Aletho News


How the CDC Uses Math to Hide COVID Vaccine Harm

By Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 23, 2022

Last week, The Epoch Times reported that Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), admitted the CDC had stopped monitoring the safety of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines using a method of analysis called proportional reporting ratio (PRR).

Walensky promised to resume the monitoring.

What The Epoch Times missed is that PRR is a fraudulent measure of vaccine harm,  designed by the CDC expressly for the new COVID-19 vaccines to disguise the devastation the vaccines are causing.

Why? Because PRR measures the pattern of different vaccine side effects, but it is indifferent to the number of people reporting those side effects.

If some completely new vaccine side effect appears with the introduction of a new vaccine, PRR will catch that.

But the COVID-19 vaccines are associated with huge numbers of people reporting side effects on an unprecedented scale — and, by design, PRR misses this completely.

For example, if one person in a million dies from vaccine A and one person in a thousand dies from vaccine B, then vaccines A and B can have exactly the same PRR score!

PRR is a single number that compares the variety of different side effects for a new vaccine to the variety of side effects from past vaccines.

Of course, there have been many vaccines with different side-effect profiles in the past, and it is difficult to stand out among such a diversity of profiles.

Where the new mRNA vaccines do stand out is the unprecedented number of bad outcomes, including deaths, reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Of all the reports in the 30-year history of VAERS, two-thirds of them were from the COVID-19 vaccines, introduced in the U.S. in December 2020.

This includes three-fourths of all deaths reported to VAERS and three-fourths of all hospitalizations.

Since the introduction of the COVID-19 vaccines, reports to VAERS have skyrocketed off the charts.

Credit: OpenVAERS

These numbers represent only the reports VAERS has processed and posted. Jessica Rose, Ph.D., has reported that VAERS is months behind in posting these reports because its staff has not increased, while its workload is roughly 50 times greater since the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines.

The sheer volume of VAERS reports, including deaths, should have set off alarm bells within weeks after the vaccines were introduced.

Reporting only PRR and not the actual count provided a convenient cover for “business as usual.”

I am grateful to Mathew Crawford for pointing this out in an article last year.

Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D., has a background in theoretical physics. Since the 1990s, he is best known for his contributions to the biology of aging, including many articles and two books.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Evidence of harm

By Steve Kirsch | September 21, 2022

A short collection of key pieces of evidence showing the COVID vaccines are not “safe and effective.” Not even close. They are the most deadly vaccines we’ve ever produced.

Executive summary

Here’s a high level collection of some of the most compelling pieces of evidence I’ve seen to date. This is not an exhaustive list, but just the key pieces of data that are impossible to explain if the vaccines are safe and effective.

I’ve divided the collection into sections and I’ve tried to limit each section to the most compelling data points. So don’t be disappointed if your favorite item isn’t mentioned in this article; I wanted to keep it short enough to be read..

I’ll try to keep this updated over time. It can be found in the Reference section of my Substack.

The phase 3 clinical trial data

  1. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed absolutely no all-cause morbidity or mortality benefit. There were no all-cause benefits at all. It was all negative. Ask your doctor why you should take a new, unproven medical intervention that is not shown to have an overall benefit. Even if there was a benefit of fewer COVID infections (which is seriously suspect due to the gaming below), the fact that the total all-cause numbers for both mortality and morbidity were negative means the intervention should not be recommended by any doctor.
  2. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed that more people died (and were injured) who got the drug than who got the placebo. In other words, the cure was worse than the disease. The drug maker claimed that none of the people in the vaccine group were killed by the vaccine. They do not reveal the tests they did and explain how they were able to make that assessment. Why the secrecy here, especially in light of the study by Bhakdi and Burkhardt showing that trained medical examiners missed the causality link in 93% of the cases they looked at? The Pfizer vaccine had 4X as many cardiac arrests in the treatment group than the placebo (see page 12 of the Supplemental Appendix). This lines up very well with the numerous cardiac-related problems related to the vaccine as documented in the study by Retsef Levi and in the VAERS data which showed that the “cardiac arrest” reports were elevated by a factor of 93X higher than the annual baseline rate (VAERS reports from all vaccines combined in previous years). For some reason, the CDC wasn’t able to detect that signal (it was only 100 times higher than normal so they ignored it for some reason; they won’t let me ask them about it). In short, the claims from the manufacturer that none of the deaths were caused by the vaccine are highly suspect since all the evidence for those claims remains hidden from public view for some reason.
  3. The Pfizer trial 6 month report showed that at best, the drug saved only 1 COVID life per 22,000 recipients. This means that at best, after vaccinating 220M Americans, we might save 10,000 lives from COVID. But the VAERS reports show an excess death toll of well over 10,000 people and that’s before applying the minimum estimated under-reporting factor of 41. So there isn’t a mortality benefit: it’s actually the reverse. Furthermore, VAERS reports will likely only be filed for deaths in temporal proximity to the shot and is highly unlikely to report those deaths happening 5 months after the shot which appear to be the bulk of the deaths. This makes the comparison even worse. In short, we aren’t anywhere close to saving any lives at all.
  4. The Classen paper analyzed the clinical trial data for all three US vaccines and confirmed the lack of any overall benefit. There was an increase in morbidity which was highly statistically significant in all three vaccines. It concluded, “Based on this data it is all but a certainty that mass COVID-19 immunization is hurting the health of the population in general. Scientific principles dictate that the mass immunization with COVID-19 vaccines must be halted immediately because we face a looming vaccine induced public health catastrophe.” This is exactly right.
  5. The paper by Christine Stabell Benn entitled, “Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?” confirmed that there was no mortality benefit by taking the COVID mRNA vaccines. “Based on the RCTs with the longest possible follow-up, mRNA vaccines had no effect on overall mortality despite protecting against fatal COVID-19.” See this article by Daniel Horowitz for more information. In other words, these vaccines have no death benefit. Period. Full stop. This is exactly what the Canadian analysis below showed.
  6. Serious adverse reactions, including paralysis, were not reported to the FDA and there were other very serious discrepancies in the trials. For some reason, nobody seems to be interested in exploring or explaining these very serious issues. Some are very clear cut such as the case of Maddie de Garay who was one of 1,000 kids in the clinical trial. She’s paralyzed now and has to eat with a feeding tube. The FDA and Pfizer never investigated, but reported her results as mild abdominal pain in the trial results. This is fraud. Also, there were 5 times as many exclusions in the treatment arm as in the placebo arm of the trial: 311 vs. 60. Do the p-value computation on that one and you’ll find that it could not possibly have happened by chance (1e-40). It means the trial was not blinded. Why didn’t anyone in the medical community ever point this out? Nobody will tell me.
  7. Pfizer admitted to clinical trial fraud in federal court. Their defense was that the FDA was in on it.

Official government data

  1. The VAERS data, which is the official adverse event reporting system used by the US government, shows that an estimated hundreds of thousands have died and millions have been injured. If these weren’t caused by the vaccine, what caused them? Why are there more adverse events reported for these vaccines than for all other vaccines in history combined? Nobody can answer that question. See this tutorial and this recent confirmation and this article on VAERS and causality. Here’s how these numbers were calculated. Here is independent confirmation of the estimates by Dr. Naomi Wolf who used different datasets. No fact checker was interested in contacting me to challenge the facts since I always insist on recording any calls. Also, the causality of events was confirmed by the Israeli safety studies, but nobody wants to look at those.Can you spot the unsafe vaccine? People at the CDC don’t see any problem with this mortality chart: all the vaccines look perfectly safe.
  2. The US Social Security Death Master File showed a 60% increase in the all-cause death rate in September 2021 vs. September 2020 for ages 18 to 55. According to the insurance companies, it wasn’t COVID. COVID kills only a small fraction of people in this age range so even if the COVID death rate doubled, it would be a minor blip on the all-cause death rate. A five month delay in death vs. vaccination was discovered in multiple countries, not just the US. Different studies found nearly identical delays. Also, I find it very troubling that the insurance companies aren’t asking the family of the policyholders who died whether they were vaccinated with the COVID vaccine and when. They don’t want to collect this information for some odd reason. So let’s be clear that a 60% increase in all-cause death rate makes this intervention extremely dangerous. I’m not aware of anything that comes close to killing people in such massive numbers. The CDC is silent on this. They don’t even want to show the public this chart:

  3. US disability rose dramatically soon after the vaccines rolled out (Y axis is Z-score). A 3 sigma increase is hard to explain.
  4. As of Sep 2, 2022, the vaccination rate in Israel is now just 2.4%. They used to be one of the world’s most vaccinated countries. Today, very few people in Israel are considered to be vaccinated. If the vaccines are so beneficial, why has nearly the entire country shifted from extremely pro-vax to extremely anti-vax in such a short period of time?

Statements from government officials

  1. The Israeli Ministry of Health revealed in a confidential meeting with scientists that the reason that they never notified the people of Israel about the safety issues from the vaccines was because of budget/staffing issues. Apparently, while they had millions of dollars to promote the vaccines as safe and effective, they forgot to budget for the possibility they were wrong.

Independent expert reports solicited by government officials

  1. The Israeli vaccine safety data showed very clearly the side-effects are serious, long-lasting, and caused by the vaccines. Secondly, it showed that the Israeli authorities and the worldwide mainstream media are covering it all up. It also showed that US officials were not interested in seeing credible COVID vaccine safety that didn’t go along with the narrative. I tried to find out why, but nobody would talk to me. Harvard Professor Martin Kulldorff, a widely respected authority on vaccines, when asked why these people wouldn’t want to see the data, replied, “I don’t know.” This is the single most damaging report in the history of the COVID vaccines. Nobody wants to talk about it. They are hoping it will die. It won’t. Some people claim Israeli used a broad mix of vaccines, but that’s not true. Over 90% of the reports are from Pfizer, the bulk of the others are from Moderna. See also Israeli Investigators Find COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Side Effects: Leaked Video.
  2. The Canadian report prepared for the Liberal Party of Canada (Trudeau’s party) showed no benefit for infection, hospitalization, and death for those under 60. “The empirical evidence investigated in this report from PHO and PHAC does not support continuing mass vaccination programs, mandates, passports and travel bans for all age groups.” You can’t have a vaccine that doesn’t work in Canada work in other countries. The authors of the report had to hide their identities for fear of retribution. The statistics analyzed were those from Ontario which is not a small province (15M people). Naturally, the mainstream press ignored the report. Nobody has shown where the experts who wrote this made a mistake. The conclusion of the report is supported by independent analysis done by Mathew Crawford of the data from San Diego County, San Diego County Data Busts a Hole in Vaccine Efficacy Narrative. So apparently, the results are not limited to Ontario.

Pre-prints from highly credible sources

  1. The Harvard-Hopkins-UCSF study showed it is unethical to mandate vaccination for college students and anyone younger. The study clearly said, “University booster mandates are unethical.”
  2. The Thailand study did blood tests before vs. after the jab and determined that nearly 30% of young adults experienced cardiovascular injuries after the jab. How is that safe? And why didn’t anyone in the US ever do such a study? Do we not want to know? This was a simple blood test before and after the vaccine. Why did they not notify parents as soon as the study was published?
  3. The study by Bhakdi and Burkhardt showing 93% of deaths after vaccination were caused by the vaccine
  4. The data showing the vaccines cause prion diseases shortly after vaccination. This is impossible if the vaccines are truly safe. See the paper on (after ResearchGate removed it).
  5. Determinants of COVID-19 Vaccine-Induced Myocarditis Requiring Hospitalization by Jessica Rose and Peter McCullough showing the myocarditis caused by the vaccine have distinct biomarkers.

Papers published in peer-reviewed medical journals

  1. The Fraiman-Doshi paper looked at serious adverse event rates and found that the vaccines may not be as safe as has been claimed, but they cannot do a proper analysis because they are not allowed to see the data. “Full transparency of the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data is needed to properly evaluate these questions. Unfortunately, as we approach 2 years after release of COVID-19 vaccines, participant level data remain inaccessible.” You have to wonder: if the vaccine is so safe, why are the drug companies hiding the data?
  2. The Levi cardiac arrest rate elevation paper showed a troubling correlation between vaccine doses and increased cardiac events from January–May 2021. When they tried to get data after May 2021, they were refused access. This begs the question: if the vaccines are perfectly safe, what are they trying to hide?
  3. There are over 1,250 papers published in the scientific peer-reviewed literature showing the vaccines cause significant adverse events.
  4. The Walach paper found that the vaccines harm more people than they save.
  5. This news article published in the BMJ showed that 10 out of 100 deaths in elderly people they examined were “likely” caused by the vaccine. Funny, in America we think the number is 0. They can’t both be right. Someone should investigate why we have different results. This is very important. In fact, with a deeper investigation, over 90% of the deaths thought by medical examiners not to be caused by the vaccine were shown to be caused by the vaccine. This suggests that the US isn’t looking at the deaths.
  6. My colleagues and I are not misinformation spreaders according to this paper published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

Articles by respected vaccine experts interpreting the data

Are the Covid mRNA Vaccines Safe? was written by Harvard professor Martin Kulldorff who until recently was on vaccine committees of the FDA and CDC. He concluded:

Fraiman and colleagues have produced the best evidence yet regarding the overall safety of the mRNA vaccines. The results are concerning. It is the responsibility of the manufacturers and FDA to ensure that benefits outweigh harms. They have failed to do so.

Articles on court rulings and expert opinion

Canadian court decisions on the constitutionality of Covid measures are invalid due to jurisdictional errors of law reviews court decisions on COVID and emphasizes the courts’ repeated over reliance on government expert testimony. Courts are supposed to find the truth and not rely on government representations or propaganda.

Articles debunking bogus studies in the peer-reviewed scientific literature

  1. The Watson et al. “modeling study”: did “COVID vaccinations” really prevent 14 million deaths? The original paper was clearly bogus since the vaccines kill more people than they save. This article examines the paper claiming the vaccines have been ridiculously effective.

Autopsy reports

There are specialized tests required to diagnose a death from the COVID vaccine.

The CDC has never told any medical examiner in the US about these tests.

So the medical examiners aren’t implicating the vaccine in any of the deaths.

The question is we know what the tests are, we know there is solid evidence from multiple countries that the vaccine causes death, yet we refuse to even consider the possibility that the vaccine caused the deaths. Why?

Retracted papers published in peer-reviewed journals

This paper, A Report on Myocarditis Adverse Events in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Association with COVID-19 Injectable Biological Products, was retracted because the publisher didn’t like the result. So he unilaterally decided to retract the paper. This is unethical.

Here’s the “withdrawn” notice.

Here is the backstory as well as this censorship update.

The publisher hasn’t fixed the problem in over a year despite assurances it would be quickly resolved.

Here is another retracted paper that was correct:

Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19? by Ron Kostoff
“Compared with the 28,000 deaths the CDC stated were due to COVID-19 and not associated morbidities for the 65+ age range, the inoculation-based deaths are an order-of-magnitude greater than the COVID-19 deaths!

That is basically what I found: the vaccines kill >10X more people than the number of COVID deaths that they save. The paper passed peer review and was published. The editor of the journal quit after he was overridden by the publisher on the retraction.

The reason cited for the retraction:

  1. The use of key terminology, specifically the key terms “inoculation” and “vaccination” diverges from common use and are incorrect, indicating clear evidence of bias.
  2. Publicly available data from the United States Center for Disease Control (U.S. CDC) were concluded by the external reviewers to be misinterpreted to make the erroneous conclusion that the vast majority of reported deaths due to COVID-19 are actually due to other comorbidities. Such an egregious misinterpretation and misrepresentation are unacceptable.

This is completely bogus for two reasons:

  1. The editor could have easily normalized the terminology to eliminate any perceived “bias.” They simply ask the author to do a quick search and replace.
  2. The vast majority of COVID-19 deaths were in fact due to other comorbidities. For example, the New Mexico death records where COVID-19 was listed as the cause of death and 5 out 6 were not consistent with a COVID death. If anyone wants to challenge me on that, I have access to the death data. In Massachusetts, only 10% to 20% of the deaths listed as COVID were actually caused by COVID. Most people don’t have access to the death data, but I do. So I wonder if the journal is interested in fixing their error?

Hard-to-explain anecdotes

Can anyone explain how these anecdotes are possible?

  1. Why don’t Dr. Paul Offit (FDA vaccine outside committee) and Professor Grace Lee (Chair, CDC vaccine outside committee) want to see the Israeli safety data? They are deliberately avoiding answering the question. Why?
  2. In Canada, the #1 cause of death is now “unexplained.” See Deaths with unknown causes now Alberta’s top killer: province. If it isn’t the vaccine, what is causing this?
  3. There is data from over 1,000 vaccine injured people where 10% of the injured report 30 or more symptoms that are unique to the vaccine injured. How is that possible if the vaccine is so safe? Marsha Gee was perfectly healthy before her COVID vaccine. Less than 1 hour after her first Pfizer shot she experienced severe symptoms and experiences 78 of symptoms common with other vaccine injured. If Marsha wasn’t injured by the COVID vaccine, what caused all these symptoms?
  4. Why is it illegal to analyze the vaccine vials? Why hasn’t a single medical institution done an analysis of the content of the vaccines to see if there are placebos with saline solution and the amount of mRNA degradation, rendering the vaccines useless? Why the secrecy here? If we knew what was in the vaccines would this cause harm? How?
  5. Why are prominent people risking their careers to obtain fake vaccine cards? We know top people at Mass General Hospital have fake vaccine cards. We’ve heard that people at the highest levels of the DoD can get fake vaccine cards. It is well known that the CEO of a large pharmaceutical company bought a fake vaccine card. Why would he risk spending years in jail if the vaccines are perfectly safe?
  6. The Died Suddenly group on Facebook was adding users at 20,000 per day making it the fastest growing group in Facebook history. They had to throttle the growth rate due to attempts by the British military to infiltrate the group to cause it to be shut down.
  7. The average age of the people reported dead in the Died Suddenly group has been trending younger and younger over time. How can you explain that? The only worldwide massive intervention that goes to younger people is the COVID vaccine.
  8. The embalmer data (such as The Epoch Times article and this interview). These clots are not blood clots, but they are clots embalmers never saw before mid-2021 (since they take 3 months or more to form into large sizes). If the vaccines are not causing these killer clots, what is? They can be found in up to 93% of the embalming cases.
  9. Insurance company data from insurance companies worldwide:
    1. Adults Aged 35–44 Died at Twice the Expected Rate Last Summer, Life Insurance Data Suggests
    2. Millennials Experienced ‘84 Percent Rise of Excess Mortality’ Into Fall 2021: Former BlackRock Portfolio Manager
  10. Wayne Root’s wedding: 200 guests, half vaxxed, half unvaxxed. Only the vaxxed got injured (26%) or died (7%). I surveyed my readers and collected data from over 600 readers who collectively reported very similar stats. That’s hard to explain if there isn’t a huge effect.
  11. My neurologist stats: 11 years without needing to do a single VAERS report; this year, she needs to file 1,000 VAERS reports on 20,000 patients in the practice. How can anyone explain that if the vaccine is perfectly safe with mild, short term effects? This is similar to the 4.5% rate of neurological injury reported earlier by the Israeli Ministry of Health.
  12. The polling results using third party polling firms (so not my followers) consistently show that more people died from the vaccine than from the virus. The mainstream media refuses to do similar surveys and most survey firms refuse to even ask the questions.
  13. Ten different surveys I did all showed the vaccines are more harmful than helpful.
  14. Doctors in Canada died at a rate that was more than 10X normal after getting the fourth dose of the vaccine. And those are just the ones we know about.
  15. The fact that Paul Offit isn’t going to get the latest booster even though the CDC says he should. Why should any of us take the shot if Paul Offit is refusing to take the shot? He’s arguably the world’s most respected authority on vaccines and sits on the FDA outside advisory committee?
  16. Why are health authorities removing safety data on the latest shots? If they are so safe, why not release the data?
  17. Google searches show people became interested in topics related to vaccine safety before they became popular on social media
  18. When I ask data/statistics experts such as Joel Smalley and Professor Norman Fenton whether they’ve seen any credible data proving the vaccines are safe and effective, they are unable to cite a single reference.
  19. A local news station (WXYZ-TV) asked people to report on unvaxxed loved ones that became sick and died and instead they got hammered with hundreds of thousands of people saying they lost loved ones to the jab. See my video on the WXYZ-TV story and also this video.
  20. Woman collapses and dies 7 minutes after Booster shot… The stunning thing is the Twitter video documents that the pharmacy workers have been instructed to not bring it up when briefing patients and, if asked, not to comment on the death. Do you think they are looking out for your best interest by withholding adverse events like death 7 minutes after the shot from the public? That should never happen. Have you ever seen a video like this before the COVID vaccines rolled out? The death was ruled as “natural causes” which means it was from internal organ failure as opposed to being hit by a truck. However, the internal organ failure was due to an external event (vaccinated).


  1. Turbo-cancer is being reported now. It’s impossible to explain. Never been seen before.
  2. A reader wrote: I work in the financial services industry in Toronto. A co-worker of mine was recently diagnosed with cancer. He has been getting treated at Sunnybrook hospital for it. The doctors there told him they’ve seen a significant spike in cancer cases well above what could be explained by people missing getting screened due to the pandemic. What’s more though is that they catalogue the vaccine status of every cancer diagnosis and the spike in the number of cases is only occurring in those who are vaccinated– apparently they are researching it to try and find out why the vaxed have seen a spike in cancers vs the unvaxed who haven’t- obviously they are not ready to go public with this but they know about it and are researching it fwiw


  1. Turtles all the way down: Vaccine science and myth shows the vaccines are not nearly as safe as people think. This is the most damaging book ever written showing the safety of the vaccines is highly questionable. There isn’t a single risk-benefit trial on all cause mortality and morbidity vs. placebo for any of the 70 approved vaccines even though they’ve had 60 years to do this. If the vaccines are truly beneficial, why do you think it’s never been done for any vaccine? A team of Israeli scientists wrote this book over 5 years. It was recently translated into English and is available through purchase on Amazon.
  2. Dissolving Illusions: the history of vaccines shows they did a lot less than people think; probably next to nothing.
  3. The Real Anthony Fauci: illustrates the corruption in the medical community today. For example, they created a more accurate adverse event reporting system (ESP:VAERS) system and then scrapped it after it showed all the vaccines were unsafe.

Slide presentations

  1. Vaccine Secrets: a 20 minute slide presentation from CHD
  2. The CCCA presentations:
    1. Stop the shots,
    2. More Harm Than Good
    3. Dispelling the Myth
  3. My mega-presentations:
    1. What I learned during the pandemic
    2. The elephant in the room
    3. Vaccine Policies
    4. Vaccine Essentials
    5. All you need to know
    6. Things you need to know
    7. 180 questions they can’t answer

Fact checks

Once I established a policy of always recording calls with “fact checkers,” I’ve not had a single call from them trying to refute anything I’ve written.

None of the drug companies that make these products will refute anything I’ve written or supply a representative to debate me or any of my colleagues in a live debate. They have immunity from liability and they are not willing to be held accountable in the court of public opinion either.

  1. The COVID lies by Dr. Michael Yeadon

Mitigation measures: masks, vaccines, lockdowns, social distancing, 6 foot rule, …

This was a very well done study, but it is of course attacked by the pro narrative people. We’d love to have an open debate about this study, but the other side doesn’t want to talk about it in a neutral forum.


Masks don’t work at all. See this article which has plenty of references. If anything, masks are more likely to hurt you than to benefit you.

There is no study at all on the 6 foot distance rule. They just made that one up.

Origin of the virus investigation

Professor Jeffrey Sachs was tasked by The Lancet to lead an independent investigation into the source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. After he determined it came from US biotechnology, all of a sudden nobody wanted to pursue the investigation any further.

Conflicts of interest

Tony Fauci gets paid every time you get a Moderna shot. He won’t disclose how much he makes and you can’t get via FOIA (it’s blacked out). If the Republicans get control of the Senate, that will change. Watch this video from Sept 20, 2022 of Rand Paul commenting on this as well as the well founded accusation that Fauci created the virus in the first place and then desperately tried to make it look like it came from nature after top scientists said it was a lab leak (watch the video at 2:00 onwards). Rand Paul called it, quite rightly, “the biggest cover-up in the history of science.”

The question you have to ask yourself is why is Fauci keeping his funding of the gain of function research and also his compensation for each vaccine dose a secret?

Tony Fauci was the primary reason that all early treatments were ignored by the government. It appears he did that because it would cut into his revenue stream.

Early treatment options

Early in the pandemic, two physicians, George Fareed and Brian Tyson, developed a treatment protocol using a variety of safe, low cost drugs and supplements with little to no side effects that had a near 100% success track record in preventing hospitalization, death, and long haul COVID if the patient started treatment shortly after realizing they were infected. They’ve treated over 10,000 patients. They wrote a best-selling book about it.

