6 months through 4 years of age.

Only two deaths are listed herein to establish knowledge. If the amendment is approved, it will have been done by committee members “knowing” of felony crimes in context.

Your investigation of these deaths should include death certificates, autopsy records, witness interviews, and immunization records.

Massachusetts Death Certificate 2022 SFN 5980 is a 7yo girl died January 18, 2022 listed as died from U071 “COVID-19”, B49 “unspecified mycosis”, J450 “predominantly allergic asthma”, and R091 “pleurisy”.

VAERS_ID 2038120 is a 7yo girl in Massachusetts, who received her 2nd dose 1/13/2022 and was reported to VAERS 1/15/2022. PRIOR_VAX states, “Severe nausea and vomiting from 5min post vaccination and for the next 8-10 hours.” SYMPTOM_TEXT states, “Spiked a 103 fever, severe stomachache, has not had a bowel movement since the day before vaccination, which makes today 3 days without one.  First vaccine caused severe nausea and vomiting from 5minutes post injection and for the next 8-10 hours.”

This little girl suffered immeasurably 4 to 5 days as her intestines shut down due likely to impeded blood vessels servicing intestines.

Massachusetts Death Certificate 2021 SFN 56611 is a 48yo man died 11/16/2021 listed as died from U071 “COVID-19” and E669 “OBESITY”.

SFN 56611 is known to have died less than 24 hours after inoculation.

In both cases, the Medical Examiners listed the cause of death as “COVID-19”, when it was clearly not COVID-19. And in both cases, the Medical Examiners omitted listing causes Y590 “Viral vaccines“ and T881 “Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified”, when these clearly were proximate and actual causes.

Death certificates from the state of Massachusetts are sent to the CDC, a federal entity.  Thus, fraud on a state death certificate is a federal crime as it affects federal death records.  Several federal felony crimes apply in this instance and are listed below.

If you dismiss this NOTICE and recommend the EUA amendment without first investigating these two deaths, you become liable for inchoate crimes and the felony crime of “misprision of felony.” If a single person subsequently dies as a result of the amendment, all the elements will have been satisfied for you to face felony murder charges or involuntary manslaughter. Qualified immunity is not a valid defense.

18 USC § 4 – Misprision of felony

“Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony …, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some … civil or military authority …, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Felony murder is a homicide that occurs during the commission of an inherently dangerous felony, showing a conscious disregard for human life. A jury decides whether recommending an injection, that you “know” caused death, and that you refused to investigate while “knowing” it caused death, is inherently dangerous.

Here are a few federal statutes likely violated by Medical Examiners in Massachusetts. You are duty-bound to call for investigation of:

  • 18 USC § 4 Misprision of felony
  • 18 USC § 286 Conspiracy to defraud the government with respect to claims
  • 18 USC § 287 False fictitious or fraudulent claims
  • 18 USC § 371 Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
  • 18 USC § 1035 False statements relating to health care matters
  • 18 USC § 1040 Fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency benefits

There were found sixty likely C19 vaccine deaths in a 25-minute perusal of the 2021 and 2022 death certificates, which extrapolates to hundreds, probably thousands of C19 vaccine deaths in Massachusetts.

Refusal to investigate these fraudulent records is a crime that, because of the felony murder aspect, has no statute of limitations. Five, ten, or twenty years from now, if a federal prosecutor were to learn of this NOTICE, he or she would have significant evidence to bring charges for felony murder.

In summary, this NOTICE places you in a position requiring you to investigate these deaths prior to recommending the amendment. If you dismiss this NOTICE, you may be criminally liable for involuntary manslaughter, felony murder, and a list of federal crimes and inchoate crimes.

Please make the appropriate decision for yourselves and for the children of the United States of America.

Comment Tracking Number

l4d-m52d-ge4m

June 14, 2022 Posted by | War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Germany’s Fridays For Future Spokesperson: We’re Planning “How To Blow Up” African Oil Pipeline!

Rich, privileged (white) eco-fanatic says her group is thinking about “how to blow up” huge African oil pipeline!

By P Gosselin – No Tricks Zone – 14. June 2022

Most of Europe’s climate activists come from rich families, who lavish in all the amenities the fossil fuel economy offers. No exception to this are Sweden’s Greta Thunberg, and Luisa “Longhaul” Neubauer of Germany.

Not only are they spoiled rich, leading pampered lives, but they’re also becoming dangerously fanatic it appears and even feel entitled to tell poor countries what they can and cannot have.

Recently Longhaul Luisa, spokesperson for Fridays for Future Germany, posted Sunday on Instagram with her Fridays for Future mates joking how right now they are planning on how to blow up” an African oil pipeline that will immensely improve the lives of among the world’s most needy.

“Of course we are thinking about how to blow up” the longest crude oil pipeline in the world, she professed on Instagram on Sunday.

Much needed Uganda-Tanzania pipeline

In the posted video, Neubauer is referring to the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). The EACOP is currently under construction and, once completed, will transport crude oil from Uganda to Tanzania. It will be around 1,400 kilometers long and deliver around 216,000 barrels of oil per day.

White activists kicking Africans in the face?

We assume that Luisa and her crazed FFF radical group would be content to see poor Africans be denied even just a tiny fraction of the pampered life she herself is privileged to follow. She tells of the pipeline in the video: We’re going to stop that one.”

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Progressive Hypocrite | | Leave a comment

Four Scare Stories designed to (literally) put you off your food

Suddenly perfectly ordinary foods are set to give you cancer, why? And who stands to gain?

By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | June 14, 2022

We’ve been covering the emerging food crisis for months now. Detailing how the economy was deliberately sabotaged to drive up the cost of living, especially food, via lockdowns and sanctions.

But propaganda wars are like regular wars: They have theatres, fronts and overt for covert campaigns.

Yes, the big noise on food is that we need to change to “save the planet”, but there’s more going on in smaller spheres. A constant drip-feed of stories, articles and studies designed to undermine public faith in the food we eat.

Here are four examples, all from just the last ten days.

1. BEEF CAUSES CANCER

On June 3rd MedicalXpress reported on a new study which  – allegedly – (we’ll be using that word a lot) found red meat increased cancer risk in certain people.

The “study”, carried out at the Boston University School of Medicine and originally published in the Journal of Nutrition, claims to have found that “unprocessed” red meat increased the risk of colorectal cancer {CRC}  – in black women:

Unprocessed red meat intake was associated with an increased CRC risk in the present study, the first positive evidence that red meat plays a role in the etiology of CRC in Black women.

2. SO DOES FISH

Then, on June 9th, Sky News reported another study which found eating fish on a regular basis also increases your risk  – this time of skin cancer.

This “study”, done out of Brown University and published in the journal Cancers Causes and Control, alleges those who eat over 40g of fish per day had a 22% increased risk of skin cancer:

We found that higher total fish intake, tuna intake, and non-fried fish intake were positively associated with risk of both malignant melanoma and melanoma in situ. Future studies are needed to investigate the potential biological mechanisms underlying these associations.

3. … EVEN MORE CANCER, THIS TIME FROM DAIRY

A third study, again in MedicalXpress and this time from June 9th, found an increased risk of prostate cancer in men who drink a lot of milk.

The “study”, done at Loma Linda University Health and published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, concludes:

Men with higher intake of dairy foods, but not nondairy calcium, had a higher risk of prostate cancer compared with men having lower intakes. Associations were nonlinear, suggesting greatest increases in risk at relatively low doses.

This parallels a study from last year, done by the same researchers, which found drinking milk increased the risk of breast cancer.

4. OH, AND KEEPING YOUR OWN CHICKENS GIVES YOU FOOD POISONING

Not a study this time – and technically not just about food either – but on June 10th CBSNews reported that the US CDC was launching a “probe” into an increase in food poisoning cases allegedly linked to people keeping their own chickens:

Federal health officials are probing several multi-state outbreaks of salmonella infections linked to backyard poultry, saying more than 200 Americans have been stricken so far this year, with one death reported.

Already in vogue in parts of the U.S., the earthy hobby of raising backyard flocks grew even more popular during the pandemic, as Americans stuck at home set up coops with an eye on fresh eggs and animal companionship. But such efforts at small-time farming can come at a cost.

Of course, this is coming straight off the back of a “bird flu outbreak” which has seen 10s of millions of poultry culled, and price of eggs and chicken skyrocket.

Interestingly, organic and free-range chickens are already said to be the most impacted by bird flu, leading some to ask if bird flu could spell “the end of free-range chicken”.

No free-range chickens, no keeping your own chickens…hmmm…seems like some time soon the only way to get chicken (and eggs) will be through Big Food corporate giants.

THE SOLUTION

So, according to The ScienceTM – all natural food humans (and most other animals) have been eating for literally thousands upon thousands of generations is somehow suddenly contriving to give us all cancer.

Personally, I’m freaking out.

But don’t worry, because there’s a few ready made solutions to this problem: If you want to save yourself from all that nasty chicken, eggs and milk, try  “alternate forms of protein”.

That’s media-speak for eating insects.

The push on that front started years ago, with articles like this one from March 2021: “If we want to save the planet, the future of food is insects”

There was a lot of pushback, with “Eat Ze Bugs” becoming an ironic slogan for those resisting the new normal. That reaction effectively bullied the “let’s eat insects” stories out of the news for a while. But now they’re back.

On May 22nd, Forbes reported yet another a new “study” which apparently found “Eating Insects Could Cut Your Environmental Impact By More Than 80%”.

On May 28th, The Sun claimed that eating insects (among other things) could “solve food shortages”.

On June 6th the BBC’s kid-focused Newsround prompted children to ask the (rather leading) questions “Eating insects: Should we be eating more? Why are they so good?

And then on June 11th, the Toronto Star simply asked

Why aren’t we all eating insects yet?”

So, yes, there’s a renewed energy behind the pro-bug-eating media. But the big move being touted is undoubtedly the pivot to lab-grown meat and dairy. The propaganda is flowing thick and fast on that.

In late May, science magazine FreeThink reported a new company called Formo is researching lab-grown dairy products – “real cheese without the cow”. While TechCrunch was talking up YoEgg’s plant-based egg substitutes.

On June 6th Forbes reported that “Cell-Cultured Seafood Isn’t just An Idea; It’s A Reality”.

Just three days ago it was announced the Israeli company ReMilk was approved to begin selling its “precision fermented cow-less dairy products” across the US.

So, while the news cycle floods with stories that beef and fish and milk are causing cancer or food poisoning, the mainstream media is packed with stories on the benefits of cultured proteins.

Medical journals are publishing articles like this one, suggesting lab-grown meat is “healthier” than natural meat.

A Schmidt Foundation-sponsored article in the Guardian, on June 4th, tells us that lab-grown meat could save the planet if people can be “convinced to make rational food choices”.

On June 6th, CNN headlined:

How ‘lab-grown’ meat could help the planet and our health

… and goes on to suggest fake meat would prevent “future pandemics” by removing the risk of zoonotic viral transmission.

The messaging could not be clearer.

CUI BONO?

So, let’s say that over the next year or so more and more natural meat/fish/dairy products are replaced on the market by lab-grown or vegetable-based alternatives. Who stands to benefit?

The answer to that is unfortunately predictable: It’s the same people that always benefit.

The problems are manifold, the reactions diverse, but the solution is always pretty much the same – giving the elite more money and more power.

Bill Gates has heavily invested in lab-grown meat companies, as well as companies that make vegetable-based “eggs”. Jeff Bezos has been doing likewise.

It’s interesting to note that, just yesterday, the CEO of one of the biggest poultry suppliers in the world has called on the EU to allow the sale of cultured meat.

Why?

Because, just as big oil companies have responded to climate change hysteria by heavily investing in renewables, corporate meat producers are busily buying up alternate “meat” companies.

As “market forces” and “climate friendly policies” come into play, governments will institute measures such as the proposed “meat taxes”, making it cheaper to buy fake meat than real meat.

In the end the same people benefit no matter where you get your electricity, and – as the war on food continues – the same people will benefit whether you get real meat, lab-grown meat or “alternate forms of protein”.

The people most hurt by this will be family farms, small local companies, and any producers of organic and ethically sourced meat and dairy. Many of whom will be driven out of business.

Meanwhile the public will be left with a “choice” between extortionately expensive mass-produced actual meat clogged with hormones and antibiotics, or fake lab-grown meat made of god-knows-what.

And since the same corporate giants will be making both options, you’ll line the same pockets either way.

Bon appetit.

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | Leave a comment

The Realities Of “Going Green”

By Paul Homewood | Not A Lot Of People Know That | June 14, 2022

I came across this on Facebook, translated from Norwegian. It’s a good summary:

Batteries do not create electricity – they store electricity produced elsewhere, especially through coal, uranium, natural-powered power plants or diesel-powered generators. So the claim that an electric car is a zero-emission vehicle is not true at all.

Since forty percent of the electricity produced in the United States comes from coal power plants, thus forty percent of the electric cars on the road are carbon-based.

But that’s not all of it. Those who are excited about electric cars and a green revolution should take a closer look at the batteries, but also wind turbines and solar panels.

A typical electric car battery weighs a thousand pounds, roughly the size of a suitcase. It contains 25 pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds of cobalt, 200 pounds of copper and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel and plastic. There are over 6,000 individual lithium ion cells inside.

To make each BEV battery, you’ll need to process 25,000 pounds of salt for lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for cobalt, 5,000 pounds of resin for nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore from copper. In total, you have to dig out 500,000 pounds of dirt for a battery. ”

The biggest problem with solar systems is the chemicals used to turn silicate into the gravel used for the panels. To produce sufficient clean silicon, it must be treated with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, fluoride, trichlorotane and acetone.

In addition, gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium diselenide and cadmium telluride are needed, which are also highly toxic. Silicone dust poses a danger to the workers and the tiles cannot be recycled.

Wind turbines are non-plusultra in terms of cost and environmental destruction. Each windmill weighs 1,688 tonnes (the equivalent of the weight of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tonnes of concrete, 295 tonnes of steel, 48 tonnes of iron, 24 tonnes of fiberglass and the hard-to-win rare soils Neodym, Praseodym, and Dysprosium. Each of the three blades weighs 81,000 pounds and has a lifespan of 15 to 20 years, after which they must be replaced. We cannot recycle used rotor blades.

Admittedly, these technologies can have their place, but you have to look beyond the myth of emission freedom.

“Going Green” may sound like a utopian ideal, but if you look at the hidden and embedded costs in a realistic and impartial way, you’ll find that “Going Green” does more damage to earth’s environment than it seems.

I’m not opposed to mining, electric vehicles, wind or solar energy. But I show the reality of the situation.

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Environmentalism | Leave a comment

Mexico President Slams “Immoral” NATO Proxy War in Ukraine

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | June 13, 2022

The president of Mexico has condemned NATO’s approach to the war in Ukraine – labelling it “immoral.”

“How easy it is to say, ‘Here, I’ll send you this much money for weapons.’ Couldn’t the war in Ukraine have been avoided? Of course it could,” said President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

López Obrador didn’t elaborate on how, but fair to say a peaceful resolution would have centered on the negotiation of:

  • Some form of independence for the eastern Ukraine provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk
  • A Ukraine government pledge that it will not join NATO
  • Ukraine’s recognition that Crimea is now part of Russia

The increasingly dismal prospects for Ukraine’s military now seem to point to a negotiated end to the war that embraces those same three elements, but perhaps with Donetsk and Luhansk—which together comprise the Donbas region—joining Russia outright.

Though we’re likely to end at the same position—or worse, from a Western view—the Biden White House and NATO member countries were content to first wage a weapon-industry-enriching proxy war that took a terrible human toll on Ukraine, paired with economic warfare that’s causing despair and hunger for people in the United States, Europe and around the world.

U.S.-NATO policy is tantamount to saying, “I’ll supply the weapons, and you supply the dead,” said López Obrador. “It is immoral.”

His comments come as Russian forces continue to strengthen their position in the Donbas, while having already secured a “land bridge” of territory connecting Russia to Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014.

The remarks were López Obrador’s second display of independence from Washington in recent days. Last week, he refused to attend the U.S.-hosted Summit of the Americas, in protest of Biden’s exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.

Explaining his refusal, López Obrador said, “I believe in the need to change the policy that has been imposed or centuries, the exclusion, the desire to dominate… the lack of respect for the sovereignty of the countries, the independence of every country.”

Mexico voted for a U.N. resolution condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but López Obrador has otherwise proclaimed, “Our posture is neutrality.”

López Obrador is a member of the Morena party. A month after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, six Morena members were among a group of Mexican legislators who launched a “Mexico-Russia Friendship Committee,” which applauded Russian Ambassador Viktor Koronelli when he addressed the group in March.

“For us this is a sign of support, of friendship, of solidarity in these complicated times in which my country is not just facing a special military operation in Ukraine, but a tremendous media war,” Koronelli said. “Russia didn’t start this war, it is finishing it.”

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Red Flagged Nation: Gun Confiscation Laws Put a Target on the Back of Every American

By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead | The Rutherford Institute | June 14, 2022

What we do not need is yet another pretext by which government officials can violate the Fourth Amendment at will under the guise of public health and safety.

Indeed, at a time when red flag gun laws (which authorize government officials to seize guns from individuals viewed as a danger to themselves or others) are gaining traction as a legislative means by which to allow police to remove guns from people suspected of being threats, it wouldn’t take much for police to be given the green light to enter a home without a warrant in order to seize lawfully-possessed firearms based on concerns that the guns might pose a danger.

Frankly, a person wouldn’t even need to own a gun to be subjected to such a home invasion.

SWAT teams have crashed through doors on lesser pretexts based on false information, mistaken identities and wrong addresses.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have adopted laws allowing the police to remove guns from people suspected of being threats. If Congress succeeds in passing the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order, which would nationalize red flag laws, that number will grow.

As The Washington Post reports, these red flag gun laws “allow a family member, roommate, beau, law enforcement officer or any type of medical professional to file a petition [with a court] asking that a person’s home be temporarily cleared of firearms. It doesn’t require a mental-health diagnosis or an arrest.”

With these red flag gun laws, the stated intention is to disarm individuals who are potential threats… to “stop dangerous people before they act.”

Where the problem arises is when you put the power to determine who is a potential danger in the hands of government agencies, the courts and the police.

Remember, this is the same government that uses the words “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably.

This is the same government whose agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports using automated eyes and ears, social media, behavior sensing software, and citizen spies to identify potential threats.

This is the same government that has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.

For instance, as a New York Times editorial warns, you may be an anti-government extremist (a.k.a. domestic terrorist) in the eyes of the police if you are afraid that the government is plotting to confiscate your firearms, if you believe the economy is about to collapse and the government will soon declare martial law, or if you display an unusual number of political and/or ideological bumper stickers on your car.

Let that sink in a moment.

Now consider the ramifications of giving police that kind of authority: to preemptively raid homes in order to neutralize a potential threat.

It’s a powder keg waiting for a lit match.

Under these red flag laws, what happened to Duncan Lemp—who was gunned down in his bedroom during an early morning, no-knock SWAT team raid on his family’s home—could very well happen to more people.

At 4:30 a.m. on March 12, 2020, a masked SWAT team—deployed to execute a “high risk” search warrant for unauthorized firearms—stormed the suburban house where 21-year-old Duncan, a software engineer and Second Amendment advocate, lived with his parents and 19-year-old brother.

The entire household, including Lemp and his girlfriend, was reportedly asleep when the SWAT team directed flash bang grenades and gunfire through Lemp’s bedroom window.

Lemp was killed and his girlfriend injured.

No one in the house that morning, including Lemp, had a criminal record.

No one in the house that morning, including Lemp, was considered an “imminent threat” to law enforcement or the public, at least not according to the search warrant.

So what was so urgent that militarized police felt compelled to employ battlefield tactics in the pre-dawn hours of a day when most people are asleep in bed, not to mention stuck at home as part of a nationwide lockdown?

According to police, they were tipped off that Lemp was in possession of “firearms.”

Thus, rather than approaching the house by the front door at a reasonable hour in order to investigate this complaint—which is what the Fourth Amendment requires—police instead strapped on their guns, loaded up their flash bang grenades and carried out a no-knock raid on the household.

According to the county report, the no-knock raid was justified “due to Lemp being ‘anti-government,’ ‘anti-police,’ currently in possession of body armor, and an active member of the Three Percenters,” a far-right paramilitary group that discussed government resistance.

This is what happens when you adopt red flag gun laws, painting anyone who might be in possession of a gun—legal or otherwise—as a threat that must be neutralized.

Therein lies the danger of these red flag laws, specifically, and pre-crime laws such as these generally where the burden of proof is reversed and you are guilty before you are given any chance to prove you are innocent.

Red flag gun laws merely push us that much closer towards a suspect society where everyone is potentially guilty of some crime or another and must be preemptively rendered harmless.

Combine red flag laws with the government’s surveillance networks and its plan to establish an agency that will take the lead in identifying and targeting “signs” of mental illness or violent inclinations among the populace by using artificial intelligence to collect data from Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home, and you’ll understand why some might view gun control legislation with trepidation.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, even the most well-intentioned government law or program can be—and has been—perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes once profit and power are added to the equation.

The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, the war on COVID-19: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the government’s hands.

No matter how well-intentioned, red flag gun laws will put a target on the back of every American whether or not they own a weapon.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at staff@rutherford.org. Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

June 14, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »