Aletho News


Doctors must take back control

Has fear of GMC retribution crushed proper clinical practice?

Health Advisory & Recovery Team | May 3, 2023

Somewhere in England in early 2023, a large group of medics gathered together for an annual conference. No need for the details, lest the GMC attack dogs start frothing at the mouth at the idea of yet another potential witch hunt. Suffice to say, one brave soul among them decided to share some clinical observations with regard to extremely unusual surgical presentations and dared to utter the unspoken heresy that they may be as a result of the mass roll-out of novel mRNA gene therapies.

The main point of this story that should terrify anyone who uses state healthcare is that it took 2 years for this individual to even be able to utter these suspicions in a forum with colleagues. The fear of GMC retribution is so entrenched — and so potentially catastrophic for the individual — that medical thoughtcrime has been self-censored out of existence by the overwhelming majority of clinical staff. The battered corpses of the Andrew Wakefields and the Sam Whites appear like ghouls in the imaginations of anyone wishing to remain employed by the monopolistic NHS.

Of interest, was the response in the room. The speaker reports that it catalysed a measured discussion, suddenly giving others who had noticed similar patterns permission to speak up. An African colleague reported seeing the same phenomena in their own country within an affluent, highly vaccinated population. It provoked something that should be par for the course: a clinical discussion among experts without fear of being tarred and feathered. The surgeon who raised the topic reflected that 10-15 years ago they were taught to critically appraise evidence and dissect articles in regular journal clubs and examinations preparation. That culture has been totally replaced by top-down protocols and bureaucratic policy driven healthcare. An eminent retired surgeon in the room was stunned following the revelations and was moved to remind everyone that they have a duty to raise concerns. He was appalled to hear that the GMC had suspended colleagues simply for questioning the prevailing covid narrative.

In a recent Twitter Space (timestamp 53:45), Dr Simon Fox made a crucial point:

“Medicine has become very politicised, particularly here in the UK…therefore it shouldn’t be a surprise to us that reality is twisted in order to suit ideology and we get this phenomenon of policy-based evidence as opposed to evidence-based policy. We as doctors have become used to following guidelines, saying things that we know not to be the case because that has been handed down from on high…. what I call the third person in the consultation room is always there. The dead hand of the state, the regulatory capture is always there and it is in the back of our minds. And we all have families, we all have hopes and dreams. We would all rather not pick a fight with authorities that would result in us losing our livelihoods. That is a strong force, and it takes serious bravery to start to say things that are manifestly the truth.”

Science begins with observation. Collective observations are more powerful as numbers of anecdotes grow and theories can be constructed and tested. If individuals are not free to collectively observe, or compare notes, progress inevitably stalls. It is a closed-loop system that does not allow for paradigm shift. All totalitarian systems work in this way and they are without exception very, very dangerous. Everyone buzzing around in their own cognitive coffin, not daring to verbalise things they are seeing with their very own eyes in case The Party doesn’t appreciate their particular version of events.

There is currently a theme on social media: doctors being castigated for their part in the last 3 years. This is extremely unfair. It has been a military grade psy-op, decades in the making. That is not a metaphor. It has been rolled out with such an exquisite knowledge of behavioural science, learning from the mistakes of various other attempts (e.g. swine flu, which coincidentally involved an identical cast of characters; Fauci, Drosten, Ferguson), ironing out all the pesky moral obstacles to ensure total psychological checkmate. This is not the fault of (most) well-meaning doctors and nurses. They have been psychologically manipulated within an inch of their lives along with the rest of the population.

It was 6 months after roll-out that this particular medic started to see a pattern. Bizarre occurrences (and recurrences) of cancer in younger and younger patients. Aggressive, inoperable stage 4 cancers with widespread metastases. Cases of thromboses that just weren’t ‘normal’ and an odd uptick in appendicitis, also not in line with expected normal distribution.

The latest edition of Pravda, sorry the Telegraph, is trying to mind-ninja you into believing that these phenomena are all due to lockdowns, lack of screening and so forth. According to our source, this is just not a viable explanation, clinically speaking. Firstly, screenings did not stop. In fact, in their particular Trust, they were inheriting more cases, earlier, due to GPs being inaccessible and referrals coming straight to them. Secondly — and more compellingly — it is the precise nature of the cancers at point of diagnosis that should be causing more than raised eyebrows. This is in fact echoed in data from the US: delayed screenings do not explain an increase in odd and ill-defined cancers, nor a dramatic increase in younger age groups.

All of this calls for an immediate halt to the roll-out of this novel gene therapy along with a prompt and thorough investigation of these hitherto unseen clinical presentations (being coined ‘turbo cancers’) to ascertain whether the injections are indeed the cause. Unless the answer is a categoric, unequivocal ‘no’, no more of these experimental drugs should be injected into a single human being, let alone ‘vulnerable babies’. We are living in a terrifying medical clown world where the whirling dervish just continues to spin, unfettered.

This quote from the Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2006 should make your blood run cold. It is taken from a review of the book Doctors from hell: The horrific account of Nazi experiments on humans written by Dr Andrew Marks of Columbia University:

What lessons have been learned from the medical experimentation horrors of the Nazis? Today, in my own field of cardiology, I am aware of clinical studies now ongoing, particularly in the areas of gene therapy and cell-based therapy, for which there are inadequately convincing animal data, yet patients are being subjected to experimentation that puts them at great risk. What chance do patients have, even the most well informed, when an arrogant and egotistically driven physician tells them that they are going to die unless they submit themselves to an unproven treatment? Are the patients told the truth — that we don’t have a lot of options, and this is an unproven therapy that will likely do more harm than good, but we need to experiment on you?

How shocked the author must be that just 15 years later, they would be experimenting, unencumbered, on entire global populations including young, healthy children.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | 1 Comment

House GOP probes State Department’s censorship ties to social media giants

An investigation into outsourcing censorship to third-parties

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | May 3, 2023

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan has initiated an inquiry into possible collaboration between federal agencies and social media companies on content moderation. In particular, Republicans on the House Foreign Affairs Committee are seeking information about the Global Engagement Center (GEC), an interagency within the State Department, regarding grants awarded to organizations fighting “misinformation.”

The Gazette reports that a letter sent to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, penned by Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul and endorsed by seven other Republicans, accuses the GEC of deviating from its original mission by funding organizations like the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, and the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Lab.

These organizations have been accused of contributing to the censorship of online speech.

According to the letter, the GEC was initially established to offer a reliable source of truth about America and its battle against global terrorism. However, the lawmakers express concern over the GEC’s expanded scope and question the legitimacy of its current activities.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

A September 2022 report by the State Department’s inspector general identified shortcomings in the GEC’s efforts to combat foreign threats and assess the use of its overseas grants.

Subsequently, House Foreign Affairs Committee Republicans postponed the reauthorization of the GEC until internal staffing, organizational structure, and policy priorities were addressed. The GEC’s legal authority is set to expire on December 23, 2024, unless Congress takes action, the report stated.

The letter highlights instances of the GEC’s collaboration with the disinformation tracking industry, such as the development of a video game called Cat Park, which aims to “educate” players about disinformation tactics.

Additionally, the GEC-funded GDI has identified the American Spectator, Newsmax, the Federalist, the American Conservative, One America News, The Blaze, The Daily Wire, RealClearPolitics, Reason, and the New York Post as the 10 riskiest news outlets for “disinformation.”

Furthermore, the GEC has allegedly granted funds to the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Lab, which identified over 40,000 Twitter accounts in June 2021 as engaging in inauthentic behavior and promoting Hindi nationalism.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Iran-made power plant parts replacing US models in SE Asia

Press TV – May 3, 2023

Spare parts manufactured by Iranian companies that are used in power plant maintenance services are replacing rival models from the US in electricity stations in Malaysia and Indonesia, according to an official in the Iranian Energy Ministry.

Abdolrasul Pishahang, who serves as CEO of Iran’s Thermal Power Plants Holding Company (TPPH), said on Wednesday that domestic firms had manufactured some 100,000 parts needed in servicing operations in Iran’s power plants in recent years.

Pishahang said Iranian-made parts are being supplied to power plants in the region and in Southeast Asia where countries previously relied on parts supplied by US companies.

“While responding to the domestic demand, these parts are exported to regional countries and are replacing US-made power plant parts in countries like Malaysia and Indonesia,” he was quoted as saying by ILNA news agency.

Iran has a relatively large electricity industry where dozens of thermal and gas power plants account for a bulk of the power generated in the country.

Total Iranian electricity generation capacity exceeded 90 gigawatts (GW) in October 2022 although Energy Ministry figures suggest production reached a record of nearly 66 GW in the peak demand time last summer.

Sanctions imposed by the US on Iran’s energy sector in 2018 caused the country to introduce measures to cut reliance on foreign suppliers for parts and equipment needed in its power plants.

TPPH’s Pishahang said some 34 new power plant units had been connected to Iran’s national power grid since August 2021.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

RFK Jr: Zelensky Could Have Avoided Conflict With Russia by Saying ‘No’ to NATO

Sputnik – 03.05.2023

WASHINGTON – Democratic presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said on Wednesday that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky had a chance to avoid the conflict with Russia by simply refusing to join NATO.

“In 2019 actor and comedian Volodymyr Zelensky ran as the peace candidate winning the Ukrainian presidency with 70% of the vote. As Benjamin Abelow observes in his brilliant book, ‘How the West Brought War to Ukraine,’ Zelenskyy almost certainly could have avoided the 2022 war with Russia simply by uttering five words – ‘I will not join NATO,'” Kennedy said in a tweet.

According to Kennedy, Zelensky was forced to continue the dangerous path to NATO by neoconservatives in the Biden administration and by violent fascist elements within the Ukrainian government.

Moreover, Zelensky even allowed the United States to place its nuclear-capable Aegis missile launchers along Ukraine’s 1,200-mile border with Russia and thereby provoked Russia, the presidential candidate added.

Moscow launched its special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022. Russian and Ukrainian delegations have engaged in several rounds of peace talks since then, but the negotiations ultimately reached an impasse. Russia has insisted that it is open for talks with Kiev, even after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a decree prohibiting negotiations with Moscow in October 2022.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | 2 Comments

Iran seizes another oil tanker

RT | May 3, 2023

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy used fast-attack boats to seize an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz on Wednesday, according to the US Navy, which released a video of the incident. Tehran confirmed the seizure, the second such retaliatory incident since the US reportedly blocked a consignment of Iranian crude oil last week.

The Niovi, a Panama-flagged tanker managed by Greece-based Smart Tankers, was swarmed by a dozen IRGC attack boats as it transited the strait, the US Navy said in a statement. Video footage released by the Navy showed the boats escorting the tanker, apparently after ordering it to redirect.

The ship had left Dubai at midday on Tuesday and was due to arrive at the Emirati port of Fujairah by Wednesday afternoon, but was turned around and diverted to Iranian waters.

Officials in Tehran told the Iranian judiciary’s Mizan news agency that the Niovi was impounded following an unspecified legal complaint by a plaintiff.

The incident came after the Advantage Sweet was stormed by Iranian commandos in the Gulf of Oman last Thursday. The Marshall Islands-flagged vessel is owned by a Chinese firm, but had been chartered to transport a cargo of oil to the US for American petroleum giant Chevron.

Dramatic video footage released by Tehran showed the commandos rappelling from helicopters onto the ship’s deck, before moving toward its bridge.

The US navy described both seizures as “contrary to international law and disruptive to regional security and stability.” However, American officials did not mention the fact that immediately prior to Thursday’s seizure, US authorities impounded a shipment of Iranian oil bound for China. Quoting anonymous officials, the Financial Times reported that the ship was redirected toward the US in an apparent sanctions enforcement operation.

The US and its allies often block the transport of Iranian oil at sea, and Tehran usually responds in kind. Iranian forces seized two Greek-flagged vessels in the Strait of Hormuz last year after Greece allowed the US to drain an Iranian tanker of oil in Greek waters. Back in 2019, Iran impounded two British-flagged tankers after the UK seized an Iranian tanker in Gibraltar.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

US Military Buildup in Finland May Threaten Northern Sea Route

By Andrei Dergalin – Sputnik – 03.05.2023

A possible increase in the US military presence in Scandinavia in the near future following Finland’s accession to NATO may present a risk not only to Russia’s northern borders but to the nautical shipping lane known as the Northern Sea Route, warned military historian and Russian Air Defense Museum Director Yuri Knutov.

After Finland officially became a member of NATO last month, Helsinki and Washington moved to hammer out an agreement that would allow the US to deploy its troops on Finnish soil and to use Finnish territory and military bases to store US gear and military hardware.

With Washington planning to work out similar pacts with Sweden and Denmark, stability in the region may soon wind out of control as the United States moves to ramp up its military presence in the area, allowing them to control one of the entrances to the Northern Sea Route, said Yuri Knutov.

As Knutov explained to Sputnik, the Northern Sea Route – a shipping lane that runs along Russia’s Arctic Sea coast – has become a prominent transport artery of late, and Moscow now seeks to increase maritime traffic and cargo flow along that lane.

“Therefore, the emergence of NATO military bases at the entrance to the Northern Sea Route would require us to boost security measures, to bolster our Northern Fleet and maybe even to deploy our warships to escort cargo vessels in order to protect the latter from any provocations or from some restrictions concocted by Western countries,” he said.

The escalation that might ensue could be quite serious, but Russia cannot relent in the face of the pressure exerted by the West because it protects its interests and territorial integrity, Knutov added.

Regarding the exact nature of the US military plans for Finland, Knutov pointed out that Helsinki did not attempt to negotiate issues such as the maximum number of foreign NATO troops that could be deployed on its soil, which appears to suggest that Finland is willing to let NATO use its territory “without any limitations.”

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Kiev regime’s meddling destroys last vestiges of press freedom in US

By Drago Bosnic | May 3, 2023

It’s hardly breaking news that the United States is meddling in the affairs of virtually every country on the planet. The simple fact that Washington DC is the only geopolitical player that operates under the doctrine of so-called “full spectrum dominance” is a testament to that. Perhaps the most obvious example of that is former Ukraine, a country that has been hijacked by a US-backed Neo-Nazi junta in 2014. However, it would seem the meddling isn’t always one-sided, at least according to the latest reports regarding the background of Tucker Carlson’s firing from the Fox News Channel (FNC).

All things considered, Carlson is the most popular news anchor in American history. His rational, highly informed, witty and mostly unbiased (with the notable exception being his views on China) analyses are extremely popular, both in the US and worldwide. However, as such, they are also an insurmountable obstacle for the warmongering propaganda machine. Years before the start of Russia’s counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe, Carlson had been warning against antagonizing Moscow. For this, the rabid Russophobes keep accusing him of supposed “pro-Russian bias”.

These attacks on Tucker Carlson and his family went on for years, but escalated dramatically after the start of the SMO (special military operation). Any attempt to actually analyze this new stage of the US-induced Ukrainian conflict is effectively considered “heresy”. Carlson dismissed this, convinced that his country is still a “bastion of freedom”. However, although the attacks from the establishment became more direct, he refused to back down and continued his reporting, at that point the only one in an American mass media outlet not going 100% with the official narrative.

According to Semafor, Fox Corporation Chair Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan spoke on the phone with the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky before Carlson was ousted on April 24. The report claims that “the elder Murdoch held a call with the Ukrainian leader in March where the two discussed the war in the Eastern European country as well as the anniversary of the deaths of two Fox News journalists outside of Kyiv in March 2022”, further adding that “a similar conversation took place between Zelensky and the younger Murdoch, Fox Corporation Executive Chairman, on March 15, which was noted in a national broadcast last month”.

If the reports are accurate, this would mean the phone calls took place just weeks before Carlson’s contract was officially terminated. Citing “a person familiar with the calls”, Semafor reports that “senior Ukrainian officials had raised their objections to Carlson’s coverage of the war to Fox Executives, but Zelensky did not address these objections [directly] during the calls”. While Zelensky may have skipped direct appeals to have Carlson fired, he certainly must have “strongly implied” that this would be “good for freedom and democracy” in the US and worldwide.

“Clearly, he spooked a lot of members into not being fully supportive of Ukraine,” an unnamed senior GOP congressional aide told Semafor, adding: “Carlson’s ouster probably reduces the loudest voice out there against US support.”

Fox Corporation is yet to reveal which of the numerous reports on the Ukrainian conflict, including exposing the lies about Russia’s long-debunked “battlefield failures” and the staggering level of corruption associated with the Kiev regime, got Carlson fired. However, whichever it was, his ouster is certainly in the interest of Zelensky, whom Carlson even called a “dictator” on several occasions (although a “puppet” would be more suitable). It is also in the interest of numerous high-ranking US officials, particularly since Carlson’s investigative approach that revealed just how corrupt the Kiev regime frontman is could easily incriminate them as well.

This notion is further reinforced by the reactions of top-ranking officials like the Republican congressman from Texas, the infamous warmonger Michael McCaul, one of the most prominent GOP warhawks and an outspoken supporter of US meddling in Ukraine and Taiwan, who described Carlson’s reporting as “Russian disinformation”. Needless to say, without providing any evidence for such bold claims. Carlson (rightfully) slammed the attack as slander. Although some of his fellow journalists supported Carlson, the vast majority, particularly those working for the mainstream propaganda machine, almost uniformly applauded his ouster from the FNC.

One of the founders of The Intercept, Glenn Greenwald, is among the former, as he criticized Carlson’s removal and the open suppression of his stances against the proxy war in Ukraine and the rapidly escalating confrontation with Russia. Greenwald also commented on the revelations about Zelensky’s involvement.

“This article strongly suggests that the Murdochs talked to Zelensky, and Tucker’s opposition to the US proxy war in Ukraine was a major factor in his firing. I’ll await confirmation, but one thing is for sure: his removal eliminated the most influential anti-war voice from TV,” Greenwald posted on Twitter.

“From the start of Biden’s war policy in Ukraine, the establishment wings of both parties were – as usual – in lockstep. Schumer and AOC have the same views as McConnell and Lindsey Graham,” Greenwald noted, adding: “The only DC opposition came from the populist right, and Tucker was its key media voice.”

Considering the fact that Zelensky officially leads an unashamedly Neo-Nazi regime that openly persecutes Ukrainian Orthodox Christians, essentially kidnaps regular Ukrainians and sends them to die as cannon fodder for a “NATO mission”, the American people should be terrified of the prospect that the same person is regulating what they can (or cannot) watch on TV.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , | Leave a comment

Russia’s Military Performance Doesn’t Match the Propaganda

By Ted Snider | The Libertarian Institute | May 3, 2023

American government and media statements have led the public to believe that the Russian military has been shockingly ineffective and there should be confident optimism for a Ukrainian victory. Ukrainians have indeed fought courageously and performed above expectation. But there has been a vast gulf between private and public assessments. Recent leaks have confirmed what has long been suggested: there is a need to re-evaluate the performance of the Russian army and to recalibrate the optimistic expectations.

The ridiculing and mocking of the Russian military has been possible only because of a deliberate self-delusion that demanded turning away from two important admissions.

First, in the three quarters of a century since the United States became the world’s dominant power, it has seldom decisively won a war or fully achieved its explicit policy goal for going to war. Honestly evaluating Russia’s military performance requires comparing it to the exemplar of recent American wars. The United States has consistently failed to defeat armies far more ragtag than the modern Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Since Vietnam, the United States has failed to achieve its military and political goals in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Libya. After twenty years of fighting in Afghanistan, the U.S. was forced to withdraw. They were in disarray; the Taliban is back in power. The United States has twice withdrawn from Iraq because their government refused to capitulate to Status of Forces Agreements. The first withdrawal left Saddam Hussein in power; the second removed him and left Iran (not the U.S.) strengthened in Iraq. The war in Libya left a failed state to bleed weapons into extremist movements throughout North Africa. In none of these wars did the United States leave victorious nor with their foreign policy objectives achieved. Each of them left a government in power that was not pro-American. The war in Syria has also left Bashar al-Assad in power.

If the Russian military has fared badly against the modern Ukrainian army, it has fared no worse than the United States has against much less modern adversaries.

The second point is the reason why Russia is fighting such a modern Ukrainian army. Ukraine has become a de facto member of NATO. The United States and its NATO allies are providing everything but the bodies in the war against Russia. Moscow is not pulling off this level of performance against Kiev: it is pulling off this level of performance against the combined resources of NATO. The United States and its NATO allies have provided and maintained the weapons, trained the Ukrainian soldiers to use them, and provided the intelligence on where to target them. The U.S. is providing “stepped up feeds of intelligence about the position of Russian forces, highlighting weaknesses in the Russian lines.” The U.S. has essentially assumed planning, conducting war-games, and “suggesting” which “avenues… were likely to be more successful.” In March, the U.S. hosted members of the Ukrainian military at an American military base in Germany for war games to strategize for the next phase of the war. In April, they “held tabletop exercises with Ukrainian military leaders to demonstrate how different offensive scenarios could play out” in the expected counter offensive, for which the U.S. has “worked” with Ukraine “in terms of their surprise,” according to General Christopher Cavoli.

But even though Russia is facing an enhanced Ukrainian military, recent leaks confirm what private assessments have long suggested: Ukraine’s losses have been understated while its prospects have been overstated, and Russia’s losses have been overstated while its achievements have been understated.

Long before the recent leaks revealed that many more Ukrainian soldiers than Russian soldiers have been killed or wounded on the battlefield, that Ukraine will be out of antiaircraft missiles by early May, that they are short of troops and ammunition and their counteroffensive will fall “well short” of its goals, attaining, at best, only “modest territorial gains,” U.S. generals and government officials had been quietly admitting as much.

In February, The Washington Post reported that privately the U.S. intelligence’s “sobering assessment” that retaking Crimea “is beyond the capability of Ukraine’s army” has been “reiterated to multiple committees on Capitol Hill over the last several weeks.” As early as November, 2022, U.S. officials shared that assessment with Ukraine, suggesting they “start thinking about [their] realistic demands and priorities for negotiations, including a reconsideration of its stated aim for Ukraine to regain Crimea.” That same month, western military analysts began to warn of an “inflection point” at which Ukraine’s battlefield gains were at an apex. And on January 21, 2023, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley said publicly that Ukraine would not be able to retake all of its territory.

But it was not only that Ukraine’s ambitions had been inflated and their prospects overstated. Their losses had also been understated. Despite public claims of parity in losses or worse for Russia, the leaked reports of a much higher ratio of Ukrainian deaths and casualties to Russian deaths and casualties had been forecasted by military analysts who frequently put the ratio of soldiers killed at closer to 7:1 or 10:1 Ukrainian versus Russian losses. Der Spiegel has reported that German intelligence is “alarmed” by the “high losses suffered by the Ukrainian army” in the battle for Bakhmut. They told German politicians in a secret meeting that the loss of life for Ukrainian soldiers is in “three-digit number[s]” every day on that battleground alone. The Washington Post has reported that the most highly trained and experienced Ukrainian soldiers are “all dead or wounded.”

And it is not only Ukrainian losses that may have been understated. Russian losses, ineptitude, and material setbacks may have been just as overstated. After suffering high casualties at the beginning of the war, Alexander Hill, professor of military history at the University of Calgary, says Russia began to pursue a more methodical battlefield strategy and lowered their losses.

On April 26, General Cavoli, the commander of United States European Command and Supreme Allied Commander Europe, gave a congressional audience of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee a report that is very different from what they’d been told just a month earlier. The public is constantly told that Putin is throwing his soldiers into a meatgrinder. General Mark Milley recently reported that Russian troops are “getting slaughtered.” He told the House Armed Services Committee in late March, “It’s a slaughter-fest for the Russians. They’re getting hammered in the vicinity of Bahkmut.”

But in April, General Cavoli told that same body, “The Russian ground force has been degenerated somewhat by this conflict; although it is bigger today than it was at the beginning of the conflict.” And it is not only the ground force. Cavoli went on to report, “The air force has lost very little: they’ve lost eighty planes. They have another one thousand fighters and fighter bombers. The navy has lost one ship.”

And as for the larger Russian military, Cavoli said, “Much of the Russian military has not been affected negatively by this conflict… despite all of the efforts they’ve undertaken inside Ukraine.”

Historian Geoffrey Roberts, an authority on Soviet military history, told me:

“Russia’s Armed Forces have made many mistakes and suffered severe setbacks during the course of its war with Ukraine and NATO, but overall it has performed very well. Like the Red Army during the Second World War, the Russian military has shown itself to be a resilient, adaptable, creative, and highly effective learning organization—a modern war-making machine whose lessons and experience—positive and negative—will be studied by General Staffs and military academies for generations to come.”

After initial territorial setbacks, the Ukrainian military countered with two shocking victories in Kharkiv and Kherson provinces. But in each of those cases, Russia seems to have either decided to leave or redeployed, offering little defense. Military analyst and ret. Lt. Col. Daniel L. Davis has pointed out that in each situation where the Russian military “chose to stand and fight, Ukraine has not defeated them.” Russia has not lost a battle it has chosen to fight.

Since then, the Russian military has settled itself in Bakhmut where, like death’s maw, it has devoured everyone Kiev has sent in to displace it. A Ukrainian commander in Bakhmut has said that “the exchange rate of trading our lives for theirs favors the Russians. If this goes on like this, we could run out.” Daniel Davis has pointed out that, even if Ukraine were to launch and win a counteroffensive, the rate of casualties and deaths would be so high, they would “have spent [their] last remaining force with which to conduct offensives” or future operations. Military historian Geoffrey Roberts recently told an interviewer, “if the war continues for much longer, I am worried that Ukraine will collapse as a state.”

Professor Hill argued in November 2022 that “had Zelensky’s Ukrainian government been willing to negotiate back in April [2022] then the eventual outcome on the ground would probably have ended up being better for Ukraine than is likely to be the case today or in the future.” It’s a prognosis, he told me, that still stands.

The Ukrainian military may have performed above expectation, and the Russian military may have performed below expectation. But recent statements, both leaked and on the record, suggest the need for an updated, more sincere evaluation. Russia is not struggling only against the Ukrainian Armed Forces: they are struggling against a military seriously swollen by NATO resources, training, and planning. And even still, they are faring no worse than the U.S. military has fared against much less equipped, trained, and prepared forces over the past several decades. The dismissive mocking of the Russian military has been helped by underestimating Ukrainian losses, overestimating Ukrainian capabilities, and by overestimating Russian losses and degeneration and underestimating Russian capabilities and achievements.

Both senior U.S. military leadership and major western media must begin reassessing the Russian military and its capabilities for what they are, instead of how narratives wish them to be.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

America’s Obesity Epidemic Thins Out Pool of Potential US Army Recruits

Sputnik – 03.05.2023

In one of its worst years ever, the US Army’s official figures showed that it failed to reach last year’s goal of 60,000 new recruits, falling short by about 15,000.

It looks as if the US Army won’t be able to live up to its recruitment expectations this year, since a considerable number of prospects simply cannot cut the mustard.

Speaking at a congressional hearing this week, US Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth said they are not going to “make” the projected goal of 65,000 new soldiers.

“We are doing everything we can to get as close to it as possible; we are going to fall short,” she noted.

According to local press reports, the US Army had also missed its recruitment target of 60,000 last year, falling short by about 15,000 “active-duty recruits.”

This trend is due to the considerable number of prospective recruits turning out to be unfit for service, or either failing the entrance exam meant to gauge their intelligence or “being too overweight to serve,” one US media outlet revealed.

Only about 23% of Americans aged 17 to 24 can meet the Army’s expectations, the media outlet notes, citing Pentagon figures.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | | 7 Comments

Kiev’s counterattack unlikely to succeed due to excessive casualties

By Lucas Leiroz | May 3, 2023

Ukrainian plans to launch a counteroffensive look rather difficult to implement. At a meeting of Russian top military officials held on May 2nd, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu reported the official assessments on Ukrainian casualties during the last month. The government estimates that more than 15,000 Ukrainian soldiers were killed or seriously wounded in April. According to Shoigu, Kiev is unable to prevent its troops from suffering serious damage on the frontlines, “despite unprecedented military assistance by Western powers”.

The Russian data comes amid a scenario of collective skepticism about the possibility of Kiev reversing the military scenario of the conflict. More and more Western public opinion seems skeptical about a Ukrainian victory, considering that the territorial losses of Kiev’s troops are notorious and that the Russians are increasingly advancing towards the complete liberation of the territories reintegrated to the Federation. Now, with the release of this data about the number of casualties, the tendency is for this skepticism to increase, which complicates the Western war plans.

The big Western media outlets have been reacting to this situation through a kind of damage control – partially admitting that things are not going well in Ukraine, but suggesting that if more weapons are sent, the scenario could change. Some journalists use the rhetoric that there is a supposed counteroffensive plan to be implemented sometime this season, which would allegedly allow Ukrainian troops to achieve a major territorial advance, expelling the Russians even from peaceful territories such as Crimea. But the existence of data like this one revealed by the Russian Ministry makes it difficult to believe in the possibility of such a move.

Although the mainstream media tends to prevent the spread of information about Ukrainian problems, it will be difficult to stop the collective skepticism, as this is not the first time that numbers informing about the catastrophic situation of the Ukrainian forces have been revealed. On several occasions in recent months, reports on this subject have appeared. Included in the recent wave of leaked documents was a Pentagon assessment that between 124,000 and 131,000 Ukrainian soldiers were killed by Russian forces. In estimates made by other intelligence agencies, there are even higher figures, with some reports giving statistics as high as 200,000 to 300,000 Ukrainian casualties. These reports circulate freely on the internet, so, as much as there are attempts by mainstream media to censor the data, the multiplicity of sources makes this work really difficult.

As expected, the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev continues to deny all these reports and claim its ability to carry on the fight. In February, Ukrainian Defense Minister Aleksey Reznikov stated that the number of deaths among the regime’s troops was lower than the number of deaths in the earthquake that hit Turkey and Syria. According to official sources, the catastrophe in these two countries led to the death of 55,000 people, which shows how Reznikov is evidently lying, since even among the most openly pro-Ukrainian sources there is no belief in such a low number of casualties.

Similar declarations are also expected for the near future, especially responding to Shoigu’s statements. Kiev’s officials will try in every way to show that they have control over the situation of their troops and that their soldiers are in sufficient numbers for a counteroffensive – depending only on more Western weapons, thus justifying the “beggar” behavior for which Zelensky has already become known. At the same time, in Western countries governments will somehow have to convince their citizens that it is indeed prudent and necessary to continue sending arms to Kiev.

The wisest thing to do would be to admit the alarming numbers of Ukrainian casualties and stop the war machine behind the regime. Considering that it is an unwinnable conflict, negotiating peace is the best alternative for all sides. But neither Ukraine has the sovereignty to make such a decision, nor NATO has an interest in any possibility of peace. So, most likely, Ukrainian citizens will continue to die on the frontlines’ “meatgrinder”.

Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Aletho News | , | 1 Comment

The Global Pandemic Treaty Is A Threat To Us All

Corbett • 04/28/2023

Today, James delivers a statement for the National Citizens Inquiry in Canada on the WHO, the global pandemic treaty, the amendments to the International Health Regulations, and the formation of the coming technocratic biosecurity control grid. [statement begins at 5:10]

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Odysee / Rokfin / Rumble / Substack / Download the mp4

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).


Hello. I’m James Corbett of The Corbett Report.

For those who don’t know, I’m a Canadian who’s been living and working in Japan for 19 years and founded The Corbett Report in 2007 as a source for news and information about politics, economics, science, philosophy and society, and in that regard I’ve been covering the corruption of the World Health Organization and warning about the dawning biosecurity state for over 15 years now.

So I would like to thank the inquiry for giving me the time to address the extremely important topic of the pending global pandemic treaty, but I know my time is limited today so I’d like to get straight into detailing the relevant background and context for understanding this story.

Firstly, the World Health Organization was established in 1948 to promote “the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.” It proposes to achieve this by acting as “the directing and co-ordinating authority on international health work.”

Accordingly, the WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly, adopted the International Sanitary Regulations in 1951 to consolidate the multiple, overlapping international agreements then governing quarantine procedures and other international health controls into a single convention.

In 1969, this was superseded by the International Health Regulations, which, as amended in 1973 and 1981, covered six diseases but focused on three: cholera, yellow fever and plague.

Worries about the “emergence, re-emergence and international spread of disease and other threats” concurrent with the surge in international travel in the 1990s gave rise to calls for a substantial revision of the treaty, and, in the wake of the 2003 SARS event and the 2004 avian influenza A epidemic (if you remember that one), a renewed sense of urgency led to the 2005 revision of the IHR.

This revision included the creation of a new category of declaration by the World Health Organization: the Public Health Emergency of International Concern, which is appropriately enough abbreviated as PHEIC.

A PHEIC declaration grants the WHO the power to obtain and share information about any declared health crisis anywhere within the IHR territories with or without the consent of the individual governments involved. And, according to Stephen Morrison—the director of the Global Health Policy Center at the Center for Strategic and International Studies—this potentially allows for “boots-on-the-ground” intervention by the US military or other NATO member countries to operate in these environments in terms of ground transport, supply chain, and distribution of commodities.

The PHEIC was declared for the first time in 2009 during the so-called Swine Flu pandemic, which, as was later shown, was based on severely overestimated case numbers. In fact, the swine flu “pandemic” did not meet the WHO website’s own definition of “an enormous number of deaths and cases of the disease” and, when that was pointed out by a CNN reporter on May 4, 2009, that language was promptly removed.

At the time, Richard Schabas—the former chief medical officer for Canada’s Ontario Province—was quoted as saying: “Sometimes some of us think that WHO stands for World Hysteria Organization.”

Indeed, in 2010, a British Medical Journal investigation and an investigation by the Council of Europe both concluded that the key scientists who advised then-WHO Director Margaret Chan to declare the PHEIC for the swine flu scare “had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing” and excoriated the WHO for its complete lack of transparency about the process.

PHEICs were subsequently declared for the 2014 polio declaration, the 2013 outbreak of Ebola in Western Africa, the 2015 Zika virus “epidemic,” the 2018–2020 Kivu Ebola epidemic, and, of course, in 2020 for the so-called novel coronavirus pandemic and in 2022 for the monkeypox “pandemic”(?).

Each of these cases similarly resulted in massive paydays for pharmaceutical manufacturers and other beneficiaries of the growing biosecurity complex and massive increases in power for “health authorities” in each country and for the WHO in particular. In fact, we are told that the current WHO Director even ignored the decision of his “expert advisory council” to unilaterally declare last year’s Monkeypox outbreak as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.

Incredibly, the WHO is not satisfied with the remarkable power that it already enjoys. It is currently engaged in a deliberately confusing process to simultaneously do two things:

  • Firstly, to once again amend the International Health Regulations to give the WHO even more powers of surveillance and control during any arbitrarily declared health crisis.
  • And secondly, to create a global pandemic treaty that would supersede the sovereignty of individual nation-states and cede even more authority to the WHO to monitor and control public health agencies in the name of preventing the next pandemic.

The process for these two separate negotiations are happening simultaneously, and although there is the fig leaf of public input in these processes, in reality only accredited organizations are given time to voice their opinion about the need for such a treaty and even then the WHO is under no obligation to even consider such input.

Instead, actual negotiations are taking place behind closed doors in off-camera sessions, and draft documents and meeting minutes are only occasionally dribbled out for public consumption.

Worse, as the WHO has already demonstrated, their procedure for adoption of these proposed amendments is at best a formality, and, at worst, pure theatrics.

That a completely unelected, unaccountable body that wields so much power over international affairs is meeting behind closed doors to decide the future of humanity under the pretense of the next declared emergency should be worrying enough. But the few details that have leaked out about these negotiations are even more frightening.

These include:

While these ideas may seem benign or even noble to those who do not know the history of the WHO or the erection of the biosecurity grid, to those of us who have lived through three years of unprecedented medical tyranny—from forced quarantines and lockdowns to the attempt to illegally mandate experimental medical interventions—stopping the WHO’s unprecedented power grab must be our greatest priority.

The World Health Organization currently consists of 194 member states, including Canada. In order to become a member of the WHO, a state must ratify the WHO Constitution, which grants the WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), the power to “adopt conventions or agreements with respect to any matter within the competence of the Organization,” which, when ratified, obliges each member state to adopt those conventions or to notify the WHO’s Director-General of rejection or reservations to that adoption within 18 months.

As a WHO member state, Canada is obligated to abide by World Health Assembly decisions or to provide specific reasons for partial or incomplete compliance with WHA rules and agreements. Accordingly, the Public Health Agency of Canada provides regular “self-assessment reports” regarding its own International Health Regulations compliance.

At an absolute minimum, Canadians must exert whatever power they have in whatever way they are able to reassert Canada’s sovereignty over its public health by registering its reservations about the IHR and the pandemic treaty. That would of course not be a solution to the problem posed by the WHO, but it would be a start. A more thoroughgoing solution would be the withdrawal of Canada from the WHO altogether.

But, as someone who is not just deeply cynical about the ability of the public to influence such affairs, but actually believes the political process itself—with its inherent abrogation of individual sovereignty and thus, by extension, bodily autonomy—to be invalid and immoral, I would suggest that a more radical approach might be appropriate. That is, active and coordinated widescale civil disobedience of medical decrees and mandates, whether federal or provincial, that are not in the interest of individual health, including, if possible, the foundation of private medical organizations with doctors and others of like mind who are willing to disregard the dictates of the WHO, Public Health Canada, and any other self-declared health authority to provide health care regardless of vaccination status or any other unreasonable dictate.

I know that such a movement will not take place without a sea change in public perception, and such a change would have to be predicated on a sea change in public awareness and understanding. That is why I participate in inquiries like this and do the work that I do to help raise awareness of these issues.

I hope you can appreciate that there is much, much more to be said about this problem and its solution than can possibly be done justice in a short presentation like this. If you’re interested in hearing more about this topic, I suggest you follow the hyperlinked transcript of this statement that is available at, as well as check The Corbett Report archives for my previous work on the WHO and the biosecurity state and follow my monthly conversations with Dr. Meryl Nass on Children’s Health Defense as we document the progress of the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty toward their proposed ratification at the 77th World Health Assembly in May of next year.

But in closing, let me just say this: The WHO was established in 1948 to coordinate international efforts to promote public health. But what is health?

That may seem like a trivial question, but as we’ve seen over the last few years, the answer to that question can affect every aspect of our lives, from what medical interventions we are obligated to take to whether or not we are permitted to leave our house.

We cannot afford to let government appointees and unelected technocrats at the WHO answer this incredibly important question for us. It is up to us to answer that question for ourselves and to decide what health precautions we are willing to take and under what circumstances we are willing to take them.

Any treaty, health regulation or other document that would seek to undermine our bodily autonomy is null and void and should be treated as if it never existed.

Thank you for your time.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | 2 Comments