As if the political unraveling across the European Union, United Kingdom and other powers of the political West wasn’t bad enough, the people who have become fed up with the disastrous policies of their failing governments are finally taking to the streets. Pushed to the brink of (or beyond) poverty, with soaring food, energy and housing costs, tens of thousands of protesters railed against the policies of the Czech government. Starting on Friday, the residents of Prague took to the streets, demanding the resignation of the Czech government under Prime Minister Petr Fiala, withdrawal from NATO, as well as direct talks and an agreement on future natural gas supplies from Russia.
“This is a new national revival and its goal is for the Czech Republic to be independent,” organizer Ladislav Vrabel stated. “When I see a full square, no one can stop this.”
Demonstrations were not only limited to Prague, but occurred both in the capital city, as well as the second-largest Czech city of Brno. Organized under the slogan of “Czech Republic First,” the protests drew large-scale support from both sides of the political spectrum, as left-wing and right-wing parties joined forces to protest the subservient policies of the government in Prague.
“Russia’s not our enemy, the government of warmongers is the enemy,” one speaker said, according to a report by the Associated Press. Prague has sent munitions, armored vehicles, tanks, artillery systems and other heavy weapons to the Kiev regime and provided approximately 500,000 visas to Ukrainian citizens, along with full benefits. This has caused frustration among millions of Czechs, many of whom are now struggling to afford basic necessities, as their government is wasting increasingly scant resources by sending them to the corrupt Neo-Nazi junta in Kiev. Among the aforementioned requests such as the halt of anti-Russian policies, protest organizers are also demanding that Ukrainian citizens in Czechia not be granted permanent residency status.
This protest was the third in a series of demonstrations organized by a Czech group demanding Prague’s withdrawal from NATO and the establishment of normal ties with Moscow. According to Bloomberg, Prime Minister Petr Fiala’s government has attempted to dismiss the protests as supposedly “inspired by pro-Kremlin propagandist narratives.” The Czech government has been woefully unprepared for the economic fallout of anti-Russian sanctions and policies it was ordered to implement, resulting in the ever-rising costs which have not been tackled despite aid to businesses and household electricity price caps. On the contrary, price controls only backfired, causing shortages and resulting in even greater price hikes.
Despite attempts by the Western mainstream propaganda machine to present the Prague protests as “merely a local occurrence”, the truth is that they are just a relatively small part of a rising wave of discontent across not just the EU, but Europe as a whole. On October 27, just a day before the demonstrations in Prague erupted, tens of thousands protested in France, demanding higher wages to offset the rising costs of living. The strike also included teachers, healthcare providers and railway workers, among thousands of other French citizens. In recent months and weeks, similar protests have been organized in Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Austria.
“This is merely the silence before the storm — the discontent is great, and people do not have any sense that the government has a plausible strategy to master the crisis,” German pollster Manfred Güllner told The Wall Street Journal.
At a time when approximately 75% of German families are forced to cut back on energy consumption, a mere 9% of Germans support Chancellor Olaf Scholz in his policies to tackle the escalating energy crisis threatening to destroy the EU’s largest industrial power. Although the protesters in France didn’t put anti-Russian sanctions at the forefront of their demands, German demonstrators have called for an end to these self-harming policies. The massive discontent in Europe will certainly spread all over the world, as hundreds of millions now realize that there is a direct connection between Western sanctions against Russia and their ever-growing economic and financial issues.
It does not take an expert in geopolitical matters to connect the dots and understand how the latest proxy war against Russia is affecting the well-being of the world. The situation in the EU has become so bad now that millions of Ukrainian citizens who have fled to Europe are returning to their (unfortunately) Neo-Nazi junta-run country. According to the latest figures by the International Organization for Migration (IMO), over six million people have gone back, despite the still ongoing conflict. The Kiev regime is now struggling to accommodate everyone and the Neo-Nazi junta officials are urging citizens not to return this winter. Blackouts have become the norm in multiple cities and with the coming sub-zero temperatures heating will be a major concern in the next several months.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Warning: Some of the following details are distressing.
***
Two years later, [investigative reporter Celia] Farber would follow the trail of child casualties left by Dr Fauci’s Aids branch, DAIDS, in Uganda, exposing the pattern of abusing African mothers and children.
After the BBC documentary aired, AP reporter John Solomon made his own efforts to calculate the number of children who died in Dr Fauci’s Aids drug experiments. Solomon’s May 2005 AP investigation revealed that at least 465 New York City foster children were subjects in NIAID’s [US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] trials and that Dr Fauci’s agency provided fewer than one-third (142) of those children with an advocate – the minimum legally mandated protection.
A March 2004 letter from Vera Sharav to Dr David Horowitz, director of FDA’s [Food and Drink Administration] Office of Compliance, charged Dr Fauci’s HIV drug trials with numerous violations of federal law, including NIAID’s failure to protect the rights and safety of foster children, particularly during the perilous Phase 1 stages in which drug companies determine toxicity effects by exploring maximum tolerance levels. Sharav accused Dr Fauci’s team of illegally failing to provide state wards and orphans with independent guardians to represent their interests and protect their rights during brutal, dangerous, and often agonizingly painful experiments.
The 2004 FDA investigation of Dr Fauci’s AIDS research division urged the head of NIH to insist on better management from NIAID. ‘The overall management of this Division requires careful review,’ the report said. A May 2005 Congressional hearing also concluded that NIAID’s experiments had violated federal statutes.
In testimony before Congress, NIAID and its local partner – New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) – sought to justify the unethical research practices by claiming they were providing first-class, cutting-edge treatments to HIV-infected children who could otherwise not afford expensive medicines.
However, AHRP’s [Alliance for Human Research Protection] investigation revealed that many of the children NIAID subjected to Dr Fauci’s experiments were perfectly healthy and may not even have been HIV-infected. Those investigations focused on thirty-six of the trials. For obvious reasons, clinical trials virtually always occur in hospital settings with trained medical personnel, doctors and nurses, in attendance. However, ICC [Incarnation Children’s Center] was a non-medical facility. The decision to allow experiments with highly toxic drugs at an orphanage devoid of medical personnel was, itself, a stunning act of malpractice. Subsequent events suggest that the decision was deliberate, calculated to avoid scientific and ethical objections that might have put Pharma PIs [principal investigators] at odds with trained medical professionals. Publicly, NIAID pretended it would permit pharmaceutical companies to conduct their dangerous dose tolerance experiments only on children who had terminal Aids and were therefore likely to die anyhow. However, AHRP found that NIAID was quietly allowing its Pharma partners to experiment not only on children with laboratory-confirmed HIV infection, but also those ‘presumed’ to be infected. In other words, NIAID required no proof that these children actually had HIV. AHRP accused NIAID of exposing children who might never have developed Aids to lethal risks and the horrific adverse effects of highly toxic drugs for purposes that were not therapeutic, but purely experimental.
On March 8, 2004, NIH [National Institutes of Health, of which Fauci’s NIAID is a division] rejected a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the adverse event reports from NIAID’s trials conducted at ICC, citing FOIA’s ‘trade secrets’ and ‘privacy’ exemptions. AHRP then filed a complaint on March 10 with the FDA and the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP), charging that NIAID was depriving foster children of legally mandated federal protections against research risks. Two subsequent investigations validated AHRP’s complaint.
John Solomon’s AP investigation finally brought Dr Fauci’s experiments to national prominence. AP identified at least forty-eight Aids experiments NIAID conducted on foster children in seven states – mostly in violation of the federal requirement that NIAID provide those children with an advocate. In addition to the Dapsone trial that killed at least ten children, NIAID sponsored another study testing a combination of adult antiretroviral drugs. AP reported that of the fifty-two children in the trial, there were twenty-six moderate to severe reactions – nearly all in infants. The side effects included rash, fever, and dangerous drops in infection-fighting white blood cells.
From the outset, Dr Fauci’s experiments served his vain obsession to develop an HIV vaccine. (Despite these expenditures of tens of billions of dollars, he has failed – for forty years – to develop an HIV vaccine that was safe or effective for human use.) Medical records that NIAID ultimately and reluctantly released proved that Dr Fauci’s PIs were testing his dangerous vaccines on children from one month to eighteen years old. AP writer John Solomon confirmed that despite contrary requirements in official NIAID protocols, NIAID was knowingly allowing its Pharma partners to violate NIAID’s written study protocols by conducting these experiments on children with and without proof of HIV infection.
For example, published reports acknowledge that NIAID, Genentech, and Micro-Genesys co-sponsored a vaccine trial code-named ACTG #218. The ACTG #218 protocol states ‘Patients must have: Documented asymptomatic HIV infection,’ and the ‘Expected Total Enrolment’ was seventy-two. However, an internal report acknowledges that NIAID was allowing the companies to openly violate those requirements: ‘125 immunized children proved to be HIV uninfected’. Another report stated: ‘A total of 126 children were not infected’. NIAID’s final analysis acknowledged that ACTG #218 ‘showed no clinical benefit to vaccine recipients’.
Another HIV Phase 1 vaccine trial, ACTG #230, tested two experimental vaccines, one by Genentech, another by Chiron/Biocine. This time, the protocol openly declared: ‘Accepts Healthy Volunteers’. As Solomon discovered, the ‘volunteer’ subjects of that unethical experiment were newborns aged three days or less. NIAID randomized these infants to one of three doses of either experimental HIV vaccine or placebo. These reports validate AHRP’s concerns that Dr Fauci experimented on infants and children who were never at risk of Aids, and that he exposed them to deadly risks and agonizing discomforts in a speculative drug and vaccine exercise that offered absolutely no potential benefit for them.
Dr Fauci was certainly aware of the peril to which he was subjecting his gallant infant ‘volunteers’. Most of the drugs that his PIs tested on these children were previously approved for adults with Aids and carried Black Box warnings of potentially lethal side effects: Aldesleukin, Dapsone, Didanosine, Lamivudine, Nevirapine, Ritonavir, Stavudine, and Zidovudine.
Finally, even in cases when the children were genuinely ill, Dr Fauci’s pretence that his experiments were compassionate gestures to impoverished orphans was always a sham. NIAID’s claim that their experiments were the only opportunity for those children to receive ‘life-saving’ drugs was a canard from the outset. New York State law requires that physicians provide ‘life-saving’ treatment to wards of the state, if need be, to provide treatment ‘off-label’.
Furthermore, drug companies do not primarily design clinical trials to benefit the individual subjects. Their purpose is to gain safety and efficacy information that may prove helpful for subsequent patients and be profitable for their bottom line. Finally, not all subjects get the ‘most promising’ drug in a trial; some get placebos.
Liam Scheff’s January 2004 article, The House that AIDS Built, ignited an outraged internet controversy, prompting the New York Press to publish a follow-up article by Scheff,Inside Incarnation. Scheff’s detailed descriptions are worth reading if only to understand the sacrifices that Dr Fauci demanded from his venturesome ‘volunteer’ babies for ‘the greater good’.
Scheff’s chronicle suggests that Dr Fauci and his PIs purposefully took advantage of Incarnation Children’s Center’s status as a non-medical facility. The PIs had free rein to engage in conduct that experienced professional nurses and doctors would have flagged as unethical and illegal.
When children declined to take the toxic drugs, NIAID and its Pharma partners arranged to surgically implant feeding tubes in their bellies to force obedience. Scheff wrote, ‘When Mimi [a staff member with no medical background] started at ICC, the tubes were used infrequently. “But when the kids got older, a lot of them started to refuse the medication,” she recalled. “Then they started coming in with the tubes more and more. Kids who refused too much, or threw up too much, they’d get a tube. First it was through the nose. But then it was more and more through the stomach. You’d see a certain child refusing over and over, and one day they’d come back from the hospital from surgery, and they had a tube coming right out of their stomach. If you asked why, the doctors said it was for ‘compliance’ – the regimen. Got to keep up the regimen,” said Mimi. “Those were the rules”.’
Mimi describes how children suffered – and how some died: ‘One girl, a six-year-old, Shyanne . . . She was the most delicate little flower – beautiful, polite, full of life. Her family never gave her meds. So, Administration for Children’s Services brought her into ICC . . . she came in and started the meds. And it was three months, maybe three months. And she had a stroke. She could not see. She was this normal girl, singing, jumping, playing. Then, poof, stroked out. Blind. We were freaked out. Then, in a few months, she was gone – dead.’
Between 1985 and 2005, NIAID and its Pharma partners conscripted at least 532 infants and children from foster care in New York City as human subjects of clinical trials testing NIAID’s experimental Aids drugs and vaccines. ICC and the medical research centers that conducted the trials received substantial payments for hosting the experiments, from both the National Institutes of Health and the manufacturers of the drugs. Among those companies were Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Micro-Genesys, Biocine, Glaxo, Wellcome, and Pfizer.
As regular readers will know, I recently had a run-in with PayPal after the payment processor cancelled the account of the Daily Sceptic, along with the Free Speech Union and my personal account. After I kicked up an almighty fuss, all three accounts were restored.
However, that’s not the end of the story. PayPal has deplatformed hundreds of individuals and organisations who still haven’t had their accounts restored, including the U.K. Medical Freedom Alliance, a group that campaigns against vaccine mandates which is run by Elizabeth Evans, a contributor to this site. Why? Because PayPal routinely closes the accounts of anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy, whether about the mRNA vaccines or the war in Ukraine. We need to rein in these global financial services companies and stop them from engaging in this sinister new form of censorship.
Here’s how you can help to do that. Sally-Ann Hart, the Member of Parliament for Hastings and Rye, has tabled an amendment to the Financial Services and Markets Bill, which is currently at the Committee Stage in the House of Commons, to make it illegal for a financial services provider to withhold or withdraw service from a customer on purely political grounds. We hope the Government will accept that amendment, but to encourage it to do so I’m urging everyone who values free speech to email their MP using the Free Speech Union’s campaigning tool, asking them to tell their whip that they support New Clause 15 of the Financial Services and Markets Bill. (You can see the amendment here. It’s on p.20 and labelled NC15.)
This is a critically important battle. If this amendment isn’t passed, we will soon see the emergence of a Chinese-style social credit system in the U.K., except instead of ideological dogma being enforced by the Communist authorities it will be enforced by woke capitalist corporations.
Shortly after he became the owner of Twitter, Elon Musk tweeted “the bird is freed,” which implied Twitter will be more free speech-friendly under his ownership.
Replying to Musk’s tweet, the European Union’s internet market commissioner Thierry Breton said, “In Europe, the bird will fly by our [EU flag emoji] rules. #DSA”
The Digital Services Act (DSA) is a new set of rules for social media and ecommerce companies that was recently passed and will come into effect next year. It aims at making internet businesses liable for societal risks like hate speech. Breton’s tweet was a warning to Musk that Twitter will have to follow DSA rules.
Breton’s spokesperson refused to say whether the European Commission is concerned about Musk’s ownership of Twitter. However, a source told TechCrunch that the bloc was confident the bird’s wings are already clipped.
“With the EU Digital Services Act, the time of big online platforms behaving like they are ‘too big to care’ is coming to an end. The DSA sets clear, harmonized obligations for platforms – proportionate to size, impact and risk,” the source said.
“Europe is open — but on our conditions. Anyone who wants to benefit from the European market will have to fulfill our rules, including on moderation, open algorithms, freedom of speech, transparency, hate speech, revenge porn, and harassment.
“The Commission will supervise very large platforms, including the possibility to impose effective and dissuasive sanctions of up to 6% of global turnover or even a ban on operating in the EU single market in case of repeated serious breaches.”
Imagine the history of medicine if—every time a new disease emerged or was described for the first time—an Official Cure was quickly imposed by government authorities, and any doctor who questioned this Official Cure was branded a dangerous spreader of misinformation.
To students of history, such a scenario is reminiscent of the Roman Catholic Church’s Holy Office of the Inquisition, founded to prosecute anyone in the church’s jurisdiction deemed to have publicly uttered or written statements that questioned Church orthodoxy on spiritual and temporal matters. In the scientific realm, the Inquisition’s most notorious prosecutions were of Giordano Bruno (1548-1600) and Galileo Galilei (1564-1642). Both were convicted of heresy for their heterodox views. The former was first publicly humiliated by being hanged upside down on Rome’s Campo de Fiori and then burned at the stake. His ashes were then thrown in the Tiber River. The latter spent the last nine years of his life under house arrest.
For a while I lived in Rome in the Via Tor di Nona, in an apartment on the site of the Tor di Nona prison in which Giordano Bruno was incarcerated for seven years before he was put to death, and I often walked past his stately monument on the Campo de Fiori—a monument to his life and death, and also to the inhumanity, illiberality, and shame of the Holy Office.
By all accounts, Bruno was an exceedingly adventurous and courageous man. At his trial, upon receiving his dreadful sentence, he reportedly gazed directly into the eyes of his judges and said, “Perhaps you pronounce this sentence against me with greater fear than I receive it.”
Because the US Constitution was so ingeniously framed, the American people lived in a free republic for over two centuries. Sometime during the last ten years or so, we lost sight of the fact that the great advances our people have made in science, technology, and medicine were entirely predicated on free speech and the free exchange of ideas. James Madison, the author of our constitution, understood that the danger of infringing free speech greatly exceeded the danger of people making erroneous utterances. The reason for his conclusion is simple: The only way to correct erroneous perceptions and beliefs is to discuss and debate them.
Six months ago, Dr. Peter McCullough received a letter, dated May 26, 2022, from Richard J. Baron, M.D., who is President and CEO of the American Board of Internal Medicine. The letter was a formal notice that the ABIM was considering potential disciplinary sanction of Dr. McCullough. As Dr. Baron stated:
ABIM has learned that you have made numerous, widely reported and disseminated public statements about the purported dangers or lack of justification for Covid-19 vaccines.
Because of Dr. McCullough’s statements—which the Board deemed to be misinformation—the Board was considering revoking Dr. McCullough’s ABIM certifications in Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Disease. In other words, the ABIM has assumed the function of maintaining/defending the official orthodoxy of Covid-19 vaccines.
It doesn’t matter that these are a based on a novel gene transfer technology, developed at Warp Speed, and deployed on the public by means of an Emergency Use Authorization. According to Dr. Baron, the ABIM’s understanding of these products and how the body reacts to them is a completely settled matter. Therefore, doctors who question the safety and efficacy of these products are, in effect, committing scientific heresy and subject to disciplinary action.
As Dr. McCullough and I document in our book, the COVID-19 vaccines—especially the mRNA products developed by Moderna and PfizerBioNTech—were (already in March of 2020) heralded as the solution to the pandemic, even before they were tested. As Bill Gates proclaimed in a press interview on April 6, 2020, he considered it imperative that mass manufacturing of these vaccines commence even before they were tested. This and countless other statements by Gates and his friends in public health agencies and the mainstream media indicated that the forthcoming vaccines and their mass deployment were a fait accompli.
As a medical scientist and treating physician, Dr. McCullough knew all too well the history of drugs that initially seemed safe and effective, but were later revealed to cause adverse reactions. OxyContin is a notorious recent example. Since SARS-CoV-2 arrived in the United States, Dr. McCullough has been at the forefront of researching the COVID-19 syndrome it causes and how to treat it. When the new vaccines were rolled out, he was at the forefront of investigating their safety and efficacy in the general public.
In the late spring of 2021, Dr. McCullough grew increasingly alarmed about the emerging vaccine safety data. According to the CDC, 6,207 deaths of people who’d received the COVID-19 vaccine were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) up to July 26, 2021. This was a staggering number. By comparison, the 1976 Swine Flu mass vaccination program was shut down after about 25 deaths and 550 cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome were reported.
McCullough pointed this out in his media interviews to the consternation of his hospital administrators who regarded his statements as grounds for termination. Since then, he has been systematically stripped of three professorships, multiple editorial positions at academic medical journals, and a host of other professional memberships and benefits. All that remains of his long and distinguished career are his Texas Medical License and his Board Certifications in Internal Medicine and Cardiovascular Disease. Now the ABIM wants to strip him of his certifications.
In a letter dated October 18, 2022, the ABIM gave Dr. McCullough notice that its Credentials and Certification Committee (CCC) had “determined to recommend that your board certifications be revoked.”
The ABIM’s CCC claimed that Dr. McCullough’s primary offenses were:
1). Understating the risk of COVID-19 death for people under the age of 50.
2). Overstating the risk of death from COVID-19 vaccines.
In making this determination, the ABIM ignored the obvious fact that both of these risks are highly complex and multifactorial and are therefore matters of ongoing inquiry and debate. Again the ABIM made the erroneous assertion that its understanding of these complex phenomena is final, settled, and therefore codified in official orthodoxy.
By inflicting this grave punishment, the ABIM ignores the other salient fact that Dr. McCullough has, in the course of his career, achieved decades of perfect clinical performance, board scores, and hundreds of peer reviewed publications. His patients—including a growing body of vaccine injured patients—consistently give him glowing reviews as a healer.
Since I started working with him over two years ago, I have gotten to know him not only as a compassionate doctor (who frequently takes calls from sick patients in the evening and makes house calls) but also as a devoted family man and loyal friend. Beyond his boundless passion for medical scholarship, he is deeply interested in the entire human condition and the integrity of our Constitutional Republic. In the two years I’ve known him, I’ve never once heard him complain. He has borne his ongoing persecution with perfect stoicism and dignity.
He and his lawyer are doing everything they can to challenge the ABIM’s determination, but doing so is an extremely time-consuming and costly endeavor. If his stripping is finalized, it will impair his status with medical insurers and therefore his ability to be paid for his services as a physician. Welcome to the New American Inquisition.
This blog has nothing to do with heart disease, or vaccines, or anything directly about medical practice at all.
However, it does have a great deal to do with data manipulation, which is something very close to my heart. It also illustrates how a ‘fact’ can be anything but.
I am also hoping to help highlight an increasingly worrying trend that now scours the planet. Namely that we are living in a world distorted to fit whatever narrative those in power are trying to stuff down our throats. Although, I continue to marvel at how anyone can spout utter, utter, nonsense, and not simply curl-up and die of acute embarrassment.
Anyway, gentle reader, let me set the scene for your delectation.
In the UK, more specifically England, doctors and nurses have been leaving the profession in droves. In particular GPs. This has caused a degree of faux concern by politicians, who always wish to claim they are the great protectors of the NHS. The NHS is inevitably a big issue at every election.
Years ago, Jeremy Hunt, the then health secretary – and slippery eel made flesh – promised he would ensure there would be five thousand more GPs within about five years(ish). The actual number of years it was going to take kept moving around as the target receded into the distance. ‘Did I say three, I meant five… or was it ten.’
Commentary on this was not complementary:
“Delivering 5,000 extra GPs in five years, when training a GP takes 10 years, was a practical impossibility that was never going to be achieved,” said Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chair of the BMA’s GPs committee.
“It was a pledge that also ignored the fact that one third of GPs are planning to retire by 2020, and the current medical graduates do not want to join an overworked, underfunded service, with more than 400 GP trainee posts left unfilled last year.”
Andrew Gwynne, the shadow health minister, said Hunt was backtracking on the pledge, and that “the Tories’ election promises are unravelling one by one”.1
Seven years, or so, have now passed since Hunt’s promise, and the number of GPs has fallen. As predicted by anyone who knew why GPs were leaving. Basically, they were all burnt out, and pissed off, and nothing was being done to make their lives easier, especially, especially not by Jeremy Hunt – who did nothing but make the job considerably more difficult. I should know, I am one. Both burnt out, and pissed off, but clinging on – for increasingly unfathomable reasons. Money, mainly.
Now, however, the UK has a new Prime Minister, a new cabinet, a new health minister and a new Chancellor of the Exchequer (one Jeremy Hunt, no less). Lo and behold, we find that the number of doctors and nurses has actually, mysteriously, who’d have thunk it … increased. Even GP numbers have increased!
‘Latest data published by NHS Digital shows that, compared to August 2021, there are also over 3,700 more doctors and over 9,100 more nurses working in the NHS.
Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Steve Barclay* said:
More healthcare staff means better care for patients, which is why it’s fantastic to see a record number of over 1.2 million staff working hard in the NHS.
With over 3,700 more doctors and 9,100 more nurses, we are really putting patients first and NHS England is developing a long-term workforce plan so we can continue to recruit and retain more NHS staff.
Thanks to all our doctors, nurses and NHS healthcare staff who work tirelessly to look after us and our loved ones and continue to inspire future generations to join this rewarding career.
The government continues to deliver on its commitment to recruit 50,000 more nurses by 2024, with 29,000 more nurses since September 2019.’ 2
[*this is a new, new, health secretary. The previous new one, began this sorry saga]
Phew, all is well. Sorted. What a remarkable thing. How has this been achieved … virtually overnight? Did they manage to compress the average training time for a fully qualified doctor from at least ten years to one month? Did they find a locked room full of 3,700 doctors and 9,100 nurses that no-one had noticed before? ‘You are now free to leave and start working. Go, go now, and tend to the sick.’
No, to understand where these figures come from, let us go back in time. Twenty-nine days from the date I wrote this blog – to be exact. We shall visit a website known as doctors.net. A place where doctors post about various things – but nothing critical of vaccines obviously. Here, twenty-nine days ago, we find this, possibly, strange post:
‘I’ve just had an email from the GMC saying the secretary of state has asked for my emergency registration to run until 2024. I doubt she had me in mind specifically. I wonder what has been foretold?’
And this one:
‘Oh. My wife tells me she has also been re-registered.’
And this one, amongst many others:
‘I’ve had the email too. They’ve also apparently restored emergency registration for the nurses, too; just after some of the ones I was working with at the vaccination centre paid to continue their registration. They are somewhat pissed off.’
What is this emergency registration of which they speak? Well, during the COVID19 panic, sorry pandemic, a number of doctors and nurses who had recently retired, (and who had handed back their registration) were unceremoniously dragged back onto the register. Thus, allowing them to keep on practicing medicine. Whether they wanted to or not … most didn’t.
These doctors and nurses didn’t need to do anything themselves, not even ask to be re-instated. It was just done. This policy was designed to help plug holes in staffing. It was known as emergency registration. As stated here, with regard to nurses:
‘The Coronavirus Act 2020 gives the Registrar a new emergency power to temporarily register a person or group of persons as registered nurses, midwives or nursing associates if the Secretary of State advises that an emergency has occurred, is occurring or is about to occur.’ 3
Then as the panic, sorry pandemic, fell away, emergency registrations began to be withdrawn.
‘Many temporary Coronavirus Act provisions remain in force. However, by default they will expire on 25 March 2022. The Government has said it will allow almost all these provisions to expire.
The following policy areas have temporary changes which are set to expire in England or (where relevant) on a UK-wide basis:
– temporary registration of health and social care professionals’ 4
Of course, getting rid of emergency registration would have the effect of (appearing to) sharply reduce the number of doctors and nurses. Even if the vast majority of those who had been plonked on the register never did an extra day’s work and remained happily retired. Yes, this was always a ‘pretend’ workforce. ‘Look at all these additional doctors and nurses we have created… who we haven’t spoken to, and we have no idea if they will ever work again …’
Anyway, the Government was dispensing with emergency registration. Then, out of the blue, it was back again. With retired doctors and nurses placed back on the ‘pretend’ doctors and nurse’s lists once more – until 2024. Which just happens to be the year of the next general election.
What is the explanation for this? Well, according to the General Medical Council in September 2022:
‘The UK government asked us to give temporary emergency registration to suitable people, as part of the response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.’ 5
[The General Medical Council (GMC) controls medical registration].
What…? We had a new COVID-19 pandemic last month? I thought it started in 2020. Did you know it was back with a vengeance? Did you? Did you hear anything about it? No, you didn’t, because it never happened. This statement is simply … not true. I would never dream of calling it a damned lie. Other’s may feel differently.
Anyway, let me take you through this from a slightly different angle.
The UK Government is desperately trying to claim they are doing everything they can to support the NHS, which is currently falling to bits, and will damage their prospects at the next election. One of the key things they wish to claim is that they are increasing the work force – especially doctors and nurses (not managers for some strange reason). However, …
‘More than 40,000 nurses have left the NHS in England in the past year, an analysis by the Nuffield Trust has revealed.
The analysis, conducted by the think tank for the BBC, said that this is the highest number and proportion of nurses leaving the NHS since trend data began.
It found that many of these nurses were often highly skilled and knowledgeable with many more years of work left.’ 6
In addition:
‘Over the last year, the NHS has lost 339 individual (headcount) GP partners and 305 salaried, locum and retainer GPs. This has created a net loss of 644 individual GPs since September 2021… There are now just 0.44 fully qualified GPs per 1,000 patients in England – down from 0.52 in 2015.’ 7
Yet, despite all these people heading for the exit, the Government now informs us that the workforce is not falling, it is going up, up, up, baby. I find this apparent conundrum to be spookily similar to my findings when studying research papers. How can various results be reconciled, when they seem directly contradictory? Heart attacks fell, but deaths from heart disease increased. In the same trial? Oh no, I must read the methodology section – usually impenetrable.
In the same way, we find the number of ‘registered’ doctors is going up, whilst the number of doctors is falling. This leaves us with two seemingly contradictory facts. Which of them is true? Or can they both be true?
In my simple little world, the true ‘fact’ is that the number of doctors is falling, rapidly. However, the Government have solved this issue by creating an equal and opposite fact. Which is that the number of doctors is going up.
They achieved this remarkable feat by bringing back the emergency re-registration of retired doctors, sharply increasing ‘pretend’ doctor’s numbers. In this weird, distorted, manipulated way we have another’ fact’ on our hands. Which is that there are more doctors on the register a.k.a. ‘more doctors.’
Which of these facts is true? Yes, in the hands of politicians, facts can become slippery little swine.
To quote John Martyn: ‘Half the lies I tell you are not true.’
In truth, once you cut through the utter steaming bullshit, I know, and you now know, what is going on – as did many doctors at the time. Here are a few more posts, from twenty-nine days ago, commenting on the re-introduction of emergency registration:
‘After a few hours to consider, I have now emailed the GMC to ask that my temporary registration be removed. FWIW (for what it is worth) I think it highly likely that this is an attempt by the government to inflate the apparent numbers of doctors available.’
Or this one:
‘It has been foretold that for purposes of political spin, they need to say that they have more doctors on the register.’
Another doctor was even more acute in their observation – twenty-nine days ago:
‘The weird thing about this is the clear and direct nature of cheating.
If – as is highly likely – this process relates to absolutely nothing at all apart from manipulating stats to misrepresent reality for political ambitions, then there would be people with job time allocated to it, meetings, emails, conclusions, notes, presentations etc.
“Are you going to the meeting about cheating the doctor numbers tomorrow?”
“Yes, I should make that meeting where we deliberately lie about how many doctors there are”
“Great, see you there. Hopefully we can cheat those figures really efficiently and get away on time!”
And lo, the game played out, exactly as predicted. One month ago, the Government very deliberately inflated figures on doctor’s numbers (and nurse’s numbers). Now they are crowing, in public, about this magnificent increase. ‘Look how brilliant we are. ‘
‘Crikey, how did you manage this totes amazeballs thing?’
‘Well, wouldn’t like to boast about it, really. Hard work, dedication … I would like to thank my team. Golly, is that the time, must dash.’
Do they think we are all completely stupid? Don’t answer that, they clearly do. Do they think no-one noticed? People were tweeting about it at the time:
‘Why has Secretary of State for Health and Social Care @theresecoffey asked the GMC @gmcuk to extend temporary registrations until 2024? Is this to prevent a sudden drop in the number of doctors on the register, causing embarrassing stats in the press?’ 8
Today, we are swimming in a sea of misinformation, and deliberately manipulated statistics. Yet, people seem to shrug their shoulders. ‘Don’t get worked up about it. Everyone is up to it, who cares. Same old, same old. The other lot are just as bad.’
It is time, I believe, for pitchforks and burning torches, and people taking to the streets in protest about the way that this world is going. So very badly wrong.
‘In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.’ George Orwell.
As we can see, investment in fossil fuels has fallen by a third since 2015 in terms of GDP. Part of this was due to the collapse in oil and gas prices in 2014, but undoubtedly the anti-fossil fuel agenda pursued across the West for climate reasons has had a major impact as well.
Either way, this is the real reason why prices have rocketed, not the invasion of Ukraine.
Further evidence can be found in Fig 1.3, which shows that investment has remained steady in countries without a Net Zero pledge:
The real concern is that we are only seeing the early signs of much worse to come. When the cuts in fossil fuel investment really start to bite and existing oil fields begin to dry up, there will be a catastrophic energy crisis. Shortages will be very real and prices will rise well above today’s levels, as demand stays high and we find that renewable energy simply cannot keep up with demand.
The IEA’s naively oversimplistic projections simply assume that building wind and solar farms will do the trick. But the world is a complex place and does not work like that.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has given us a warning. We had better not ignore it.
Anthony Fauci, chief medical adviser to President Biden and director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for 38 years, has resigned and is leaving his post in December. He also steps down as director of the National Institutes for Health (NIH); both organisations are government-funded.
The 81-year-old virologist, who has served seven presidents, is quitting not because (as he says) he wants ‘new challenges’, but because of two books Robert F Kennedy Jnr (RFK) has written exposing him as a liar and a fraud, says Tony Lyons, President at Skyhorse Publishing, the independent publisher of both books.
Lyons said: ‘He used every available form of censorship to protect himself about the allegations in the first book and he doesn’t have any tools left to combat the likely congressional hearings in January.
‘Censorship as a government weapon against dissent has grown to unprecedented levels in the US. It’s a danger to the future of real science, real freedom, and real democracy.’
RFK’s first book, The Real Anthony Fauci, sold one million copies and topped the New York Times best-seller list despite extreme mainstream media censorship. It exposed Fauci’s role in the Covid pandemic and in the disastrous response to the HIV/Aids crisis in the 1980s and 1990s.
In a second book called ‘The Wuhan Cover Up – How US Health Officials Conspired with the Chinese Military to Hide the Origins of COVID-19’ due to be released next year, RFK uncovers the complex web of control and censorship at the heart of this story. Kennedy accuses Fauci of being the architect of the pandemic by funding ‘gain-of-function’ research – or bioweapon research, in plain English – in China’s Wuhan lab, the source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Here is an extract from The Real Anthony Fauci, which details experiments he sanctioned on vulnerable American children during his HIV research.
***
Warning: Some of the following details are distressing.
In 2004, investigative journalist Liam Scheff chronicled Dr Fauci’s secretive experiments on hundreds of HIV-positive foster children at Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC) in New York City and numerous sister facilities in New York and six other states between 1988 and 2002. Those experiments were the core of Dr Fauci’s career-defining effort to develop a second generation of profitable AIDS drugs as an encore to AZT.
Scheff described how Dr Fauci’s NIAID and his Big Pharma partners turned black and Hispanic foster kids into lab rats, subjecting them to torture and abuse in a grim parade of unsupervised drug and vaccine studies: “This former convent houses a revolving stable of children who’ve been removed from their own homes by the Agency for Child Services [ACS]. These children are black, Hispanic, and poor. Many of their mothers had a history of drug abuse and have died. Once taken into ICC, the children become subjects of drug trials sponsored by [Dr Fauci’s] NIAID (a division of the National Institutes of Health), NICHD (the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) in conjunction with some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies – GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Genentech, Chiron/Biocine and others.”
NIAID’s Pharma partners remunerated Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC) for supplying children for the tests. As usual, Dr Fauci had the safety oversight board rigged with his loyal principal investigators (PIs), foremost of whom was Dr Stephen Nicholas, a generously funded NIAID AIDS drug researcher. “Stephen Nicholas was not only director of the ICC until 2002; he also simultaneously sat on the Paediatric Medical Advisory Panel, which was supposed to oversee the tests—which signifies a serious conflict of interest,” criticizes [Holocaust survivor and medical abuse investigator] Vera Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP), a medical industry watchdog organization.
Scheff continued, “The drugs being given to the children are toxic – they’re known to cause genetic mutation, organ failure, bone marrow death, bodily deformations, brain damage, and fatal skin disorders.
“If the children refuse the drugs, they’re held down and force fed. If the children continue to resist, they’re taken to Columbia Presbyterian hospital, where a surgeon puts a plastic tube through their abdominal wall into their stomachs. From then on, the drugs are injected directly into their intestines.
“In 2003, two children, ages six and twelve, had debilitating strokes due to drug toxicities. The six-year-old went blind. They both died shortly after. Another fourteen-year-old died recently. An eight-year-old boy had two plastic surgeries to remove large, fatty, drug-induced lumps from his neck.
“This isn’t science fiction. This is AIDS research.”
Even the foster children who survived Fauci’s experiments reported dire side effects, ranging from skin outbreaks and hives, nausea, and vomiting, to sharp drops in immune response and fevers—all common adverse reactions associated with the drugs he was targeting for development.
During one of his trials involving the drug Dapsone, at least ten children died. A May 2005 Associated Press investigation reported that those “children died from a variety of causes, including four from blood poisoning.” Researchers complained they were unable to determine a safe, useful dosage. Their guessing game cost those children their lives.
“An unexpected finding in our study,” the researchers pitilessly observed, “was that overall mortality while receiving the study drug was significantly higher in the daily Dapsone group.” NIAID researchers shrugged off the deaths as a mystery: “This finding remains unexplained.”
Vera Sharav spent years investigating Dr Fauci’s torture chambers as part of her lifelong mission to end cruel medical experimentation on children. Sharav told me, “Fauci just brushed all those dead babies under the rug. They were collateral damage in his career ambitions. They were throw-away children.” Sharav said that at least eighty children died in Dr Fauci’s Manhattan concentration camp and accused NIAID and its partners of disposing of children’s remains in mass graves.
The BBC’s heart-breaking 2004 documentary, Guinea Pig Kids, chronicles the savage barbarity of Dr Fauci’s science projects from the perspective of the affected children. That year, the BBC hired investigative reporter Celia Farber to conduct field research for the film, which exposes the dark underside of Big Pharma’s stampede to develop lucrative new AIDS remedies. “I found the mass grave at Gate of Heaven cemetery in Hawthorne, New York,” she told me. “I couldn’t believe my eyes. It was a very large pit with AstroTurf thrown over it, which you could actually lift up. Under it one could see dozens of plain wooden coffins, haphazardly stacked. There may have been 100 of them. I learned there was more than one child’s body in each. Around the pit was a semi-circle of several large tombstones on which upward of one thousand children’s names had been engraved. I wrote down every name. I’m still wondering who the rest of those kids were. As far as I know, nobody has ever asked Dr Fauci that haunting question.
“I remember the teddy bears and hearts in piles around the pit and I recall the flies buzzing around. The job of recording all those names took all day. NIAID, New York, and all the hospital PIs were stonewalling us. We couldn’t get any accurate estimate of the number of children who died in the NIAID experiments, or who they were. I went to check the gravestone names against death certificates at the NYC Department of Health, which you could still do at that time. The BBC wanted to match these coffins to the names of children who were known to have been at ICC. It was a very slow, byzantine project with tremendous institutional resistance, but we did turn up a few names. We learned the story of a father who had come out of prison looking for his son. He was told his son had died at ICC of AIDS and there were no medical records, as they’d all been ‘lost in a fire.’ He was devastated. This story ran in the NY Post, believe it or not. But one after the other, every media outlet that touched this story got cold feet. Even then, the medical cartel had this power to kill this kind of story. Dr Fauci has built his career on that attitude. Nobody even asks him a follow-up question. NIAID’s narrative, at that time, was that these children were among the doomed as they ‘had AIDS,’ so supposedly they were all going to die anyway. When people died, in large numbers, gruesome deaths, NIAID’s medical researchers called it ‘lessons learned.’”
MOSCOW – The Russian Defense Ministry raised from the sea bottom and inspected fragments of drones that were used to strike ships and infrastructure of the Russian Black Sea Fleet on Saturday, which revealed that they were launched near the port city of Odesa, the ministry said on Sunday.
The ministry noted that its specialists, in coordination with experts from other state agencies, examined the Canadian-made navigation modules installed on the maritime drones.
“According to the results of recovery of the information read from the memory of the navigation unit, it was established that the launch of the maritime drones was carried out from the coast near the city of Odesa,” the ministry said.
The drones were moving along the safe zone of the so-called grain corridor before swerving towards Russia’s navy base in Sevastopol, according to the ministry.
“Coordinates of the trajectory of one of the maritime drones suggest that it was launched from the waters of the ‘grain corridor’ safe zone in the Black Sea. According to experts, this may indicate a preliminary launch of this drone from one of the civilian vessels chartered by Kiev or its Western supporters to export agricultural products from Ukrainian ports,” the ministry said.
On Saturday, the Russian defense ministry said that Moscow was suspending its participation in the grain deal following Ukraine’s drone attack on vessels of the Russian Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol.
Several ships loaded with liquefied natural gas (LNG) that have been circling off the coast of Spain are likely to stay there until late November, as they wait for European gas prices to go up, Reuters reported on Wednesday, citing industry sources.
An LNG tanker traffic jam has been building off the Spanish coast for weeks with vessels waiting to unload their cargo. Spain boasts the largest LNG storage facilities in the European Union.
The glut of LNG off the coast could be part of a trading strategy by suppliers, as ships are waiting until prices increase to unload, industry sources told Reuters.
Natural gas prices are at their lowest level in Europe since June, having dropped 28% in a week, due in part to above-normal temperatures and high inventory levels, as the EU’s gas storage is now nearly 95% full, according to Rystad Energy.
“If one single idling vessel discharges its cargo, the price will immediately collapse by affecting the other cargoes in the queue and this domino effect is so painful in terms of opportunity cost,” one of the sources told Reuters.
Just by waiting to deliver in December rather than November, the difference in profit could be in the order of tens of millions of dollars per shipment, Michelle Wiese Bockmann from the shipping journal Lloyd’s List told the BBC.
The backlog of ships has mainly been attributed to a lack of LNG storage capacity in Europe. EU countries went on an LNG-buying spree over the summer to fill up their reserves ahead of winter in view of reduced supplies from Russia. But, as the bloc has long relied on pipeline gas, the continent’s regasification and storage capacities cannot cope, Reuters explained.
Here’s the video that got be censored, fired, and canceled by Next Star media, which owns The Hill and Rising, a show I’ve been a weekly contributor to for three years.
Thanks to Breakthrough News for making this video with me and actually being an independent and uncensored media outlet. @BreakThrough News
The army, or a part of it at the war college, has perked up and noticed some of the lessons of the Ukraine war, and that it’s a war that the US military could not fight. They’ve missed a lot of things, or felt they couldn’t/shouldn’t write about them, but they’ve figured some stuff out and written about them in a new report, “A Call to Action: Lessons from Ukraine for the Future Force” by Lieutenant Colonel Katie Crombe, and Professor John A. Nagle.
The entire thing is worth reading, but I’m going to pull out three of the main points. The first is that a volunteer US military can’t fight a real war.
The Russia-Ukraine War is exposing significant vulnerabilities in the Army’s strategic personnel depth and ability to withstand and replace casualties.11 Army theater medical planners may anticipate a sustained rate of roughly 3,600 casualties per day, ranging from those killed in action to those wounded in action or suffering disease or other non-battle injuries. With a 25 percent predicted replacement rate, the personnel system will require 800 new personnel each day. For context, the United States sustained about 50,000 casualties in two decades of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. In large-scale combat operations, the United States could experience that same number of casualties in two weeks. (emphasis mine)
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News
Aletho News 