Today, more than two years later, the FDA and the CDC have not returned their calls.

Questions for lawmakers

  1. Why can’t we have open forums where our public health officials can be challenged by experts who disagree? Is there proof that having open debate results in worse outcomes?
  2. Why doesn’t anyone want to see the Israeli safety data?
  3. Why isn’t anyone asking for Fauci’s unredacted emails?
  4. Is there a scientific reason that the CDC is ignoring me and all the experts I work with?
  5. Questions I’d love to ask Congresswoman Anna Eshoo… that she’ll never answer

Questions I’d like to ask the CDC

  1. Why hasn’t anyone calculated the minimum VAERS under-reporting factor (URF)?
  2. Did the propensity to report change in 2021 vs. previous years. What is the new number in 2021 and 2022 compared to previous years? How did you calculate it?
  3. Why do John Su and Tom Shimabukuro never talk about the URF in the ACIP meetings?
  4. There were over 14,000 excess deaths reported in VAERS. That’s before the URF is applied. If these weren’t caused by the vaccine, what caused them?
  5. If these vaccines are so safe, why are there more adverse events reported for these vaccines than for all other vaccines in history combined?
  6. I found thousands of adverse events that are elevated by these vaccines compared to all other vaccines combined in previous years. How many adverse events did the CDC find?
  7. There was a dramatic rise in adverse events reported in the VAERS system for the COVID vaccines. How could this not be a serious safety concern? The propensity to report did not increase. If you believe the propensity to report did increase, what data do you have to support that?
  8. My neurologist has been in practice for 11 years. She has 20,000 patients in her multi-physician practice. In that time, she’s never had to report a single event to VAERS. With the COVID vaccines, she now needs to make 1,000 reports. If the vaccines are safe and effective and most all the symptoms are mild and short term, how do you explain this? Her event rate similar to the 4.5% injury rate that the Israeli MoH found. So her reporting rate is more than 10,000 times higher than for any other vaccine. Couldn’t that be the explanation for the higher rate of VAERS reports? Doesn’t this suggest that the propensity to report is much lower this year because there are so many more events and doctors simply don’t have the time to report them all?
  9. The NEJM pregnancy paper by Tom Shimabukuro noted that the results on safety for pregnant women was preliminary since many of the women were still pregnant. What was the final result and why wasn’t it published?
  10. There was an analysis of the VAERS data by Hannah Rosenblum published in the Lancet. It never goes into explaining why there were elevated reporting rates and also the nature of the reported events are not normal background events. Couldn’t the elevated reporting rates be caused by a dangerous vaccine? Does she want to look at the Israeli safety data? If not, why not? The Israeli data directly contradicts the conclusion of the paper. Shouldn’t we figure out which conclusion is correct?
  11. Why does Carol Crawford not answer my questions about an open discussion with the top vaccine misinformation spreaders to resolve our differences and reduce vaccine hesitancy?
  12. Why does Martha Sharan ignore my emails and phone messages when I attempted to ask for permission to talk to the authors of the Rosenblum paper? Can’t she reply with the reason questions are not allowed?

The unanswered questions

Questions I’d love to get the answer to. These were asked, but never answered.

  1. Why did the CDC never publish the follow up on the NEJM pregnancy paper by Tom Shimabukuro?
  2. The CEO of Moderna was asked how the 19 nucleotide sequence from a Moderna patent got into the SARS-CoV-2 genome. That sequence is never found in a virus. How did it get in this one? The CEO said he’d look into it, but never reported the explanation. I’d love to know what it was.
  3. Why hasn’t any Democratic committee chairman asked the NIH for Tony Fauci’s unredacted emails? Don’t we want to know the truth about whether there was a deliberate cover-up? If there was, shouldn’t Fauci be fired?
  4. Fauci wasn’t supposed to be funding gain of function research but he was. How is he being held accountable?
  5. How much is Fauci making every time someone gets a Moderna shot? He’s a public official… Why is this a secret?


People who disagree with the mainstream narrative are rewarded with censorship, permanent bans on posting on social media, demonetization of your YouTube account, revocation of your medical license, revocation of your medical certifications, loss of hospital privileges, loss of job, loss of funding, loss of friends, and a Wikipedia entry labeling you a “misinformation spreader” and/or “conspiracy theorist.”

This is a problem. I am not aware of any paper published in the medical literature that shows that such tactics result in better health decisions.

Should we use the same rules at the UN when nations disagree? Do you think that will result in better outcomes?

The way people resolve differences is by confronting the issues and talking through them. But we are not doing this:

  1. Why can’t we find anyone who will defend the CDC, FDA, and NIH on camera?
  2. Dr. Byram Bridle and 2 colleagues challenged Canada’s health authorities to a debate
  3. Vinay Prasad’s most important op-ed

Articles about the corruption of science

  1. The head of the CDC’s outside committee on vaccine safety does not want to see the safety data collected by the Israeli Ministry of Health.

This is objective proof of a broken system. It is indefensible. Caught on video camera. There is no reason that anyone in a position of authority on the COVID vaccines would refuse an opportunity to see the most thorough post-vaccine safety study ever done: one that shows causality of serious adverse events.

From Israeli Investigators Find COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Side Effects: Leaked Video:

Rechallenge changes a causal link “from possible to definitive,” Dr. Mati Berkovitch, head of the research team and a pediatric specialist, said at the meeting.


Many of the reported adverse events were found to be long-lasting, which researchers said in the meeting was surprising since the brochure handed to vaccine recipients says otherwise. They also said Pfizer officials told them that Pfizer did not know of any long-lasting symptoms.


In the official report later issued to the public, the MoH did not detail how researchers were caught off guard by the duration of the events and side effects. The health agency also stated that there were no new events identified.

It concludes:

The choice to omit some of the crucial findings discussed in the meeting from the public report is “a recipe to destroy” the entire vaccine program, according to Levi, an Israeli native and an expert in risk management.

“The more pro-vaccine, the more disturbed you need to be from something like this,” Levi told The Epoch Times. “And the reason is that the two most important enablers for vaccine programs … to be successful is trust and transparency, that you actually communicate to people the real risk-benefits and allow them to make choices about what they want to do. The second thing is that you take care of the people that were harmed by the vaccine because no vaccine has 100 percent safety.”

“I think we have in this example … where we violate these two very important principles,” he added. “This is a recipe to basically destroy all vaccine programs, so the more pro-vaccine you are, you should be more disturbed by this.”

How can you have the chair of a safety committee not interested in seeing important safety data? Professor Grace Lee should be removed from her position by the CDC. Why isn’t she? Does anyone care?

Why does Dr. Paul Offit ignore requests to see the same data?

According to the Epoch Times article, everyone declined to comment on the story: the scientists, the MOH officials, and the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office declined to comment on the Israeli findings.


If the above isn’t enough, there are hundreds more “hard to explain” data points.

  1. List of over 1,200 papers published in peer-reviewed scientific journals
  2. The safe and effective narrative is falling apart
  3. Think we got it wrong?
  4. How the authorities can INSTANTLY stop the spread of “COVID misinformation”
  5. Examining COVID Vaccine Efficacy

Using all the available evidence

There is an excellent article written in August 2020 by Norman Doidge entitled “Medicine’s Fundamentalists” which talks about the “all-available-evidence approach.” It should be read by every doctor in America. This is how medical science should work.

The precautionary principle of medicine

The precautionary principle medicine seems to have been thrown under the bus during the pandemic. It says in the face of uncertainty, one should take reasonable measures to avoid threats that are serious and plausible.

For example, the Pfizer clinical trial showed the vaccine saved only one COVID death per 22,000 injected. That means we might only save around 10,000 lives if we inject 200M Americans. So if VAERS, which is at least 41 times under reported, is showing over 12,000 deaths associated with the vaccine, any reasonable person should say that killing more than 41 people to save 1 life is nonsensical… shouldn’t we put a PAUSE on this intervention until we resolve the uncertainty?

In the current system, questioning the CDC or other authorities results in serious retribution as mentioned earlier.

Is that really the right way to handle scientific dissent?


Are the vaccines “safe and effective” as claimed?

To answer this, science requires that we look at all the available data and see whether the data is more consistent with the hypothesis of “safe and effective” or “not safe and effective.”

All the data that I and my colleagues have seen end up being placed in the “not” bucket.

We are open to being shown we got it wrong on the hundreds of pieces of evidence we have examined, but nobody is willing to discuss the data with us to resolve the issue, not even for $1M dollars.

I even went to extraordinary lengths to offer the Israeli safety data to ACIP Chair Grace Lee. Her response: she called the police on me. That pretty much tells you everything you need to know: they simply refuse to look at any data that goes against their currently held beliefs. That’s the way science works.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Book Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | 1 Comment

How Fauci Channeled Cheney 20 Years After Dick Cheney Lied the US into Invading Iraq

By Sam Husseini | September 7, 2022

Twenty years ago, the “Cheney-Bush junta” — as Gore Vidal called it — launched its propaganda campaign to invade Iraq, effectively casting the dye for much of the historic period since.

On Sunday, Sept. 8, 2002, the New York Times ran on its front page the story “U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts” by Michael Gordon and Judith Miller.

The same day, then Vice President Dick Cheney appeared on Meet the Press  with Tim Russert, hyping the New York Times story as evidence that Hussein was attempting to acquire “the kinds of tubes that are necessary to build a centrifuge and the centrifuge is required to take low-grade uranium and enhance it into highly-enriched uranium which is what you have to have in order to build a bomb.” Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice followed Cheney’s lead on other shows.

In 2005, I confronted Miller about her reporting, asking her at if she would name the anonymous lying source who she allegedly relied on to falsely report “the best technical experts and nuclear scientists at laboratories like Oak Ridge supported” the CIA claim that the tubes were for a nuclear weapons program. In fact, it would later be established, the nuclear scientists did not support such an assessment and were effectively muzzled. When I questioned her, Miller refused to name the source that fed her this false information and Marvin Kalb, the moderator of the event, see video, ran interference, stopping further follow-ups. (See my piece “Should Media Expose Sources Who Lied to Them?”)

Many serious analysts early on deduced that the source was Cheney himself, likely through his chief of staff, Scooter Libby.

Even the mainstream Bob Simon of CBS would later remark to Bill Moyers about Cheney: “You leak a story, and then you quote the story. I mean, that’s a remarkable thing to do.”

Remarkable is actually an understatement. It’s engaging in a de facto conspiracy to deceive the U.S. public into war.

In April of 2020, a journalist asked at the daily White House press briefing: “Mr. President, I wanted to ask Dr. Fauci: Could you address these suggestions or concerns that this virus was somehow manmade, possibly came out of a laboratory in China?”

Anthony Fauci replied: “There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.”

What Fauci was talking about was the piece “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” in Nature Medicine.

That article was widely accepted by the major media as eviscerating the possibility of lab origin of Covid, shutting down debate at that critical time and continuing to hinder it to this day.

The thing is, Fauci seems to have had a serious role in that article’s appearing.

One of the few people objecting to the piece when it was first published, in the Spring of 2020 was Meryl Nass, who asked: “Why are some of the US’s top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?” She would go on to argue that the signers of the Nature Medicine article were pushed to write it.

In 2021, limited Freedom of Information Act findings showed that Fauci had at minimum effectively coordinated with the named authors of the Nature Medicine article. See Nass’ write-up and subsequent reporting by some mainstream outlets such as USA Today.

Thus, this insidious tactic of helping to plant a story pushing the line you want in a media outlet and then citing it as evidence for your case was employed by both longtime creatures of Washington at historic junctures.

There are other notable parallels. Both Fauci and Cheney have also both been leading beneficiaries of Trumpwashing.

Ashley Rindsberg makes some serious arguments in his piece, “How Dick Cheney created Anthony Fauci,” including about the buildup of US bio“defense” after 9/11 (actually the anthrax attacks) — a trend several observers have noted. Alexis Baden-Mayer traces such arguments back to 1976, when Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld apparently pressured President Ford to order massive inoculations in the Swine Flu scare, which he would be widely mocked for.

While the antiwar forces and “left” criticism of the Iraq WMD propaganda were wholly inadequate, they at least manifested themselves on the national stage to some extent. Covid origins has hardly been recognized as an antiwar issue by most and the “left” at times has actually played a detrimental role, explicitly doing the establishment’s bidding in irrationally denying or minimizing the possibility of lab origin of the pandemic.

One thing that should be kept in mind as one parses through the claims and “exposés” is that some are de facto cover stories.

The Bush administration ramped up their propaganda campaign for the Iraq invasion, as noted at the beginning of this article, in September of 2002.

Why then? Sophisticates at the time would quote Andrew Card: “From a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce new products in August” said Bush’s chief of staff.

With the Bush administration cynically using the one year anniversary of 9/11 as a backdrop to launch their push for invading Iraq, the rationale articulated by Card was actually a remarkably benign motivation, a likely cover, in comparison to the war makers actual thinking.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

Ethical Principles of Public Health

The Academy for Science and Freedom | August 23, 2022

During the SARS2 coronavirus pandemic, fundamental principles of public health were ignored, and trust in public health has been damaged. As experts in public health, medical science, ethics, and health policy, we propose the following ten principles to guide public health officials and scientists, in order to ensure the credibility of public health recommendations and to help restore public trust.

Ethical Principles of Public Health

  1. All public health advice should consider the impact on overall health, rather than solely be concerned with a single disease. It should always consider both benefits and harms from public health measures and weigh short-term gains against long-term harms.
  2. Public health is about everyone. Any public health policy must first and foremost protect society’s most vulnerable, including children, low-income families, persons with disabilities and the elderly. It should never shift the burden of disease from the affluent to the less affluent.
  3. Public health advice should be adapted to the needs of each population, within cultural, religious, geographic, and other contexts.
  4. Public health is about comparative risk evaluations, risk reduction, and reducing uncertainties using the best available evidence, since risk usually cannot be entirely eliminated.
  5. Public health requires public trust. Public health recommendations should present facts as the basis for guidance, and never employ fear or shame to sway or manipulate the public.
  6. Medical interventions should not be forced or coerced upon a population, but rather should be voluntary and based on informed consent.  Public health officials are advisors, not rule setters, and provide information and resources for individuals to make informed decisions.
  7. Public health authorities must be honest and transparent, both with what is known and what is not known. Advice should be evidence-based and explained by data, and authorities must acknowledge errors or changes in evidence as soon as they are made aware of them.
  8. Public health scientists and practitioners should avoid conflicts-of-interest, and any unavoidable conflicts-of-interest must be clearly stated.
  9. In public health, open civilized debate is profoundly important. It is unacceptable for public health professionals to censor, silence or intimidate members of the public or other public health scientists or practitioners.
  10. It is critical for public health scientists and practitioners always to listen to the public, who are living the public health consequences of public health decisions, and to adapt appropriately

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Most Americans Shrug Off Badgering that They Take the New Coronavirus ‘Bivalent’ Booster Shot

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | September 26, 2022

In the face of incessant media badgering to rush out and take the latest version of experimental coronavirus “vaccine” shot — the “bivalent” booster, the vast majority of Americans are saying “nope” and continuing on with their lives. Three weeks into the all-out push to have every American over 12 years old take the new shot (giving these new booster shots to younger children is up next), it appears that less than two percent of eligible Americans have done so.

The growing resistance to the coronavirus shots pushers’ propaganda gives one hope for America. With each new experimental coronavirus shot Americans are being urged to take, the percentage who acquiesce declines. The line that the shots are needed, safe, and effective has proven a farce on all counts. And the latest shot rushed into distribution has taken the previous shots’ mockery of the process for ensuring safety and efficacy to the next level. The truth is out there; increasingly Americans are seeing past the media hype and finding it.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 1 Comment

YouTube CEO is questioned over censorship of US Senator

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | September 24, 2022

In a letter to YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, Senator Ron Johnson demanded answers on the platform’s COVID-19 moderation policies because of repeated censorship of a sitting senator.

“YouTube has displayed a troubling track record of censoring a sitting United States Senator, the proceedings of the United States Senate, journalists that interview me, and the display of data that is entirely generated from U.S. government health agencies,” Johnson wrote.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The Wisconsin Republican and ranking member of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee asked YouTube to provide the committee with documents “concerning the development and implementation” of its COVID-19 content moderation policies.

The letter highlights several cases, starting in October 2021, where YouTube censored content or suspended the senator.

Johnson also noted that YouTube is not fair in applying its moderation policies, something that was highlighted when the platform’s chief product officer Neal Mohan testified before the Senate on September 14.

“I read the following two quotes that President Biden said on July 21, 2021. The first was, ‘You’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.’ The second was, ‘If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in an ICU unit, and you’re not going to die,’” the senator recounts in his letter.

“There is no doubt that these two statements are false. I asked Mr. Mohan and the witnesses from the other social media companies whether your companies ever flagged President Biden as a spreader of misinformation. No one even attempted to answer my question.”

The letter demands external and internal communications related to each incident where he was censored.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

PayPal Could Be Legally Prevented From Banning People For Their Political Views

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | September 26, 2022

Although PayPal has been banning conservatives and right-wingers for years, its recent move to terminate accounts operated by the Free Speech Union and other groups in the UK that opposed lockdowns and vaccine mandates has apparently been a step too far.

Following the controversy, dozens of Conservative Party MPs, including Michael Gove, David Davis and Sir Iain Duncan Smith, signed an open letter to Jacob Rees-Mogg’s Business Department demanding that PayPal be legally barred from imposing discriminatory practices.

The letter asserts that it is “hard to avoid construing PayPal’s actions as an orchestrated, politically motivated move to silence critical or dissenting views on these topics within the U.K.”

This morning, the London Times also published a powerful piece by Jawad Iqbal which highlighted the dangers of allowing PayPal to abuse such powers.

“This is censorship by corporate diktat: the company sets its own rules and interprets them as it sees fit. It appears oblivious to the notion that it is wrong in principle to withdraw vital services from people because of their political views. Would it be acceptable for a supermarket to refuse to serve a customer because of their politics or for a high street bank to refuse to make a payment to a company it deemed politically objectionable?” asked Iqbal.

After questions were asked in Parliament about the issue, a new law could be on the cards that would put an end to PayPal’s crusade against dissident viewpoints.

“Conservative backbenchers are considering launching an amendment to upcoming financial legislation in the House of Commons that would ban companies from freezing campaigners’ accounts,” reports the Telegraph.

“One source said ministers are likely to accept the amendment to the law because Conservative backbenchers will support it.”

The Department of Culture, Media and Sport has also demanded answers from PayPal.

The familiar old argument from leftists, who apparently now vehemently support monopolistic transnational corporations using their might and vast resources to impose censorship, is that “PayPal is a private company and can ban who it wants.”

However, at least in the UK, that isn’t strictly true.

PayPal is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which mandates “All firms must be able to show consistently that fair treatment of customers is at the heart of their business model.”

Fair treatment of customers clearly isn’t at the heart of PayPal’s business model, it’s literally the exact opposite.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

The Spoils of War

By Eamon McKinney | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 25, 2022

“The spoils of war” normally refers to the plunder extracted from enemies during and after a conflict. However, in light of recent revelations the assumption that wartime plunder is only visited on “enemies” needs to be re-evaluated. While the Empire’s supposed “ally” Ukraine has already been lined up to be dismantled and pillaged by the Western financial powers post war, it seems as if the resources of the Ukraine will not be sufficient to satisfy the American Empire’s insatiable greed. A recently leaked document from American think tank, The Rand Corporation outlines clearly the next stage in the planned destruction of Europe, where friend and foe alike are fair game for the Cabal’s limitless avarice.

The Rand Corp was established in 1946, it is one of many such think tanks the U.S. establishment outsources its thinking to. Made famous by the “Pentagon papers” leak during the Vietnam war, its role in the planning, operation and continuance of that genocidal conflict left few in any doubt whose interests it serves. Funded primarily by the Pentagon, the U.S. Army and the Air Force, it claims that it is non-partisan, meaning that regardless of the incumbent political party, it serves the permanent government, the deep state.

The strategies for the current conflict were drawn up by Rand back in May 2019. Titled “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia”, it follows the Cold War thinking that successfully bankrupted and brought down the former Soviet Union. Firstly, it states that “Russia must be attacked and its most vulnerable point, that of its oil and gas exports which underpin its economy”. To this end “financial and commercial sanctions must be used, and the same time European countries must be made to decrease the importation of Russian gas and replace it with U.S. supplied liquified natural gas”. So, no conflict of interests here.

It goes on to state that “providing lethal aid to Ukraine will exploit Russia’s vulnerability and force it pay a high cost for the war, calibrated to harm Russia without it leading to a wider conflict”. No mention of any “human cost” associated with their plan, for the sociopathic Rand Corp, collateral damage is just the cost of doing business. The simplistic worldview promoted by Rand rarely considers the law of unintended consequences, such as Russia’s destruction of more than 2000 military bases constructed by the west in the eight year build-up in the Ukraine. It completely underestimated Russia’s military might and strategic savvy, and seemed baffled and disappointed that Russia wasn’t fighting the war the way Rand envisaged. Neither did it anticipate the fact that most of the world’s nations declined to join in the American sanctions, which rather than harm Russia’s economy only served to elevate it to new highs. It seems in Washington you still get to call yourself a think tank, even when you are always wrong.

But the Rand Corp has a larger vision. In another recently leaked report from Rand they outlined how the U.S. intends to further profit from Europe’s misery. Titled, “Weakening Germany, Strengthening U.S.” it posits that “there is an urgent need for an influx of resources from outside to maintain the economy, particularly the banking sector” It further states that “Only European countries, bound by EU and NATO commitments can provide these without significant military and political costs to us” Despite the manufactured appearance of close bonds between the EU and the U.S., the latter has become increasingly concerned about their ability to control their European “allies”. Absent the British influence in the EU post-Brexit, the Europeans, particularly Germany and France, it worried may be developing some independent thought and may in time “develop into an American competitor, both politically and economically”.

“Stopping Russian supplies could create a systematic crisis that could have a devastating effect on the German economy and indirectly on the European Union as a whole. The only possible way to ensure Germany rejects Russian energy is to draw it into a military conflict in the Ukraine”. So states the Rand report, that part they got right. So now a beleaguered Germany limps obediently towards its imminent destruction and plunder. A once proud country with a dynamic and thriving industrial sector is now led by fools, traitors and ideologues, all who lack the spine to stand up for the interests of the German people. The Nordstream 2 pipeline would have served the German people and its economy, yet German politicians refused to bring it online, because America told them to. It will be a leaderless Germany that will be the first to be sacrificed and plundered in the service of “American interests”. Yet even the enormous wealth of the German state alone is unlikely to sate Americas appetite.

After Germany which of Americas “allies” will be next to experience the warm embrace of American friendship? France? Holland? Italy? Any country with resources that America thinks can help prop up its own failing economy, is likely already in the crosshairs of American greed. American financial policies have ensured that all the nations it considered in its sphere of influence will suffer mightily in the coming meltdown. Japan, South Korea, and even remote Australia all have resources, natural and otherwise that can be plucked out of bankruptcy at pennies on the dollar. After all, a good crisis cannot be allowed to go to waste, particularly when the crisis was designed for that very purpose.

Henry Kissinger said many years ago, “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests,” these interests of which the reviled Kissinger spoke, are decidedly not the interests of the American people who have already been looted to breaking point. They are the financial and corporate interests, the same interests on whose behalf all America’s wars and interventions are fought. The “one indispensable nation”, to whom everyone and everything is dispensable, considers anything it sees as its to take.

America has underestimated Putin’s Russia, and Europe as a whole will suffer disastrous consequences as a result. But it has also underestimated the Europeans. If it thinks the limp-wristed European political class is representative of the European people, it has a major surprise coming. Years of malaise and political apathy have put the EU nations into a stupor that has allowed a corrupt class of obedient simpletons to achieve political power. The effects of the Ukrainian conflict are now being felt hard and that anger will be on full display as temperatures continue to drop. The previously docile European people are angry, very angry and the Rand Corp and the masters it serves will soon discover that despite their attempts, Europe is not yet a weak third world country incapable of resistance.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | 3 Comments

Former US Congressman Ron Paul mocks US neocon ties to Iran riots ‘leader’

Press TV – September 26, 2022

Former US Congressman Ron Paul has mocked the claim that a US-government-hired Iranian opposition figure is “leading” what Washington is projecting as a “freedom” movement in Iran amid deadly riots over the death of a young woman.

In a Twitter post on Monday, Paul pointed to the close ties between Masih Alinejad — a commentator for Washington’s official Persian language propaganda network Voice of America (VOA) – and the ultra-rightwing neoconservative elements (neocons) in US politics and ridiculed the notion as “totally legit.”

“Doesn’t it strike anyone as strange that the “leader” of this “freedom” movement in Iran is a US government employee and bosom buddy of the neocons? But hey, sure, it’s totally legit…,” the ex-lawmaker wrote, posting a photo of Alinejad with former hawkish US Secretary of State and CIA Director, Mike Pompeo.

The deadly riots, backed by the Western regimes, in the past week in many Iranian cities have seen armed rioters beating and killing police officers, public works servants as well as ordinary civilians while vandalizing banks and other public and private properties.

The riots — also sponsored and encourage by terrorist groups, such as the Komola, Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), and the Paris-based MKO, as well as UK-based propaganda media networks like the state-funded BBC and the Saudi-financed Iran International – started after the death of an Iranian woman, Mahsa Amini, during her brief detention in Tehran by law enforcement officers for failing to adequately observe hijab.

Police authorities in Tehran insist that Amini was not mistreated by law-enforcement personnel, and released video footage showing that she suddenly fainted while attending an educational workshop on the proper observance of the country’s dress code regulations.

After initial peaceful protests demanding official explanations surrounding the circumstances of Amini’s death, foreign-based anti-Iran media outlets as well as opposition and terrorist leaders used it as an opportunity to incite violent riots across Iran.

Meanwhile, investigations to ascertain the cause of Amini’s death are underway with results likely to be made public in a couple of weeks.

On Sunday, millions of Iranians took part in countrywide demonstrations condemning recent riots and foreign sponsorship of violence and vandalism.

The demonstrators reaffirmed their support and allegiance to the Islamic Revolution and raised vociferous slogans against West-backed rabble-rousers.

See also:

CT scan says Mahsa was not hit; BBC says she was brutally killed

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | 2 Comments

Europe’s Biggest Enemy Isn’t Russia Nor Islamic Terrorism, but Israel

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 25, 2022

When Joe Biden took office, many pundits said that at least relations between the U.S. and EU would be restored. But the Iran deal is the ultimate test of just how much he loves the old continent.

Just how far will Israel go to scupper the so-called Iran deal from being signed by both Iran and the West? And will it play a fair game or use underhand and covert tactics to achieve its goal of the deal never being signed? Recently, we have seen the talks in Vienna progress as even the Americans say that certain key negotiating points have been taken out of the deal from the Iranians which has made the negotiations move closer to an agreement; we have also seen though Israel pulling out all the stops, from a PR and lobbying perspective at least.

And then there is the murky subject of skullduggery to destroy the talks. If you’re one of these people who believes in fairies at the bottom of the garden or that certain toothpastes can make your teeth whiter, then you might not buy into Israel using Mossad to derail the deal. Attacks on U.S. forces for example in Iraq, supposedly carried out by Iran-backed militias would normally have most people pointing the finger at Iran, proclaiming that Tehran is not at all serious about the deal but just playing along for time so that it can roll out a nuclear bomb. Then there is the curious case of the Salman Rushdie attack, which, again, many would point out could be attributed to the Iranians who still have a very much ‘alive’ fatwa against the British writer. Indeed, even the Supreme Leader is reported to have made a comment against Rushdie when he heard of the knife attack.

Given even the Israeli media have speculated that Mossad did it, it would be easy to conclude an open and shut case right?

Yet the author believes, like the 9/11 attacks in New York, which was the dirty work of Mossad, that these previous attacks can also be attributed to the Israelis who may well be plotting a bigger attack in the U.S. which Iran can be framed for; in fact, Americans are so ignorant of Islam or anything to do with the Arab world, that such an attack doesn’t even need to be linked to Iran but simply “Islamic terrorists” which might have tenuous links with Tehran.

There is no limit for Israel in terms of how far it can go to block the deal as the elite there believes that the Iran deal would exponentially boost Tehran’s power given the impact of sanctions relief on the economy. But the emergence of Iran as a regional player, economically, will always be a threat to Israel especially as it throws the spotlight on the once pariah state and many will see the fraud of hatred between Israel and Iran for what it is. Just as for decades the West goaded the Gulf States about Iran, installing fear to such a point that it was America and the UK who cleaned up on weapons sales, Israel needs to keep this yarn alive that Iran is the threat both for internal politics with their own people and also to justify the obscene amount of military aid which is sent to Israel each year. But any hack in Lebanon who has connections with Hezbollah will tell you that this threat is phoney and that both sides have enormous respect for one another; in reality both sides are fooling their own people into buying into the threat of an attack as it’s good for political support. The recent claims by Matthew Levitt in the Israeli media for example that Hezbollah wants to start some skirmishes with Israel can’t be taken seriously from those who are close to the Shiite group in Lebanon who say simply that Hezbollah is too scared to do such a thing off its own bat; being directed by the Supreme Leader in Iran though is another matter.

Hezbollah and Indeed Israel’s game of smoke and mirrors in Lebanon makes some pundits question whether Iran is really serious about reaching out for a deal with the west to lift its sanctions, or just playing us all along to win time? Surely Israel can’t have it both ways as its desperate antics of late tend to contradict themselves.

Hezbollah serves Israel well as the latter can focus more of defence spending and other such border initiatives in preference for being held more accountable for its governance. For Hezbollah it’s exactly the same. The threat of Israel launching an attack, once again, is the very bedrock of Hezbollah support in Lebanon. Without that threat, the Shia group may well lose half of its support overnight. This is one of the reasons why Israel continues to bomb Syria, targeting Iranian and Hezbollah activities: to keep the dream alive. It’s another reason why Hezbollah has a despondent enthusiasm towards Lebanon securing gas drilling rights close to Israel’s maritime border.

Yet in this time of Europe’s economies diving into recessions, we should ask ourselves what is the bigger picture? If Israel fails to derail the Iran talks and once again the Iranians get a deal which appeases the Americans, then certainly their economy in Iran will return to the billion dollars a month trade with the EU. One minor detail though which is overlooked and carefully airbrushed out of mainstream media’s narrative is the impact on Europe if the deal goes ahead. Cheap Iranian oil being sent to most EU countries which are really suffering from the shortages of oil and gas and its present market price could be a godsend and would enrage the Israelis even further. Europeans and even the British would look at Iran through a more favourable prism. Many would argue that Iran should be brought back in from the cold, in preference to the loathing of Putin and the hatred generally towards Russia. At least we can talk to the Iranians, many will argue. This notion cannot have escaped the attention of the EU dogs of war in Brussels who seem to be detached from all realities about the Ukrainian war and their sanctions towards Russia. Is it that they are banking on cheap oil from Iran saving EU economies? Biden too must have been advised of how things will pan out. But cheap oil for EU countries doesn’t favour the U.S. directly whereas letting the Europeans sink in their own demise will actually boost the U.S. economy according to the Washington Post, So much for the special relationship with Europe. For both Israel and Washington.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, False Flag Terrorism | , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Industrialist: ‘The Americans control everything in the background’

Free West Media | September 26, 2022

German industrialist Wolfgang Grupp, the CEO of textile giant Trigema, does not understand why Germans suddenly see Vladimir Putin as a mortal enemy. He believes that the US is controlling everything in the background and are the only winners of this war.

The head of the textile manufacturer has taken a stand on the Ukraine war in an interview with Grupp told the portal, “I don’t understand how you can be best friends with Mr Putin for 20 years, be 100 percent dependent on him and within two months you are mortal enemies! That doesn’t make sense.”

Something must have been going on for some time, Grupp suggested. The company patriarch believes that “the Americans are controlling everything in the background so that it remains a world power.” The US, he said, was the only winner in this war.

Grupp: ‘Supplying weapons to Ukraine with great fanfare’

Grupp goes on to say in the interview: “If we deliver weapons to Ukraine with great fanfare for billions and at the same time say: No problem, the citizens and the economy have to pay for it. These are statements that I cannot understand.” He said he had never experienced “ending a dispute by giving one a bigger knife and the other a bigger axe.”

Grupp instead insists on negotiations with Putin. Otherwise, he said, the war could not be ended. His company, said the entrepreneur, has a high financial burden due to the war. Recently he said in an interview with FOCUS online that his costs for gas had increased tenfold in the past two years. He told that he was being “punished” for switching to gas.

No slave labour

The textile industry has been mired in controversy because it uses slave labour, overseas sweatshops and a “fast fashion” business model that encourages huge waste and unsustainable consumption. Grupp has avoided these issues through a long-term commitment to manufacturing textiles entirely in Germany – and more specifically, in Burladingen, Schwabia, where its factory is based.

Unlike the vast majority of other textile firms and international clothing brands, Trigema does not outsource any of its production overseas and only imports responsibly sourced cotton. Trigema has been wholly owned by Grupp for more than 50 years.

Grupp is free to voice such an opinion because being the sole owner using 100 percent of his own capital means Grupp is not beholden to any influence from banks or shareholders. It is Germany’s largest manufacturer of t-shirts, sweatshirts and tennis clothing.

‘Old values’

Grupp is considered a man of conservative values ​​such as responsibility, respect and decency. He is personally liable for Trigema – which is somewhat of a rarity these days.

With reference to current corporatist notions, the company patriarch, who turned 80 this year, explained: “Cash in when things are going well and leave losses to the taxpayer in difficult times, that certainly shouldn’t be done!

“Our world is so crazy. I appreciate the old values, I’m traditional. I am responsible for everything, I guarantee jobs.”

Greens bring ‘war and poverty’

The Scholz administration is clinging to its ideological aberrations. In a bill intended to implement an EU directive, the Treasury Department earlier underwrote a 66 billion loan authorization for KfW to provide support to energy companies.

The KfW is a German state-owned investment and development bank, based in Frankfurt. As of 2014, it is the world’s largest national development bank and Germany’s third largest bank in terms of its balance sheet.

Martin Reichardt, AfD state chairman of Saxony-Anhalt and member of the federal executive board, exposed the government’s justification for the additional credit authorization as scandalous: “The credit authorization is necessary so that the confidence of business and the public in the federal government’s packages of measures is not damaged.” The damage to citizens however is huge.

“Those who vote for the Greens choose war and poverty,” according to Reichardt.

The crisis is picking up speed

Fifty  percent of trading companies are threatened by the government’s policies. Every second company in Germany is now facing existential hardships. This was the result of a recent survey by the German Retail Association (HDE) among 900 companies in the retail sector.

The main reason for the development is energy costs, which have risen by an average of 150 percent since the beginning of the year. Stefan Genth, General Manager of the HDE, explains: “On the one hand, energy prices are rising enormously, on the other hand, most of them cannot simply pass the costs on to customers due to the tough competition.”

In addition, there are the additional cost increases due to the Russia sanctions – they too are a direct consequence of the policy of the federal government.

Only 14 percent of those surveyed can add some or all of the rising energy costs to consumer prices. Almost a quarter of the survey participants expect to have to close their own business within the next twelve months. The situation is particularly tense among bicycle dealers, dealers in household appliances and consumer electronics.

Meanwhile, the food industry is already warning of the acute danger of food shortages. “There are significant supply gaps in the daily food supply for people in Germany. The situation is more than serious,” an open letter from the industry warned, which was initiated by the German Frozen Food Institute (DTI) and the Association of German Cold Stores and Cold Logistics Companies (VDKL). Five other industry associations signed the letter, which was addressed to Chancellor Scholz, Federal Minister of Economics Habeck and Minister of Agriculture Özdemir.

The companies now fear that production lines will soon come to a standstill and that refrigerated logistics centers for food distribution will be closed. “The food industry is currently experiencing the worst crisis since the end of the Second World War,” it continued. “The situation is tense and the load limit has been reached, so the companies have to reduce their ranges in an emergency.”

Here, too, the dramatic rise in prices for electricity and gas supply due to sanctions is cited as the reason for the catastrophic situation.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | 1 Comment

US Hard at Work Preparing Taiwan for War with China

By Vladimir Platov – New Eastern Outlook 26.09.2022

The years leading up to World War I and World War II are often referred to by historians as “diplomatic fever,” because of active mobilization of several powers around the world in both overt and covert alliances. However, such activity was not aimed at preventing conflict, but solely at strengthening their position ahead of the impending war which was their goal all along.

Unfortunately, something similar can be seen in US behavior of late, both in terms of “joining forces” on Washington’s possible European battlefront against Russia, and in the Asia-Pacific region (APAC) in confronting China. US recent policies and actions – on the eve of the Chinese Communist Party Congress – have been characterized by the creation of anti-Chinese blocs, unprecedented large-scale exercises in the APAC and close to Chinese borders, and various provocations.

After a provocative visit to Taiwan by US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi in early August, the situation around the island, as well as relations between China and the US in general, escalated. China, which considers the island one of its provinces, condemned the visit, seeing it as support by the United States for Taiwanese separatism.

In the interest of containing China, the White House is provoking tensions around the island of Taiwan, blatantly violating the One China principle, which the Americans once accepted as one of the main conditions for normalizing US-China relations. In pursuing the the anti-China strategy, during August alone four delegations with representatives from the US political establishment at various levels travelled to Taiwan. Apparently in coordination with Washington, a number of European Union political delegations also paid provocative visits to Taiwan and showed support for Beijing’s opponents on the island.

Simultaneously with the political anti-Beijing demarches, immediately after Nancy Pelosi’s visit, Chinese territorial waters in the Taiwan Strait began to be violated more frequently by US naval vessels under the pretext of freedom of navigation. On August 27, for example, two US naval vessels, the missile cruisers USS Antietam and USS Chancellorsville, made a demonstrative and provocative passage through the Taiwan Strait, which the Chinese Foreign Ministry strongly opposed. To thwart any further provocation by the US, China’s Army has been put on high alert, according to Shi Yi, an official of the Eastern Theater Command of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). On August 28, Taiwan’s Armed Forces recorded the sighting of 23 PLA aircraft and eight PLA ships in sea and airspace near Taiwan.

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian commented on Washington’s provocation on August 29. “US naval vessels flying the flag of freedom of navigation are carrying out a show of force. This is not a commitment to freedom of navigation, but a provocation against it and deliberate harm to peace and stability in the region. The Chinese side again calls on the US to stop emasculating, diluting and perverting the One China principle, strictly respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other countries and basic international norms on non-interference in the internal affairs of states, and effectively implement the provisions of the three Chinese-US joint communiqués.”

Continuing to escalate the situation around Taiwan, US authorities in early September announced their intention to sell $1.1 billion worth of weapons and military equipment to Taiwan.

At the same time, the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations approved a bill on September 14 that would provide for a comprehensive expansion of support to Taiwan, including military support. As well as imposing sanctions on Beijing under the pretext of seeking to preserve stability in the Asia-Pacific region, said the Committee’s senior Republican, Jim Risch, commenting on the vote. In essence, this initiative by US lawmakers seeks to revise US policy towards Taiwan and, by extension, mainland China. The bill would make Taiwan a “major non-NATO ally” of the United States, increasing its military aid (not just defensive but also offensive weapons, including missiles) to $4.5 billion over the next four years, making it the largest recipient after Israel, Egypt and Ukraine. China has already said that, if passed, the new bill would come as a shock to US-China relations. And China’s Ambassador to the US, Qin Gang, told Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman in a meeting on August 23 that Chinese-US relations would be severed if the law went into effect.

Covering up his aggressive policy towards China with the alleged possibility of a Chinese “invasion” of Taiwan, US President Joe Biden assured in an interview with CBS that the US military would stand up to defend Taiwan.

However, by pushing China into military action, the US, Bloomberg estimates, could find itself in a terrible position in the event of a conflict with China within months or even weeks of the outbreak of hostilities. Pentagon arsenals are empty because of significant arms deliveries to Kiev. And China’s Army today is very technically equipped. Defending Taiwan will therefore be very costly, with the United States having to pay a prohibitive price in both personnel and equipment.

The US Navy is now poorly prepared, inferior in numbers to the Chinese, and US naval bases are underprepared, former US Navy Rear Admiral Charles Williams pointed out in an article for The Hill. Furthermore, the US can no longer act on two fronts; against Russia and China at the same time.

The Times also warns that the United States would suffer heavy losses and take years to recover from an open conflict with the PRC, citing analysis by the Washington-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies. In particular, its analysts predict that the US will lose a significant portion of its fleet and some 900 combat aircraft defending Taiwan against China.

In confronting China, regional allies are unlikely to help the US, and even Germany, which intends, according to remarks made in early September by Inspector General of the Bundeswehr General Eberhard Zorn, to “increase its military presence in the Indo-Pacific region to contain China.”

Despite these provocative actions by Washington and Taipei’s push for military action, the PRC government has reaffirmed its determination to pursue national reunification with Taiwan. Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning reiterated the other day that the Taiwan issue is strictly an internal Chinese matter and the US has no right to interfere in it.

September 26, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment