Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Bill Passed by House and Senate to Declassify COVID Origins Documents May Be Attempt to ‘Frame’ China

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 13, 2023

Lawmakers and media misrepresented a bill requiring the declassification of documents related to the origins of COVID-19, according to several experts who warned that contrary to what the public was told, the legislation limits the types of documents the government must declassify — raising questions about the bill’s real intent.

According to the sponsors of the COVID-19 Origin Act of 2023 — which sailed through the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives and is awaiting President Biden’s signature — the bill requires the government to declassify all documents pertaining to COVID-19.

But experts interviewed by The Defender said the bill requires the declassification only of documents related to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China — the epicenter of the “lab leak theory.”

They suggested the limitations may be intended to reduce the culpability of U.S. and private actors in the potential leak of — or development of — COVID-19, by placing full blame on China and the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Bill’s backers made ‘false claims’

Independent journalist Sam Husseini said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), the Senate’s co-sponsor of the COVID-19 Origin Act, made “claims about the bill which are false.”

Hawley, on March 1, tweeted:

Speaking to Fox News March 2, Hawley made similar claims, saying, “My bill … will declassify all of the information the federal government has on COVID origins.”

Hawley later followed up his statements with a letter addressed to Chinese President Xi Jinping, informing him of the bill’s passage. This prompted a response from the Chinese government, according to The Gateway Pundit.

Another of the bill’s Senate co-sponsors, Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), said in a statement:

“The American people deserve transparency, free from censorship or spin. It’s time to declassify everything we know about COVID’s origins and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, now.”

Braun also tweeted:

Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), who chairs the House Intelligence Committee, told the House:

“The American public deserves answers to every aspect of COVID-19 pandemic including how this virus was created, and specifically whether it was a natural occurrence or was the result of a lab related event.”

Statements like these led media outlets, including The Defender, to report that if passed, the will would trigger the release of all documents — not just those related to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Bill ‘dubiously named’

On his blog, Husseini said the COVID-19 Origin Act is “dubiously named” and instructs Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines only to:

“Declassify any and all information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origin of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), including (A) activities performed by the Wuhan Institute of Virology with or on behalf of the People’s Liberation Army [of China].”

“This means that information not related to the Wuhan Institute of Virology is not being requested and would almost certainly therefore remain classified,” Husseini wrote.

The bill also states:

“There is reason to believe the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology …

“… the Director of National Intelligence should declassify and make available to the public as much information as possible about the origin of COVID-19 so the United States and like-minded countries can —

“(A) identify the origin of COVID-19 as expeditiously as possible, and

“(B) use that information to take all appropriate measures to prevent a similar pandemic from occurring again.”

The bill requires Haines to turn over the declassified evidence “no later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act” and to submit to Congress an unclassified report containing all the documents requested in the bill, with “only such redactions as the Director determines necessary to protect sources and methods.”

Husseini noted that parts of the bill are unusually specific, focusing “on one strain of alleged evidence” by calling for Haines to turn over classified documents pertaining to “researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who fell ill in autumn 2019.”

“Now, that could be very important,” Husseini wrote. “But why is this legislation limiting disclosures?”

A ‘classic Nixonian limited hangout’?

Husseini suggested some members of Congress may not have been fully aware that the bill they were voting for does not appear to, in fact, fully declassify all documents related to the origins of COVID-19.

“I have no idea if members of Congress have actually read the legislation and realize how limited it is,” wrote Husseini, who, in another post, called Hawley’s public rhetoric regarding the bill “false and misleading.”

Husseini told The Defender the bill may be acting as a “limited hangout” with the purpose of acknowledging the “lab leak theory” on the one hand, but via legislation that “makes us accept half of the truth.”

Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., professor of international law at the University of Illinois, told The Defender, “I’m afraid this [bill] is going to be a classic Nixonian limited hangout” that “does not call for the declassification of all those sources [that] should be declassified and/or released.”

Boyle said any information that is declassified “is going to be helpful,” but that the bill’s provision allowing redactions raises concern.

“Who knows what Avril Haines is going to knock out of this report,” he said.

Husseini noted that the bill also makes no provisions for providing information that several groups, including U.S. Right to Know and some media organizations, have requested — but not yet received — via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) submissions. Husseini said this information “is not classified but is being withheld.”

Husseini cited Gary Ruskin, executive director and co-founder of U.S. Right to Know, who said:

“Much of the federal government’s information related to the origins of Covid-19 is not classified, or likely not classified. We just haven’t been able to access much of it yet via FOIA/FOIA litigation.

“The NIH’s [National Institutes of Health] conduct in stonewalling FOIAs is especially outrageous. It’s time for the Biden administration to tell NIH to comply with the FOIA.”

At a March 9 U.S. Department of State press conference, Ned Price, the agency’s spokesperson, appeared to stonewall Husseini when he asked why the government hasn’t responded to U.S. Right to Know’s FOIA requests related to government funding of bioweapons agents’ discovery research, including the funding of such research in China.

“We can respond in writing on a question that specific,” Price replied. When further pressed by Husseini, Price said, “I would ask that you be respectful of your colleagues.”

An attempt to blame the virus exclusively on China?

There has been a flurry of news reports in recent weeks originating from various branches of the U.S. government indicating broader acceptance of the “lab leak theory.”

The U.S. Department of Energy said it now believes COVID-19 most likely emerged from the Wuhan lab — a position subsequently adopted publicly by FBI Director Christopher Wray.

On March 8, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic heard the testimony of experts who also accepted the “lab leak theory.”

“All this — the recent hearings, the Hawley legislation, the WSJ piece — seem part of a coordinated effort on the part of the ‘intelligence community’ to own the pandemic story and use it for their purposes,” Husseini wrote.

Boyle shared similar concerns with The Defender :

“I am concerned that this [bill] is only going to get a part of the truth. Certainly not the full truth of what really happened here with COVID-19, which we need to get at.

“My concern is that all that’s going to get out of this report … will implicate the Wuhan BSL4 [biosafety level 4 lab] in COVID-19. Well, that’s fine with me. But what about the American involvement here?

“And this was funded by Tony Fauci and Francis Collins at NIAID [National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases] and NIH. Those should be in this legislation too, if we really wanted to get to the bottom of what happened here.”

Boyle and Husseini told The Defender there are numerous government and private entities whose classified documents should be declassified.

Boyle said these include the University of North Carolina, the National Center for Toxicological Research, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute at Harvard Medical School, the U.S. Agency for International Development, EcoHealth Alliance and the Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick.

Husseini noted that state governments and private institutions also are likely to possess important information that the COVID-19 Origin Act does not cover. These include Scripps Research, Tulane University and the Wellcome Trust.”

The Wellcome Trust is headed by Jeremy Farrar, now chief scientist for the World Health Organization. “Farrar played a central role in disseminating the propaganda line that COVID could not have lab origins in early 2020,” Husseini said.

U.S. Right to Know sued the University of North Carolina, which is publicly owned, after it failed to respond to the watchdog group’s FOIA requests.

Husseini said the COVID-19 Origin Act “doesn’t even instruct the DNI [Director of National Intelligence] to declassify what it knows about other Chinese government institutions like the Chinese CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention].”

Husseini told The Defender :

“Since [Fauci] retired, the system has seemingly skillfully tried to put the deranged stance of the last three years into the rearview mirror hoping people will forget the massive propaganda.”

Boyle told The Defender that “from this legislation, it does appear they’re trying to pin it all on China.”

Husseini, noting that “China may well have major culpability,” said this is not the same as full or exclusive culpability, which is what the U.S. government may now be attempting to establish.

Husseini wrote that “a general anti-China agenda, has taken primacy and is part of a dynamic which ‘ultimately lets’ U.S. institutions and ‘U.S. biowarfare off the hook.’”

He told The Defender :

“There are two pillars of the U.S. establishment here — one wants to polarize at some level with China and the other wants to ensure the U.S. government continues its discovery of bioweapons agents.

“For the establishment to be maintained, both those strains need to be maintained.”

According to Husseini, this may explain why the bill passed both houses with seemingly little debate. It passed the Senate with “unanimous consent,” and subsequently passed the House in a unanimous vote.

Husseini noted that Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a member of the House Rules Committee, even put forth a rule “to ensure passage of Hawley’s bill.”

Husseini said Biden, who hasn’t yet said if he will sign the bill, has a few options he may be considering, telling The Defender :

“I see no sign of actual opposition from the Biden administration and I suspect this is all being done in coordination with the director of National Intelligence, as were the reports in the Wall Street Journal that drove this narrative.

“It’s possible Biden wants to appear reluctant on this and I suppose Biden could veto it and get an override so he could pose as being conciliatory to the Chinese or the like.”

Husseini said that “with the collapse of the completely fictional Daszak narrative in the late Spring and Summer of 2021 … a backup narrative has been put forward, especially through the Wall Street Journal,” whose report on the Department of Energy pivoting toward the “lab leak theory” was co-written by Michael Gordon, “who with Judy Miller perpetrated the Iraq weapons of mass destruction fraud on the U.S. public.”

He also blamed wide swaths of the independent media, particularly left-leaning outlets, for going along with establishment efforts to discredit the theory that COVID-19 emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

“Much of ‘the Left’ has basically done everything to kill lab origin — and effectively made it a right-wing issue,” Husseini said.

According to Husseini, those who long promoted the Chinese response to COVID-19 and who now are supporting the push to frame China, are pushing for a world “that combines the worst aspects of the U.S. — corrupt corporate capitalism — with the worst aspects of Chinese society: explicit authoritarianism.”

“The pandemic, it can hardly be ignored, helped isolate people from one another, helped restrict borders, was an excuse for massive civil liberties restrictions — all things useful to the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ agenda,” said Husseini. “This is another reason that intentional release should be seriously examined.”

Lab leak or lab origin?

Husseini said he prefers the term “lab origin theory” over “lab leak theory.”

“I see no good reason to make assumptions,” Husseini said. “‘Leak’ assumes a mistake. It could have been a mistake, but why presume it?”

Boyle adopted a similar view, although he noted that the language of the COVID-19 Origin Act does not mention either term.

“It does not refer to a lab leak,” he said. “It doesn’t say ‘leak’ at all. It says ‘originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.’ Obviously, there could be different interpretations of why it originated there. I still believe it was a leak, but this does leave open why it might have originated there.”

Boyle reiterated his longstanding belief that “COVID-19 is an offensive biological warfare weapon with gain-of-function properties” and called for the halting of gain-of-function research.

According to Boyle, who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, Congress’ reluctance to declassify documents that may implicate U.S. government entities in the origins of COVID-19 is reflective of the massive amounts of federal money spent on biological weapons research.

“They’re not doing that because the U.S. government agencies and scientists involved in the development of COVID-19 [have received] massive sums of money,” Boyle said. “We’ve been devoted to developing offensive biological warfare programs since after Sept. 11, 2001 … I’ve been speaking out about this publicly for years.”

Husseini told The Defender :

“Biowarfare is a deniable weapon, which makes disclosure of documents key. Another reason why the Hawley bill limiting disclosure may well signal a massive coverup in plain sight.”

In a pair of tweets Sunday, British Member of Parliament Andrew Bridgen said he received information from U.S. government sources indicating that the U.S. Department of Defense and the Fort Detrick research facility “were responsible for both the virus and the vaccines” and that “criminal proceedings” may follow.

Bridgen did not clarify which sources provided him with this information or who might face such criminal proceedings. At the March 8 Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic hearing, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Dr. Robert Redfield said COVID-19 was “engineered” and blamed gain-of-function research for “the greatest pandemic our world has seen.”

However, Redfield stopped short of explicitly calling for a full ban on such activities, calling instead for a moratorium.

Boyle told The Defender “all this gain-of-function so-called ‘research’ has to be terminated immediately with legislation by Congress … The only way to protect ourselves is to terminate it immediately. No moratorium.”

“There was a moratorium” during the Barack Obama presidency, said Boyle, “and Fauci undermined the moratorium by outsourcing the work through the EcoHealth Alliance to the Wuhan BSL4 [laboratory]. So, a moratorium is worthless. We have to terminate all gain-of-function research everywhere. It has to be prohibited, to be made criminal.”

The Defender reached out to the offices of Hawley and Braun, Turner and Bridgen for comment, but did not receive a response as of press time.

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., based in Athens, Greece, is a senior reporter for The Defender and part of the rotation of hosts for CHD.TV’s “Good Morning CHD.”

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.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , , | Leave a comment

FTC faces ethics complaint after alleged retaliation against Twitter over censorship revelations

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | March 14, 2023

America First Legal (AFL) has filed federal ethics and Inspector General complaints and launched a probe into the Federal Trade Commission’s retaliation against Twitter owner Elon Musk and Twitter for exposing the Biden administration and federal agencies for pressuring Twitter to censor content.

Last week, the House’s Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government released a report detailing how the FTC has been harassing Musk and  over the past few months.

Read the FOIA request, IG investigative request, and Senate ethics request here, here, and here.

AFL filed a complaint with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics requesting an investigation into several Democratic senators, including  and Richard Blumenthal, for violating Senate Rule 43, which prohibits partisan communications in an unconcluded federal proceeding. AFL accuses these senators of encouraging the FTC to investigate Musk and Twitter, which further solidifies conservatives’ claims of the Biden administration weaponizing federal agencies.

AFL filed another complaint with the FTC’s Inspector General requesting an investigation into the agency’s chair Lina Khan and other officials for abusing power.

The organization also filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records that would reveal the reasons for the FTC’s abuse of power.

“The Biden Administration is steadfastly focused on weaponizing the federal government to advance its radical, left-wing political agenda,” said AFL’s general counsel Gene Hamilton. “Most Americans are now aware of politicization at the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security. And now, the Biden Administration has turned to the Federal Trade Commission to exact harm on those who oppose their radical agenda–particularly regarding free speech on social media platforms. Weaponizing the FTC to retaliate against  and Twitter for exposing the truth about Deep State censorship is reprehensible, and we will not stand by idly.”

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Saudi Arabia sticks to Arab Initiative in drive for ties with Israel

MEMO | March 16, 2023

Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief has said that the Kingdom is sticking to the terms of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative in its drive to normalise relations with Israel.

“The terms are well-known,” Prince Turki Al-Faisal told France 24. “The creation of a sovereign Palestinian state with recognised borders and Jerusalem is its capital, and the return of Palestine refugees.” He pointed out that these were the conditions that Saudi Arabia added to the initiative before it was adopted by the Arab League 21 years ago.

The Arab Peace Initiative has been rejected by every Israeli government since then. Moreover, several Arab states have bypassed it and forged ties with the occupation state.

Replying to a question about the potential normalisation of ties with Israel without fulfilling these conditions, Al-Faisal confirmed: “What I have said was not my opinion, but it was declared by officials. I trust the officials when they say anything, and anything made by media is nonsense.”

According to the New Khalij news website, reports in America claim that Riyadh has proposed to Washington that it will make diplomatic ties with Israel in return for a US pledge to protect the Gulf region, support a peaceful nuclear programme in the Kingdom and approve major arms sales to the Royal Saudi Armed Forces.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Australian premiers spar over nuclear sub waste disposal

RT | March 16, 2023

The Australian political establishment is divided as to where the federal government should dispose of nuclear waste associated with the country’s expanded submarine deal with its AUKUS allies.

An accord was struck by the leadership of the countries which make up the trilateral AUKUS alliance – Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom – when they met in San Diego, California earlier this week, which rubber-stamped the sale of nuclear-powered submarines by Washington to Canberra.

In addition, Australia Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed that his country would construct its own fleet of nuclear submarines, which will be delivered in the early 2040s. The terms of the agreement stipulate that the Australian government will be responsible for the disposal of nuclear waste from the vessels – but this appears to have opened a new political front for the country’s various state leaders.

“I think the waste can go where all the jobs are going,” said Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews via the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on Thursday, referencing the 8,000 jobs which are expected to be generated in South Australia during the construction of the military submarines. “I don’t think that’s unreasonable, is it?”

West Australian Premier Mark McGowan has also indicated that nuclear waste disposal sites are unwelcome in his state, joining Andrews in suggesting South Australia as the most appropriate location.

Susan Close, the acting South Australian premier who doubles as the region’s environment minister, responded to the suggestions by saying the decision on nuclear waste locations should be dictated by science and not by “state leaders trying to move nuclear waste that doesn’t yet exist across the border.”

A final decision on the location of the site is not expected for another 12 months, and the site that is eventually selected won’t be required for use until around 2055.

The AUKUS deal will see Australia become the seventh nation with nuclear-powered submarines in its military arsenal, and comes amid Western concerns about China’s military expansion in the Indo-Pacific region. Beijing has rebuked the AUKUS nuclear submarine agreement, saying it contradicts accepted norms of nuclear non-proliferation.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Environmentalism, Militarism, Nuclear Power | , | Leave a comment

MQ-9 Drone Incident: Biden’s Dangerous Escalation

By Scott Ritter – Sputnik -16.03.2023

A US surveillance drone crashed off the coast of Crimea after an encounter with a Russian fighter aircraft. What does this incident say about the current state of the war in Ukraine and where Russia and the US might go from here.

In 2015, the United States established a permanent training facility in Yavoriv, western Ukraine, for the express purpose of training Ukrainian soldiers for combat against Russia.
At that time the conflict in Ukraine was an internal affair, pitting the Ukrainian Army against Ukrainians of ethnic-Russian background who had rebelled against a US-backed coup which, in February 2014, saw the constitutionally elected government of President Viktor Yanukovych replaced by a pro-American government.

This new Ukrainian government, hand-picked by the US, was deeply infused with radical ultra-nationalism linked to the ideology of Stepan Bandera and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, or OUN, which fought alongside Nazi Germany during the Second World War and whose members were responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians.

Many of the Ukrainians being trained by the US military were affiliated with the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, an organization which many in the US Congress at the time found so odious that the passed an amendment to the defense authorization act prohibiting US taxpayer dollars from being used to train its members.

These restrictions aside, there can be no doubt that the purpose of the US training mission in Ukraine was to prepare the Ukrainian military to go to war against Russia. That the US training not only instructed the Ukrainians troops on modern combined arms maneuver warfare, but also sought to elevate the Ukrainians to the same standard used to train the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), provided the first inkling that any future conflict between Ukraine and its disenfranchised ethnic Russian population that involved Russia would be far more than a simple confrontation between two regional neighbors, but a larger war between Russia and the US and NATO—the so-called “collective west”, using Ukraine as a proxy.

This reality was amplified further with the provision by the US and NATO of advanced anti-tank missile systems and other lethal military assistance.

Even before Russia initiated the Special Military Operation, in February 2022, the United States, the United Kingdom, and NATO began a program of intelligence sharing with the Ukrainian armed forces at the highest levels. Once the Russian troops moved across the border, the nature of this intelligence relationship shifted away from providing indications and warning of an impending attack, to the provision of operational and tactical intelligence about Russian military disposition, capabilities, and intent that was used by Ukraine to target Russian forces.

While the US and its NATO allies are understandably reticent about the nature of this intelligence, and the sources from which it is derived, over time it has become clear that every available intelligence collection platform is being used to gather relevant data about Russian military operations in support of the Special Military Operation.
It is also clear that this intelligence is used by joint operational planning cells comprised of US/NATO/Ukrainian forces to develop targets in real time, which are then transmitted to Ukrainian forces.

One of the more ubiquitous intelligence resources employed by the US in support of Ukraine is the MQ-9 Reaper. The MQ-9 is a large a large unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operated by the Air Force. It is remotely operated by a two-person team from a ground control station that is connected to the MQ-9 using satellite equipment. The team includes a qualified pilot who is responsible for flying the aircraft and an enlisted aircrew member who is charged with operating any onboard sensors or weapons the MQ-9 might be carrying.

The MQ-9 has a wingspan of 66 feet, is 36 feet long, 12 feet high, and weighs approximately 4,900 pounds. It is capable of flying at altitudes as high as 50,000 feet and has a range of some 1,400 miles. It can carry a wide variety of weapons and intelligence collection pods. Each MQ-9 costs about $32 million. The MQ-9 Reapers operating over the Black Sea are flown out of a Romanian Air Force base in Campia Turzii by members of the US Air Force’ Detachment 1, 31st Expeditionary Operations Group.

On March 14, 2023, an MQ-9 Reaper operating out of Campia Turzii was flying in international airspace over the Black Sea, west of Crimea. This was a standard flight profile for the MQ-9 Reaper, one that had the Russians concerned, given its proximity to sensitive Russian military installations.

Ukraine had a history of launching operations against Russian forces in Crimea using aerial and underwater drones, and the potential for intelligence collected by the MQ-9 Reaper being used in support of such attacks was very real. For this purpose, the Russian military had declared certain areas off the coast of Crimea as being off limits.

The US, however, does not recognize Russia’s claim to Crimea, or for that matter the four new territories of Kherson, Zaporozhye, Donetsk and Lugansk, that joined the federation following referendums held in September 2022 and, as such, does not recognize any claim regarding the establishment of no-fly zones by Russia in support of its ongoing military operations against Ukraine. The decision to fly the MQ-9 Reaper was made knowing Russia would object, or worse.

Indeed, Russia dispatched a pair of Su-27 fighter aircraft to intercept the MQ-9 Reaper. After making 19 passes at the Reaper, the Su-27’s conducted what can only be described as aggressive maneuvering designed to either compel the MQ-9 Reaper to depart the area, or else bring it down. After one particular incident, which may or may not have involved one or more Su-27 aircraft dumping fuel onto the Reaper, the MQ-9 lost control and crashed into international waters off the coast of Crimea.

It is believed that Russian forces dispatched from Crimea recovered most, if not all, the wreckage, including the top-secret intelligence pod that had been mounted under the left wing of the aircraft. If this is the case, critical US intelligence collection capabilities would have been compromised, allowing Russia to better protect itself from sensors like the one carried onboard the downed MQ-9 Reaper aircraft.

While the US State Department has declared that the US will continue to fly missions in international airspace, the Commander of US forces in Europe, General Christopher Cavoli has ordered all MQ-9 Reaper operations to be halted pending a review of the incident and a decision on how best to proceed.

The fact that the US is using the MQ-9 Reaper to fly in direct support of Ukrainian military forces make the aircraft a direct participant in the conflict, and as such a legitimate target for Russia. Russia’s decision not to shoot the MQ-9 down, but rather provide multiple opportunities for the US aircraft to disengage and leave the contested airspace, is indicative of Russia’s desire to avoid unnecessary escalation of the conflict, especially one that could have US and Russian forces engaged in direct combat.

One of the options that the US could consider would be to fly the MQ-9 with a US fighter escort. But this would be contested by Russia, leading to the possibility of a dogfight that could result in casualties on both sides, and the probability of escalation. At the end of the day, the US will probably seek to fly an MQ-9 Reaper on a course that comes close to, but does not violate, a declared Russian no-fly zone, after which MQ-9 Reaper flights along the Crimean coast will probably be discontinued.

There are other ways to collect the intelligence that the MQ-9 Reaper gathers which do not put US military assets at risk, and which do not provide the possibility of military escalation between the US and Russia.

Such a decision would be a sharp departure from the confrontational stance taken to date by the US when it comes to intelligence collection targeting Russia. However, the devolving military situation in Ukraine, with the Ukrainian military facing a decisive defeat in Bakhmut and in general, alters the risk-gain analysis that accompanies the decision to fly missions such as the one that resulted in the downed MQ-9 aircraft. With little chance of a Ukrainian victory in sight, the US will be looking for ways to deescalate, rather than escalate, its involvement in the Ukrainian conflict.

Whether or not the MQ-9 Reaper incident will result in a top-down review of incidents of this nature, for example prompting the Biden administration to reflect on the apparent hypocrisy of the US approach toward responding to the Chinese balloon “threat”, namely by shooting the balloon down, while condemning the more restrained approach taken by Russia in responding to a genuine military threat on its borders in an active warzone, is yet to be seen. Such an abut-face would be unlikely, given the current political climate, where Russophobia runs rampant.

The fact remains that as long as the US is engaged in the implementation of a wartime policy that seeks the strategic defeat of Russia, the possibility for rational, logic-based policy formulation and implementation on the part of the US is almost nil.

The shortest path for the normalization of US-Russian relations lays in a decisive victory being achieved by Russia over Ukraine and the collective west in the shortest time possible. Such an outcome would force the US and its NATO allies to reexamine their approach toward Russia based upon the new realities that would accrue from such an outcome.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

The U.S. War of Aggression Against Iraq

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | March 16, 2023

The U.S. invasion of Iraq, whose 20th anniversary occurs this month, provides a perfect demonstration of why so many people around the world believe that the U.S. government suffers from a very grave case of hypocrisy. While U.S. officials decry Russia’s invasion of Ukraine with great vehemence, they somehow block out of their minds their own deadly and destructive invasion, war of aggression, and long-term occupation of Iraq.

Not only have U.S. officials not even offered an apology for what they did to the Iraqi people, they still expect the American people to thank the troops for what they did to the people of Iraq.

Let’s keep one important, undisputed fact in mind: Iraq never attacked or invaded the United States. It was the United States that was the invader and the aggressor. That’s why I use the term “war of aggression.” It is a term that was used at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal to convict and condemn German officials who did the same thing to other countries in World War II that the U.S. did to Iraq.

That means that under international law, U.S. troops had no legal authority to kill even one Iraqi. Yet, they killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. We are still expected to thank the troops for their “service” in killing an enormously large number of people they had no right to kill.

There is another important, undisputed fact to keep in mind: Congress never declared war on Iraq. Yet, our Constitution requires a congressional declaration of war before the president can legally wage war with his army against another nation. That makes the U.S. invasion, war of aggression, and occupation illegal under our own form of government.

Thus, the killing, maiming, injuring, or torturing of Iraqi citizens was illegal under our own form of government. Yet, we are still expected to thank the troops for their “service.”

U.S. officials have long claimed that their invasion of Iraq was based on an innocent mistake. They say that they honestly thought that Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction.”

But there is a serious flaw in that justification: The U.S. government had no legal authority to enforce WMD resolutions that had been enacted by the United Nations. Only the UN has the legal authority to enforce its own resolutions. It is undisputed that the UN never authorized an invasion of Iraq to enforce its WMD resolutions.

Equally important, the WMD claim was clearly a lie on the part of U.S. officials to garner American support for the invasion. After all, if it was truly an innocent mistake, once it became clear that there were no WMDs U.S. officials would have apologized for their deadly and destructive invasion and ordered the troops to return home. Instead, they keep the troops in Iraq, who continued killing, injuring, maiming, and torturing Iraqis.

Moreover, once it became clear that there were no WMDs, U.S. officials quickly shifted their justification for their invasion, war of aggression, and occupation to bringing “freedom” to the Iraqi people. That’s why they called their war of aggression “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” But under international law, a nation is prohibited from invading another nation for the purpose of bringing “freedom” to the invaded country. Moreover, at the risk of belaboring the obvious, all those hundreds of thousands of Iraqis they killed are not enjoying “freedom” because they are dead.

Moreover, notice something else of importance: There has never been an official U.S. investigation — not even by Congress — into whether the WMD claim was, in fact, an innocent mistake or an intentional, deliberate, and knowing lie. Even while U.S. officials cry out for war-crimes indictments of Russian officials for supposed war crimes in Ukraine, they steadfastly oppose any indictments or even criminal investigations of U.S. officials who ordered and presided over the U.S. invasion, war of aggression, and long-term occupation of Iraq.

It is always easy to point out the faults, failures, and misdeeds of foreign regimes. It is much more difficult to focus on the faults, failures, and misdeeds of one’s own regime. We should bear in mind that when U.S. officials point their accusatory finger at Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, and other regimes, there are three more hypocritical fingers pointing back at them.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Lula Is Lying: The NATO-Russian Proxy War Isn’t Being Fought “Over Small Things”

By Andrew Korybko | March 16, 2023

Brazilian President Lula proved that his recalibrated worldview in recent years is a lot more closely aligned with the US’ than ever after downplaying the causes of the NATO-Russian proxy war. According to him, “In the 21st century, it shouldn’t be possible that we have war over small things”, which he uttered after declaring that he won’t visit either Russia or Ukraine due to the special operation. This position serves as further proof that he endorses the US’ narrative about the conflict.

Lula previously condemned Russia in a joint statement with Biden during his trip to DC in early February, after which Brazil voted in support of a fiercely anti-Russian UN Resolution demanding Moscow’s full and immediate withdrawal without any preconditions from all the territory that Kiev claims as its own, which includes Crimea. Russian Permanent Representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzia reacted to the passing of that motion by describing it as pushing a “militaristic Russophobic line”.

Removing any ambiguity about his government’s stance, Lula then called Zelensky shortly afterwards to reaffirm that “Brazil defends Ukraine’s territorial integrity”. Despite these objectively existing and easily verifiable pieces of evidence documenting his political support of Russia’s nemeses in Kiev, an intense information warfare campaign has been waged by forces allied with the ruling party to gaslight its base into falsely thinking that Lula isn’t aligned with the US on this issue or others like Nicaragua.

Elite members of the Workers’ Party (PT) fear that the rank and file might revolt upon becoming aware that their leader is moving Brazil closer to the US-led West’s Golden Billion than the Sino-Russo Entente or even the Global South of which it’s a part amidst the impending trifurcation of International Relations. With a view towards preemptively averting the scenario of them publicly pressuring him en masse to change this grand strategic trajectory, they sought to manipulate their perceptions about Lula’s policies.

This explains the intense information warfare campaign that’s being waged against their minds at this pivotal point in the global systemic transition, which he himself is directly participating in upon downplaying the causes of the NATO-Russian proxy war in an attempt to justify his political support of Kiev. Lula wants his supporters to discount the evidence before their eyes and ears in favor of agreeing with the US’ narrative that Russia supposedly “invaded” Ukraine for purely “imperialistic” purposes.

If the PT’s base was aware of the military-strategic dynamics that forced Russia to commence its special operation as a last resort for defending the integrity of its national security red lines in Ukraine after NATO clandestinely crossed them there, then they’d be against his political support of Kiev. It would thus be self-evident to them that Lula is placing Brazil on a US-aligned grand strategic trajectory in the New Cold War, which could lead to them publicly pressuring him en masse to change his policy.

The following analyses explain the larger context within which the special operation is being waged:

* 15 March 2022: “Why Did U.S. Prioritize Containing Russia Over China?”

* 26 March 2022: “Russia Is Waging an Existential Struggle in Defense of Its Independence & Sovereignty”

* 24 December 2022: “Putin Explained Why He Had No Choice But To Protect The Russian Population In Ukraine”

* 22 February 2023: “Putin Reminded Everyone That Russia Is Using Force To End The War That The West Started”

* 22 February 2023: “Russia Would Be Torn To Pieces Exactly As Medvedev Predicted If It Ended Its Special Operation”

A summary of the abovementioned insight will now follow for the reader’s convenience.

In brief, the US spent the preceding eight years between its successful Color Revolution in early 2014 and the start of the special operation in 2022 turning Ukraine into an anti-Russian bastion, the purpose of which was to degrade that targeted Great Power’s strategic capabilities to defend itself from the US. This was to be done through a combination of Hybrid War means related to Kiev’s support of information warfare- and terrorist-driven separatism as well as conventional ones connected to NATO.

The first half of this policy aimed to destabilize Russia from within through the cultivation of forces that could advance its “Balkanization” while the second intended to eventually employ biological weapons, clandestine NATO bases, and “missile defense” infrastructure to place it in a position of blackmail. The US envisaged forcing Russia into a never-ending series of unilateral concessions that would ultimately result in its geostrategic neutralization and thus facilitate the successful “containment” of China.

This plot to restore its declining unipolar hegemony was to begin with Kiev’s NATO-supported reconquest of Donbass, which threatened to genocide that region’s indigenous Russian population and ethically cleanse the survivors. That sequence of events was foiled by the special operation that was launched after President Putin realized that the West had no interest in discussing his country’s security guarantee requests from December 2021 for politically resolving their security dilemma.

While the US prepared for the possibility of some kinetic response to its support of Kiev’s imminent reconquest of Donbass, American policymakers hadn’t calculated that President Putin would launch a preventive campaign across all of Ukraine to avert the impending scenario of Russia’s strategic neutralization simultaneously with the preemptive one to stop the Donbass genocide. Had it been otherwise, then they’d have retooled the West’s military-industrial complex well in advance.

This major miscalculation explains why the NATO chief admitted last month that his bloc is in a “race of logistics”/“war of attrition” with Russia, which wouldn’t be the case if it truly expected a protracted conflict of this scale, nor would Kiev’s forces be faring as badly as the Washington Post just revealed. President Putin regularly reminds everyone of the existential nature of this conflict, which places his decision to commence an interconnected preemptive-preventive campaign into context.

Returning to Lula’s latest remarks that inspired this analysis, there’s no doubt that he’s well aware of these military-strategic dynamics that forced President Putin’s hand, which thus means that he’s deliberately downplaying them in order to manipulate his base. He can’t claim ignorance after over a year of Russia explaining this at length, hence why it can now confidently be concluded that Lula politically aligned Brazil with the US in the most geostrategically significant conflict since World War II.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Sunak grants £5 billion boost to the military despite growing issues of poverty and inflation

By Ahmed Adel | March 16, 2023

Britain’s updated defence and foreign policy strategy envisages an additional £5 billion for armaments and is a demonstration that London’s priority is confrontation with Russia and China. Although UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak promised this considerable appropriation for the military over two years, it is unlikely to appease British conservatives as the figure did not meet the demands of spending 3% GDP on defence.

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace wanted a larger military budget but officials are reportedly “delighted” with the settlement. This is unlikely the case behind closed doors.

Most of the £5 billion will be used to replenish ammunition stockpiles given to Ukraine and work on the AUKUS project to develop nuclear-powered submarines for Australia. Effectively, the main priority of London’s updated defence and foreign policy strategy is to oppose the main geopolitical threats to Anglo hegemony – Russia and China.

Speaking from San Diego on March 13, Sunak said: “It’s clear that the world has become more volatile, the threats to our security have increased. And that’s why we’re investing £5 billion more in our world-beating armed forces over the next two years and increasing our defence spending to 2.5% of GDP so we can continue to be a world leader when it comes to defence and keeping our country safe.”

Of course, this omits the obvious failures in Afghanistan and Ukraine, and the fact that neither Russia or China pose a threat to Britain. In fact, it is evident from the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan that the threat is the UK.

Russophobia guides the British political and media establishment, and has thus shaped British public opinion for more than 200 years. Therefore, in the context of Russia’s special military operation, the updated strategy does not represent anything new in terms of escalation. Rather, it just merely shows the British establishment’s continuous Russophobia.

The procurement of ammunition and atomic armament demonstrates that the Sunak government is continuing what Boris Johnson, and those before him, started. What is telling though is that a £5 billion boost is being allocated to the military, partially to replenish stocks given to Ukraine, just as the UK is experiencing the worst economic catastrophe of the 21st century, thus far.

According to the latest figures (2020/21), around one in five people in the UK (20%) were in poverty, or 13.4 million people. Of these, 7.9 million were working-age adults, 3.9 million were children and 1.7 million were pensioners. Therefore, one in four children in the UK are living in poverty (27%).

However, a report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, an independent social change organization working to solve poverty in the UK, said in January 2023 that “living standards are likely to have fallen since the latest official data covering 2020/21.”

“Since the last official poverty data, the direct impact of the pandemic on society has lessened, but some of the changes it has brought about will be long lasting,” the report said, citing the war in Ukraine and the continuing effects of Brexit as examples of difficulties.

The report published that across the poorest fifth of British families, the JRF’s cost of living tracker in October 2022 found that around six in ten low-income households are not able to afford an unexpected expense, over half are in arrears, around a quarter use credit to pay essential bills, and over seven in ten families are going without essentials.

However, due to centuries of indoctrination, there is little condemnation from the British public that £5 billion is being used to replenish military stocks sent to Ukraine instead of dealing with an inflation that is currently forecast to peak at around 11%, which will be the highest rate in forty years, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Although Russia is the main adversary for London, China is rapidly becoming its second. This is becoming increasingly apparent considering that the UK and US are not only each other’s main political and military ally, but are also in anti-China formations together, such as AUKUS.

Therefore, it should not be surprising either that the second part of the renewed strategy is arming Australia so that it becomes an Anglo stronghold in the South Pacific. This is all part of preparations to set the stage for a new big showdown with China, especially given that the situation related to Taiwan confirms that the current trajectory is towards military confrontation.

Either way, although the £5 billion is not as much as the British hawks wanted due to budgetary constraints, it still symbolises that the UK is committed to opposing Russia and advancing future hostilities with China.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Vitamin D reduced dementia by 40%

Dr John Campbell | March 13, 2023

Mosquito net distribution in Uganda, donations to this project, https://www.buymeacoffee.com/awmedica…

More videos from this project, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzsL…

Vitamin D supplementation and incident dementia: Effects of sex, APOE, and baseline cognitive status https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wi…

Alberta, Canada Known association, vitamin D deficiency, incident dementia https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/…

Role of supplementation is unclear. Prospectively study Associations, vitamin D supplementation and incident dementia N = 12,388 dementia-free people (from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center)

Methods Baseline exposure to vitamin D was considered D+ No exposure prior to dementia onset was considered D− MCI and depression were both more frequent in the D− group, compared to D+ People taking vitamin D had less MCI and less depression

Adjusted for age, sex, education, race, cognitive diagnosis, depression, and apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4. Potential interactions between exposure and model covariates were explored. Results Across all formulations, vitamin D exposure was associated with significantly longer dementia-free survival, and lower dementia incidence rate than no exposure

Hazard ratio = 0.60 (95% confidence interval: 0.55–0.65) Vitamin D exposure was associated with 40% lower dementia incidence versus no exposure. Over 10 year follow up of 12,388 2,696 participants progressed to dementia

Among them the 2,696 2,017 (74.8%) had no exposure to vitamin D 679 (25.2%) had baseline exposure

Exposure to vitamin D was associated with significantly higher dementia-free survival 5-year survival for D− was 68.4% 5-year survival for D+ was 83.6%

The effect of vitamin D on incidence rate differed significantly, Vitamin D effects were significantly greater in females versus males

Vitamin D effects were significantly greater in normal cognition versus mild cognitive impairment.

Vitamin D effects were significantly greater in apolipoprotein E ε4 non-carriers versus carriers.

Vitamin D effects were less significantly apolipoprotein E ε4 carriers. (25% one copy, 3% two copies)

Vitamin D has potential for dementia prevention, especially in the high-risk strata.

Vitamin D deficiency, worldwide prevalence of up to 1 billion. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science…

Mechanism of action https://www.nature.com/articles/s4143…

Vitamin D is known to participate in the clearance of amyloid beta (Aβ) aggregates, one of the hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and may provide neuroprotection against Aβ-induced tau hyperphosphorylation (neurofibrillary tangles) Cholecalciferol may be more effective than ergocalciferol

March 16, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

Karl Lauterbach, in major reversal, says vaccine injuries are “dismaying,” complains of “exorbitant” pharmaceutical profits

Calls for vaccine manufacturers to fund an institute for those harmed

eugyppius: a plague chronicle | March 13, 2023

Things aren’t going very well for Germany’s foremost virus pest, Health Minister Karl Lauterbach. His approval ratings have dwindled, and he hardly tweets anymore. Increasingly he avoids virological topics entirely, probably to escape the relentless mockery his every remark on this front brings. On Saturday, things got even worse for him, as Welt reported that he’d falsified his CV while applying for a professorship at Tübingen in 1997. From the coalition government, where he might’ve expected vigorous defence as late as last year, there is only deafening silence.

Under these gathering clouds, Lauterbach granted an interview yesterday to the state media programme ZDF Heute Journal, for a segment on vaccine injuries. In the course of the remarkable conversation, Lauterbach was confronted with and forced to disavow his earlier claims from 2021 that the vaccines are “side-effect free”; recognised that every injury is one injury too many and called these cases “dismaying”; likened the so-called “post-vaccination syndrome” (Post-Vac) to Long Covid; emphasised that he wasn’t responsible for negotiating the contracts which exclude pharmaceuticals from liability; and twice called pharmaceutical company profits “exorbitant,” agreeing that these firms should fund an institute to help those those who have been injured by their products.

This isn’t a total reversal: Lauterbach doesn’t denounce mass vaccination and doesn’t question massaged official estimates which put serious injuries at a rate of less than 1 in 10,000. We’re nearer the beginning than the end of a steady process of repudiation here. Still, this is a big deal.

Because the interview will be selectively clipped, I provide this full translation:

Christian Sievers of the ZDF Heute Journal (henceforth S): The Federal Minister of Health is with us. Many thanks and good evening, Mr Lauterbach.

Karl Lauterbach (hereafter L): Good evening, Mr Sievers.

S: What do you say to those who have been affected [by vaccine injuries]?

L: First of all, what’s happened to these people is absolutely dismaying, and every single case is one too many. I honestly feel very sorry for these people. There are severe disabilities, and some of them will be permanent. So it’s hard. What we do as a state is that the health insurance companies pay the treatment costs, and, well, the federal states bear the support costs, if support is necessary. But in fact we have problems on both sides, because we don’t yet have the drugs for treating them. These are being feverishly researched. The entitlement to benefits is also often very bureaucratically tied-up. So I really do understand the people who are complaining here.

S : Now you’re making it sound like everything is settled. But when you talk to these people, you hear exactly the opposite. A year of fighting, being turned away again and again – many officials simply don’t believe them, sometimes they never get an answer at all, and then after running the gauntlet to get their vaccine injuries recognised, all they receive is a small sum. That can’t be all the state has to offer these people right now, can it?

L: Absolutely not, and I don’t want to give that impression, because that’s not how I see things. These cases must be more quickly recognised, these vaccine injuries, and we’re now slowly getting a clearer picture. But I should also point out, just so I don’t leave a false impression: severe vaccine injuries happen in less than 1 in 10,000 vaccinations, according to the Paul Ehrlich Institute or the European licensing authorities. So it’s not that common. But because our understanding of these injuries is getting clearer and clearer, it should also be possible in future to identify those who are affected more quickly, so that we can get them quicker help.

S: Why did you, Mr Lauterbach, still claim in the summer of 2021 that the vaccines had no side effects?

L: Well, that was an exaggeration that I once made in a misguided tweet. But it wasn’t fundamentally my position. I had already commented very, very often on the side effects of vaccinations. For example, I …

S: But you often said afterwards that there were hardly any or practically no [side effects. You said this again on the [television talkshow] Anne Will. So, you’ve always given the impression that side effects aren’t really an issue at all.

L: Well, that’s not right, as I just said. I was aware of the figures at the time, and they’ve remained relatively stable. These vaccines have been used worldwide, 1 in 10,000 [are injured], so you can say it’s a lot, or you can say it’s not so many. But the vaccine really does protect against serious illness and, by the way, very often also reduces the risk of Long Covid. This is similar to what we’re talking about here, with the Post-Vac syndrome, so the vaccinations – there’s an outweighing benefit, but it’s true, 1 in 10,000 is the frequency of serious side effects.

S: Now the first lawsuits are pending against BioNTech, and also against other vaccine manufacturers. What do you think that’ll go?

L: I can’t speculate, that’s not my job. As minister I have to be careful. It’s true that within the framework of these EU contracts, the companies were largely exempted from liability and that the liability therefore lies with the German state, so to speak, as just described, with the federal states … but the most important thing is, looking ahead, we need treatments, and I’ll therefore set up a programme with the Ministry of Health, where we’ll investigate the consequences of Long Covid, and also Post-Vac syndrome, where we’ll look into this and improve care. That’s a contribution we can make.

S: When will this happen, in concrete terms? It’s precisely these affected people who are suffering all these delays, who want to know.

L: That’s true, but I’m negotiating with the budget committee, and indeed it’s a programme I’d like to launch as soon as possible, and I’m in budget negotiations for this money. So it’s something that we also have to bring to frutition, it’s an obligation, and it would network the experts in this field in such a way that the probability of good therapy in Germany would grow.

S: Now, you just mentioned the liability waiver for pharmaceutical companies. It means that the pharmaceuticals can, so to speak, relax in all these lawsuits, because the state has assumed the risk. So it’s the state – that is, you, the federal government – that has to answer for any damages claims that may arise. Does you feel good about that?

L: What does feeling good mean? First of all, I didn’t negotiate the contracts; as far as my office is concerned, I inherited them, and I believe that it was due to the situation at that time that people wanted to get the vaccines as quickly as possible, and so the state assumed liability. Maybe that was the right thing to do, because it’s better for the state to be liable than to have to go through long settlements or lawsuits with companies.

S: But we’ve just seen how difficult it is to actually get money from the state. What do you think will happen now? Do you think that in view of the situation, for example, pharmaceuticals could voluntarily put money into a foundation? Would that be an idea if they don’t have any liability?

L: It would definitely be a good idea if companies would show a willingness to help out here, because the profits have been exorbitant – exorbitant profits. So that wouldn’t just be a good gesture, we should expect it. But you ask me, what will next? I’d say the optimistic scenario is that we finally learn how to deal with Long Covid and Post-Vac, how we can manage that, and that we moreover recognise case fasterdo that people don’t have to wait so long to be recognised as having Post-Vac syndrome in the first place.

S: That’s a promise from the Federal Minister of Health, Karl Lauterbach. Thank you very much for the interview this evening.

L: Thank you.

March 15, 2023 Posted by | Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Pfizer wants EU to keep paying for unused Covid jabs

RT | March 15, 2023

Pfizer has offered to extend its Covid-19 vaccine contract with the European Union while scaling back deliveries, but still expects the bloc to pay billions of euros for unused doses amid a major supply glut in some countries, the Financial Times has reported. The offer prompted outrage from a handful of member states, who say the deal would serve the interests of Big Pharma over their own citizens.

The contract extension would push the vaccine agreement out to 2026, with a proposed 40% reduction in the number of doses supplied as well as delays to deliveries, the newspaper reported on Tuesday, citing two unnamed officials.

However, despite the suggested cuts, the US pharma giant still insists that it be paid for the full number of doses originally agreed upon, many of which would never be produced under the new terms.

The amendments to the deal – the full text of which has never been made public – were presented by European health commissioner Stella Kyriakides during a closed-door meeting in Brussels on Tuesday, but faced objections from some EU members.

In a joint statement issued following the meeting, officials from Bulgaria, Hungary, Lithuania and Poland said they would not sign the agreement with the proposed changes, as they “do not present a final and fair solution to the problems of the Covid-19 vaccine surplus and do not meet the needs of the healthcare systems, the needs of citizens and the financial interests of the member states.”

Polish Health Minister Adam Niedzielski argued that the current Pfizer proposal would favor Big Pharma, and has called for the secretive contract to be published, questioning the role European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen played in the negotiations for the massive vaccine deal.

An EU watchdog launched a probe into the negotiation and procurement process late last year, after von der Leyen’s office failed to produce personal text messages sent to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during the talks for nearly 2 billion vaccine doses, prompting accusations of corruption.

The 27-member bloc originally signed a joint contract with Pfizer in 2020, but since the pandemic receded, demand for vaccines has steadily dropped, leaving an overabundance across the continent. Some countries have been forced to throw away vaccines, with Germany alone tossing out some 36.6 million doses, according to public broadcaster BR24, while others are sitting on large stocks of unused shots, such as Austria, which has reported around 17.5 million in its supply.

However, Czech Health Minister Vlastimil Valek pushed back on the criticisms, arguing that the “majority of countries” had agreed to the deal and that “the contract is not bad.” He added that the large stock of doses would not pose a problem as “Covid is still here” and “It will be necessary to repeat vaccination each year for a particular group of patients.”

March 15, 2023 Posted by | Corruption | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fauci: “I doubt if I’ve ever met him [Ralph Baric]”

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | March 15, 2023

Dr. McCullough and I often marvel at how the mainstream media somehow fails to see and report facts of enormous importance—facts that are documented in academic papers, grant proposals, e-mail correspondence, and video footage.

All a journalist has to do is read the documents and report their content. And yet, somehow, most legacy media journalists are apparently unable to gain awareness of and report what is immediately at hand.

Take the 2015 paper published by UNC Chapel Hill Professor Ralph Baric et al. titled A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence. As the authors (including Zhengli-Li Shi at the Wuhan Institute of Virology) state in their abstract:

Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations1. Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system2, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV.

The purported purpose of this Gain-of-Function work—i.e., generating a chimeric virus (combining genetic material from two different viruses) capable of infecting human airway cells—was to lay the groundwork for vaccine development and testing in the event that a wild bat coronavirus were eventually to infect humans.

Under the paper’s section titled Biosafety and biosecurity, the authors wrote:

Reported studies were initiated after the University of North Carolina Institutional Biosafety Committee approved the experimental protocol (Project Title: Generating infectious clones of bat SARS-like CoVs; Lab Safety Plan ID: 20145741; Schedule G ID: 12279). These studies were initiated before the US Government Deliberative Process Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS and SARS Viruses (http://www.phe.gov/s3/dualuse/Documents/gain-of-function.pdf). This paper has been reviewed by the funding agency, the NIH. Continuation of these studies was requested, and this has been approved by the NIH.

So there it is. Ralph Baric and his colleague at the Wuhan Institute of Virology plainly state that they engineered a bat coronavirus, using Gain-of-Function methods, that infected the respiratory tract of humanized mice, and the NIH approved their study because it was initiated before the US Government pause on Gain-of-Function Research.

UNC Professor Ralph Baric

Anyone familiar with Ralph Baric’s storied career as the world’s greatest authority on bat coronaviruses (both natural and chimeric) has, for the last three years, wondered: “Where is Professor Baric? Why isn’t he an official consultant on the nature of SARS-CoV-2? Why hasn’t he been a member of any pandemic response task force?”

Until late 2022, no one in Congress, the White House, or in any of the federal health agencies ever mentioned the name Ralph Baric in any official public discussions. This is probably the most glaring omission in the history of scientific investigations. It’s the equivalent of a Congressional investigation into the development of the atomic bombs dropped on Japan without questioning or even mentioning Robert Oppenheimer or Enrico Fermi.

Finally, on November 23, 2022, Dr. Fauci was deposed by John Sauer, counsel for the State of Missouri, on the origins of SARS-CoV-2. As the Epoch Times reported on March 8, 2023, the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana told a federal court in a recent filing that parts of Dr. Fauci’s testimony are not credible.

Especially conspicuous and dubious were his statements about Ralph Baric. To quote the Epoch Times report:

“I know who he is. I doubt if I’ve ever met him,” Fauci said during the late 2022 deposition—the first time he answered questions under oath since the pandemic began.

Fauci acknowledged the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which he headed until around the New Year, provided funding for Baric.

“But you don’t remember ever meeting him in person?” he was asked.

“I don’t recall. I could have met him. I run into several thousands of scientists that we refer to, but I don’t recall, certainly, having a relationship with him,” Fauci responded.

But Fauci’s official calendar lists a one-on-one meeting with Baric on Feb. 11, 2020. And a newly revealed message from a professor who recounted Baric’s account of the meeting showed they talked about man-made virus combinations.

“I talked to Ralph for a long time last night. He sounds beat,” Matt Frieman, a University of Maryland professor, wrote in a Feb. 18, 2020, message. “He said he sat in Fauci’s office talking about the outbreak and chimeras.”

Why did Dr. Fauci claim he had no memory of meeting Dr. Baric and conversing with him about man-made coronaviruses?

March 15, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »