Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Leave Trump Alone (Because It Does Not Matter)

By Peter Van Buren | We Meant Well | June 26, 2023

The narrative is set. Everything between now and November 2024, absent an actual alien intervention, is filler material.

Trump will ride his narrative to the polls, campaigning even if in hand cuffs and an ankle monitor. He is, he will make clear, the victim of a Democratic plot to weaponize “justice,” dating back to 2016 when Hillary was let off scot-free for her email shenanigans, followed by the FBI’s concocted Russiagate, two impeachments, and now a carousel of indictments. His opponent is Joe Biden, older than Yoda but presenting more like Jar Jar, crooked in cahoots with his scum bag son to hard suck bribe money out of eastern Europe. Sleepy Joe’s narrative is to count on the same FBI going after Trump with both barrels to shuffle its feet investigating him and Hunter through the election, with a final surge under the slogan “Oh who cares, I’m not Trump!” to wrap things up. It’s all a rich tapestry.

The problem is it is compelling; there is a lot of truth underneath the showmanship. There was David Petraeus, Obama’s CIA Director, who leaked secret docs to his girlfriend, and Sandy Berger, Clinton’s NSA Director, who stole secret docs. But it was Hillary who did get away with it all, at the FBI’s discretion (so much for one law for everyone) what Trump has been accused of in Mar-a-Lago. Hillary Clinton maintained an unsecured private email server which processed classified material on a daily basis. Her server held at least 110 known messages containing classified information, including e-mail chains classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level, the highest level of civilian classification. The FBI found classified intelligence improperly stored and transmitted on Clinton’s server “was compromised by unauthorized individuals, to include foreign governments or intelligence services, via cyber intrusion or other means.”

Clinton and her team destroyed tens of thousands of emails, evidence, as well as physical phones and Blackberries which potentially held evidence — obstruction as clear as it comes. She operated the server out of her home kitchen despite the presence of the Secret Service on property who failed to report it. A server in a closet is not as dramatic a visual as boxes of classified stored in a shower room, but justice is supposed to be blind. More recently, what of Mike Pence and Joe Biden, both of whom have escaped indictment so far on similar charges of mishandling classified information. Trump voters know if the FBI is going to take similar fact sets and ignore one while aggressively pursuing another, it is partial and political. No matter which candidate wins and loses, DOJ’s credibility is tanked.

The Stormy Daniels case, and the guilty finding in the Jean Carroll defamation case, reek of politics. Neither case would have seen daylight outside of Democratic hive New York, and neither could have held up outside a partisan justice system that permits it to ignore Jeffrey Epstein’s death in custody or a city in a crime tornado (New York in the past year reduced 52 percent of all felony charges to misdemeanors, opposite of what was done to Trump) while aggressively allowing the system to pursue a decades-old rape case of dubious propriety.

Witch hunt meet Hunter. New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran for office on the promise to prosecute Trump. He fulfilled a campaign promise and paid off his George Soros-connected backers. Bragg, in the words of law professor Jonathan Turley, had a “very public, almost Hamlet-like process where he debated whether he could do this bootstrapping theory [bumping misdemeanors up to felonies in the Stormy case.] He stopped it for a while and was pressured to go forward with it. All of that smacks more of politics than prosecutorial discretion.”

Calling it all a witch hunt is just a starting point. The point here is not innocence; it is whether the justice system is going to take fact sets and ignore one while aggressively pursuing another, risking being seen as partial and political. No matter which candidate wins or loses, credibility is tanked.

Still to come (at the least) are whatever judicial actions will emerge from the Special Prosecutor over Trump’s role in January 6, and legal action over the 2020 Georgia vote count (with another Democratic openly anti-Trump prosecutor.) Trump jokes in his stump speech nowadays every time he flies over a Blue State he gets another subpoena. He could easily head into the Republican convention to accept the nomination with multiple convictions and/or indictments on his shoulders. It won’t matter. The justice system is going to take fact sets and ignore some while aggressively pursuing others, partial and political plain as day. No matter which candidate wins, credibility is tanked. It grinds that most of the serious charges against Trump are under the hoary Espionage Act, seen by many as reviving the now-discredited trope Trump was a Russian agent.

Mostly overlooked for now is how much of the apparent evidence against Trump at Mar-a-Lago came from his own attorneys. Attorney-client privilege is recognized as one of the cornerstones of fairness in our system. In the Trump case, the Justice Department used the one major exception to privilege, when the communication is intended to further a criminal or fraudulent act, to compel Trump’s lawyers to give evidence against their own client. Justice asserted Trump lied to his own team about having no more classified documents, and that this constituted a crime of fraud and maybe obstruction, and thus privilege is not available and Trump’s lawyer can be made to testify against his client. The crime or fraud exception to attorney-client privilege itself has a long history, dating back to English common law. In the United States, the crime or fraud exception was first recognized by the Supreme Court in the 1840 case of United States v. Privileged Communications. But Trump’s supporters are unlikely to read deeply into the case law; all they’ll see is what looks like strong-arm tactics by the Department of Justice. No matter which candidate wins and loses, DOJ’s credibility is tanked.

The thing is no one has to work very hard to convince Trump supporters of the truth of what he is saying, that he is the victim. Trump support remained unmoved by the many investigations that plagued his presidency. Even during peak crises, views of him were static. Post-presidency polls continued the trend. Public opinion of Trump remains remarkably stable, despite his unprecedented legal challenges, and about half of Americans do not see his behavior as disqualifying, sharper if you divide along partisan lines. When asked if Trump’s legal troubles would impact their views of him, two-thirds of his supporters said it would not make a difference. That’s a committed bunch. Perhaps just as important, 57 percent of voters, including one-third of Democrats, said the indictment in New York earlier this year was politically motivated.

No one can say who will win in November 2024, but one loser is certain, faith in the rule of law by a large number of Americans. They will leave the polls certain the system was bent to “get” Trump, either saddened by the fall of blind justice or saddened that it did not work and Trump remined a powerful figure with a large movement behind him, either in or out of the Oval Office.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | Leave a comment

mRNA: Vaccine or Gene Therapy? The Safety Regulatory Issues

Dr. Helene Banoun Elucidates the History of Misguided Use of Genetic Code for Vaccination

By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH | Courageous Discourse | June 26, 2023

I have been impressed with the quality of scholarship from independent academic researchers during the pandemic. During this time there has been a silence from academia in terms of any viewpoints that deviate from the mainstream scientific narrative. Dr. Helene Banoun is an independent researcher, former research fellow at INSERM (French Institute for Health and Medical Research), Marseille, France. She has published several very important review papers during the crisis.

Dr. Banoun has recently published an analysis on the mRNA vaccines in consideration of definitions and regulations that apply to gene therapy. For most people vaccinated, it was the first time they had been injected synthetic genetic code for a potentially lethal foreign protein (Wuhan Spike protein). A perfectly compliant American who started the COVID-19 vaccination program on time is on their seventh mRNA injection—an astonishing observation given the lack of any safety information concerning the cumulative effect of frequent, serial administrations. Banoun makes the case that they should be classified as gene therapy products. I have heard no counter arguments to the contrary.

Banoun, H. mRNA: Vaccine or Gene Therapy? The Safety Regulatory Issues. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 10514. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241310514

Banoun goes on to state: “The wide and persistent biodistribution of mRNAs and their protein products, incompletely studied due to their classification as vaccines, raises safety issues. Post-marketing studies have shown that mRNA passes into breast milk and could have adverse effects on breast-fed babies. Long-term expression, integration into the genome, transmission to the germline, passage into sperm, embryo/fetal and perinatal toxicity, genotoxicity and tumorigenicity should be studied in light of the adverse events reported in pharmacovigilance databases.”

This is important for discussants and litigators to have this predicate. Genetic vaccines are gene therapy products, all the regulations, laws, and safety protections should be called for and pointed out when missing in the discussion on the next steps to be taken on mRNA genetic vaccines.

Banoun, H. mRNA: Vaccine or Gene Therapy? The Safety Regulatory Issues. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 10514. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241310514

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Wind costs will remain high

By Gordon Hughes | Net Zero Watch | June 26, 2023

The crash in Siemens Energy’s share price on Friday has admirably highlighted an issue with wind costs that colleagues and I have been examining for more than a decade. The painful facts are that (i) wind generation, both onshore and offshore, is more expensive than we are being told and (ii) the performance of wind turbines tends to deteriorate with age, in significant part because of the kind of failures reported by Siemens Energy. There is strong evidence to support these conclusions, which has been presented in reports published by the Renewable Energy Foundation in 2012 and in 2020 for the UK and Denmark, with updates provided by the Global Warming Policy Foundation and Net Zero Watch.

The news about Siemens Energy brings a strong inclination to say ‘you were warned’. However, their travails are a symptom of a much more widespread disease, which affects all of us, either directly through the costs of electricity or indirectly as the owners of wind farms (via pension funds and other investment vehicles). The plunge in the share price of Siemens Energy is dramatic, but that may be written off as a temporary market response to disappointed expectations. We need to look beneath the immediate story to understand the reasons for the disappointment and their implications for the prospects for wind generation.

The announcement by Siemens Energy focused on higher-than-expected failure rates for their onshore turbines. These were ascribed to problems with key components, but newspaper reports suggest more systematic design faults in recent generations of large turbines. Previous announcements have referred to problems with offshore turbines, and the market reaction suggests few believe that the current problems are confined to onshore turbines. Further, while each of the major turbine manufacturers has its own specific problems, Siemens Energy is not unique in experiencing high warranty costs due to higher than anticipated failure rates.

In increasing order of importance, there are three aspects to note:

(a) Siemens Energy and other manufacturers have given warranties on performance that won’t be met because of higher failure rates. They will incur additional expenses, either to replace components or to compensate wind farm operators for any resulting underperformance. Those costs are the basis for the write-offs that Siemens Energy has had to take. Investors will be painfully aware that the company has been declaring profits when they sell wind turbines, but without making adequate provision for future warranty repair costs.

In accounting terms this is known as recognising future profits for new contracts. When it becomes clear that the contracts will be less profitable, the company must write down the value of previously reported profits and, thus, the value of the assets on its balance sheet. In effect, though perhaps entirely innocently, the company has been misleading investors about its past and current profitability. Senior managers should be feeling very uncomfortable about their positions since the problem was predictable (and predicted).

(b) Warranties have a limited period – often 5 to 8 years – but the higher failure rates will persist and affect performance over the remainder of the life of the wind farms where the turbines have been installed. Their future opex costs will be higher than expected, and their output will be significantly lower. This will reduce their operational lifetimes, which are determined by how the margin between revenues and costs changes as wind farms get older. Lower revenues and higher costs bring forward the date at which replacement or repowering is necessary. These changes will reduce, often quite substantially, the returns earned by the financial investors – pension funds and other – to whom operators sell the majority of the equity in wind farms after a few years of operation.

(c) Siemens Energy and other manufacturers may argue that they can – with time – fix the component and design problems which lead to high failure rates. They may well be correct. The history of power engineering is littered with examples of new generations of equipment which experienced major problems when first introduced but which were eventually sorted out. Many companies have found themselves in severe financial difficulties or even forced into bankruptcy by these “teething” problems. The error in this case has been to pretend that wind turbines were immune to such failures.

The whole justification for the falling costs of wind generation rested on the assumption that much bigger turbines would produce more output at lower capex cost per megawatt, without the large costs of generational change. Now we have confirmation that such optimism is entirely unjustified – the whole development process has been a case of too far, too fast. Again, this was both predictable and predicted. The idea that wind turbines are immune to the factors that affect other types of power engineering was always absurd. The consequence is that both capital and operating costs for wind farms will not fall as rapidly as claimed and may not fall significantly at all. It follows that current energy policies in the UK, Europe and the United States are based on foundations of sand – naïve optimism reinforced by enthusiastic lobbying divorced from engineering reality.

In the longer term it is (b) and (c) that are the big story. With respect to (a), serious analysts have long since recognised that claims made about future wind costs and performance by the wind industry should not be taken seriously. It has been obvious that they were kidding themselves and their investors ever since the last 2010s. Unfortunately, we have now been tied into a high energy-cost future, with all the implications that has for the economy and standards of living.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | 2 Comments

Sweden just scrapped their “Renewable Energy Targets”. Here’s why.

By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | June 26, 2023

Buried behind the news of the supposed “attempted coup” in Russia this weekend, was the Swedish government’s announcement, last Wednesday, that they will be stepping back from their plans to go 100% renewable energy.

According to finance minister Elisabeth Svantesson, wind and solar power are simply not efficient or reliable enough to be trusted to produce the entire country’s energy supply.

This has been celebrated in some circles as an example of a government taking a logical approach.

But, to be clear, this is not about refuting or rejecting the “climate change” agenda, but purely a question of methodology. Sweden is rejecting “renewable energy” goals, not net zero. Net zero is still very much on the cards… via nuclear power, what some still laughably call “clean energy”.

According to Euractive.com :

Sweden’s parliament on Tuesday (20 June) adopted a new energy target, giving the right-wing government the green light to push forward with plans to build new nuclear plants in a country that voted 40 years ago to phase out atomic power. Changing the target to “100% fossil-free” electricity, from “100% renewable” is key to the government’s plan to […] reach net zero emissions by 2045.”

Sweden has always been at the fore-front of climate messaging, introducing one of the first ever “Carbon Taxes” as early as 1991.

It’s also the case that Sweden recently approved a feasibility study for a massive carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant near Stockholm. CCS is among the bigger scams of the climate change narrative.

And yet this scrapping of renewable goals has been welcomed by some in the alternative sphere as Sweden “seeing sense”.

This is highly reminiscent of Sweden’s role in the Covid narrative – the “voice of reason”. The sensible rejection of the official narrative in favour of a very slightly different version of the official narrative.

Sweden pushed for no lockdowns and “early treatment” and herd immunity, but all of that actually served to underline that there was an actual pandemic that needed dealing with. Reinforcing the official story through carefully orchestrated dissent.

It looks like Sweden is about to cast itself in the same part for the Climate play.

Moving forward, the debate will be about “net zero via renewables” vs “net zero via nuclear”, without ever questioning whether we need to go “net zero” at all, or if it’s even physically possible to do so.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Nuclear Power | | Leave a comment

DeSantis Says Would Resume Keystone XL Pipeline if Elected US President in 2024

Sputnik – 26.06.2023

WASHINGTON – Florida Governor and 2024 Republican presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis said on Monday that he would resume work on the Keystone XL oil pipeline between the United States and Canada, in addition to permitting other pipeline projects, if he is elected to be the next US president.

“Hundred percent, yeah. It’s a no-brainer,” DeSantis said during remarks in Texas, when asked whether he plans to restart work on the project.

DeSantis pointed out that pipelines are the safest way to transport energy and pointed to the latest derailment of a train with tanker cars over the weekend in the US state of Montana.

DeSantis also said he plans to permit “a lot of pipelines,” noting that such a move would also be good for national security.

The Keystone pipeline system transports oil from Western Canada to refineries in the United States. The system currently has three phases of the project operational, but with the fourth, Keystone XL, was suspended by the Biden administration.

Keystone XL would run through the state of Montana, where US oil would be added to the system. President Joe Biden rescinded a construction permit for the pipeline granted by former President Donald Trump in 2019.

Last year, the Biden administration said it had no plans to restart the Keystone XL project even amid concerns about rising gas prices and volatility in the energy market.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Robert F Kennedy Jr. Calls CBDCs “Instruments of Control and Oppression”

By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | June 26, 2023

In an interview with The New York Post, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a Democratic Party presidential candidate, took a deep dive into the topic of currency. He unfolded his candid views on Bitcoin, expressed trepidations over central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and rang the bell of caution around artificial intelligence (AI).

Kennedy plans to “support Bitcoin and the freedom to transact,” and enable individuals to wield command over “Bitcoin wallets, nodes, and passwords.” In his world, regulatory fetters would be whittled down to the bare essentials to curb money laundering.

Kennedy also locked horns with Biden’s proposed crypto tax, a formidable 30%, and sounded the alarm against CBDCs.

His argument on CBDCs was clear-cut – CBDCs, in his estimation, are “instruments of control and oppression, and are certain to be abused.” He’s not alone in this battle-cry; his rival from the Republican stables, Ron DeSantis, shares a kindred spirit.

His disquiet was not merely consigned to the domain of cryptocurrency; artificial intelligence was equally ensnared in his critical lens. Kennedy called for the global harnessing of AI, citing figures like Elon Musk, whose advocacy for free speech he commended. The omens, as he foresees, are grave – where AI’s formidable might could “control narratives, create illusions, surveil our activities to dictate our behaviors and enforce compliance, and ultimately enslave humanity.”

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | 2 Comments

Facebook Trusts Former CIA Analyst To Manage Election Policies

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | June 26, 2023

Meta recently appointed Aaron Berman, an ex-CIA agent, to take charge of its Elections Policies. Berman, who previously led the misinformation team at the company during the 2020 elections, now occupies a prominent position with extensive oversight over elections-related content across the globe.

The move is part of the revolving door between the intelligence community and social media platforms.

Aaron Berman boasts a career that spans nearly two decades with the CIA, from March 2002 to July 2019, Breitbart reported. During his tenure, he wielded significant influence, assuming various roles including editing and writing for the President’s Daily Brief – a high-profile classified document prepared every morning for the President of the United States by the intelligence community. Besides this, he supervised numerous analysts and managed multimillion-dollar budgets. His wide-ranging duties also encompassed providing briefings to members of Congress and the National Security Council.

After his extensive tenure with the CIA, Berman joined Facebook in 2019. Here, he took on the role of Senior Product Policy Manager for “misinformation.” He was instrumental in constructing the misinformation policy team’s workforce in the US and implementing policies during what he refers to as “critical events.” Although Berman has not specified the nature of these events, his stint at Facebook’s misinformation department coincided with the period leading up to the 2020 election, which was marred by controversies such as suppression of voices and news outlets.

Now as the Head of Elections Policies, Berman has wide-ranging responsibilities, as described on his LinkedIn profile: “Leads a team responsible for elections-related content policies worldwide. Oversees policy development, advises senior executives, coordinates with teams on implementation via technical and human workflows, and represents Meta with external stakeholders. Puts policies into practice on key elections.”

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | 1 Comment

Australia mulls ‘fake news’ fines for Big Tech

RT | June 26, 2023

Social media companies like Twitter and Facebook could be hit with substantial fines under new draft legislation from the Australian government to crack down on the spread of “misinformation” and fake news on their platforms, The Age reported.

Under the proposal put forth by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), social media companies will be required to keep records showing their efforts to curb the spread of such information online. Repeated failures to do so could see them facing fixed fines numbering in the millions of dollars.

“Mis- and disinformation sows division within the community, undermines trust and can threaten public safety,” Canberra’s communications minister Michelle Rowland said on Sunday. She added that “the Albanese government is committed to keeping Australians safe online.”

Under the government proposal, the ACMA would be entitled to impose a new “code” of practice on social media platforms that repeatedly demonstrate an inability to monitor the spread of fake news on their services. It would also establish an industry-wide ‘standard’ to force the removal of certain content, requiring more robust methods to identify misinformation and an increased use of fact-checkers.

Systemic breaches of the code would see a company liable to a maximum fine of AUS $2.75 million (US $1.83 million) or 2% of global turnover – whichever is higher. The maximum penalty for breaking an industry ‘standard’ would be AUS $6.88 million (US $4.6 million) or 5% of global turnover.

A hypothetical fine under the latter terms for Facebook’s parent company Meta would amount to around AUS $8 billion (US $5.35 million), The Age daily noted.

The EU imposed similar rules governing social-media content last year which also saw social media companies liable for fines linked to annual global turnover.

Under the proposed legislation the government in Canberra would not have a role in determining which content online constitutes “misinformation” or “disinformation.” Rowland stressed that the law is designed to “strike the right balance” between curbing fake news and protecting freedom of speech online.

The powers will also not apply to standalone pieces of content, official electoral information and professional news services. Google had previously removed around 3,000 videos uploaded to YouTube from Australia which spread what it referred to as dangerous or misleading information related to Covid-19.

The proposed legislation was published on Saturday and is currently out for public consultation, which Rowland said was an opportunity for Australians and social media companies to air any objections to it.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | 1 Comment

Democrats Call on YouTube To Bring Back Its Election Censorship Rules

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | June 26, 2023

A ripple of indignation surged through the Capitol this Thursday as some lawmakers pushed against YouTube and its parent colossus, Alphabet Inc. At the heart of the issue is the tech behemoth’s about-face on its election misinformation policy, a move that emerges as a tinderbox in the countdown to the presidential race next year.

The fury emanated from the news that YouTube has decided to slacken its policy reins, no longer acting as the all-mighty censor against videos questioning the the sanctity of the 2020 presidential elections. The revelation, made through an announcement from YouTube, was met with the usual complaints from four high-profile Democrats of the US House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee. Among the voices was that of Ranking Member Frank Pallone Jr. (D.-NJ) who, along with his cohorts, denounced YouTube’s maneuver and demanded the tech giant retract this new stance.

In a letter, the lawmakers articulated their dissent, stating, “While you claim that taking such action is ‘core to a functioning democratic society,’ we emphatically disagree.”

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

They lambasted the policy relaxation as perilous and branded it a dagger pointed at the heart of American democracy, pressing YouTube to review this “harmful policy decision.”

YouTube’s silent watch was palpable as a spokesperson offered no rejoinder to the avalanche of criticism.

Dissecting the June 2nd announcement, YouTube’s reversal appears to be rooted in an introspective contemplation of its policy’s past efficacy and consequences. After purging of tens of thousands of videos, and a whole election cycle within its purview, the platform seems to have had an awakening. Perhaps censoring stuff isn’t good after all, they suggest, hopefully realizing that they were the baddies all along.

They believe the policy, initially started as a bulwark against election denialism, might inadvertently muzzle political speech without significantly stymieing the risk of violence.

However, the democratic lawmakers rebuked YouTube’s newfound stance as perilous, asserting that content discrediting the legitimacy of recent elections has already wreaked havoc upon democracy.

Since when has free speech been antithetical to democracy?

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Republicans ‘Too Afraid’ to Remove Adam Schiff From Office Over Russiagate Hoax

By Andrei Dergalin – Sputnik – 25.06.2023

Despite being censured in the US Congress, Adam Schiff is in fact doing pretty well for himself and is likely going to “get a promotion for lying to the American people for four years,” says a former Colorado state senator.

The US House of Representatives voted to censure Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff this week for his role in promoting unsubstantiated claims that former US President Donald Trump colluded with Russia.

Former Colorado Senator Ted Harvey (Rep.), however, argued that Schiff deserves worse for essentially lying to the American people while in the capacity of the House Intelligence Committee head.

Despite basically knowing that there was no substance to allegations of Trump colluding with Russia, Schiff told the US public that there was “ample evidence of collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign,” Harvey told Sputnik.

“That is everything Schiff said to the American people for four years as the chairman of the intelligence community, he should not just be censured. He should be removed from office,” he said.

Alas, Harvey lamented, the US Republicans are simply “too afraid” to pursue this course of actions and instead managed to make a “martyr” out of Schiff.

“And he is raising money by the boatloads and he is now running for the United States Senate and will get a promotion for lying to the American people for four years,” Harvey mused about Schiff’s prospects. “And instead of being held accountable for that, he’s going to be promoted for that.”

During his tenure as the 45th president of the United States, Donald Trump was hounded by allegations of colluding with Russia in order to be elected in 2016, with said allegations being actively promoted by his political opponents.

Despite the seriousness of the allegations brought against him, an investigation into the alleged Russian election interference led by special counsel Robert Mueller failed to produce conclusive evidence to back claims that Trump campaign members conspired with Russia.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Russophobia | | 6 Comments

Why are NATO intelligence assets and heavy weapons in South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant?

By Drago Bosnic | June 26, 2023

Amid numerous disturbing reports about possible false flag operations involving nuclear devices and weapons, the Kiev regime seems to be escalating its actions in this regard. According to various local sources, the South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant (NPP), located in the city of Yuzhnoukrainsk in the Nikolayev region (oblast), has been effectively taken over by the Neo-Nazi junta forces. Although troops have been stationed in and around the NPP since the start of the special military operation (SMO), in recent weeks this has escalated. Apparently, mysterious “guards” have appeared at the NPP and have even restricted access to the reactor facilities, including to the staff responsible for the critically important maintenance of the reactor and the NPP’s key systems and subsystems.

Worse yet, the “guards” are offering no explanation for their behavior, nor does anyone else, be it the military or civilian authorities. In essence, nobody really knows for sure, but many people are skeptical (to say the least). The “guards” have even placed what can only be described as ammunition crates inside the NPP. And it doesn’t seem to be small arms ammunition, but something much bigger, such as shells or even rockets, all of which have foreign markings. For over a year, there have been numerous reports about the Kiev regime hiding NATO-sourced weapons there, obviously in an attempt to prevent their destruction. Needless to say, having any sort of weapons at a nuclear facility of any kind is suicidal in and of itself, but having shells and rockets stored there is simply criminal.

This is particularly dangerous as the political West and the Neo-Nazi junta have been insisting that Russia is supposedly planning to use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine, supposedly due to mythical “battlefield losses”. On the other hand, Moscow has repeatedly issued warnings about the Kiev regime’s plans to build a so-called “dirty bomb”, for which it has more than enough enriched uranium stored in several Soviet-era NPPs across Ukraine. The previous scenario is extremely unlikely, as it’s not in Russia’s interest to use nuclear weapons. However, Moscow’s “dirty bomb” warnings are certainly not to be dismissed, as the Neo-Nazi junta has been threatening to acquire nuclear weapons for years. This includes threats by the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky himself.

Latest intelligence data suggests that the South Ukraine NPP is also being used as an ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) command and control center for most NATO forces covertly stationed in Ukraine. This is hardly unexpected and is in line with the previous message Russia sent to the belligerent alliance after it hit an underground bunker where hundreds of NATO officers were deployed to command and coordinate their favorite puppet regime’s troops. According to varying estimates, up to 400 officers and other staff were neutralized in a hypersonic missile strike (presumably involving a single 9-A-7660 “Kinzhal”). Obviously, in order to ensure such high casualties among high-value assets are avoided, NATO most likely decided to deploy its higher-ranking personnel in NPPs, knowing that Russia will not target those.

This could also explain why the United States and NATO are suddenly parroting about invoking Article 5 in case of a supposed Russian use of tactical nuclear weapons or if an attack on an NPP causes radiation spikes. Both scenarios clearly imply that a false flag is in the works, as this is precisely how the political West operates during its countless aggressions against the world. The belligerent power pole first threatens to attack in case the side they are targeting does something, and then, all of a sudden, the targeted country supposedly does “exactly that”, even though it’s clearly not in its interest. Obviously, such a scenario is virtually impossible to implement against a country like Russia without leading to a world-ending thermonuclear confrontation.

It has now become clear that the political West is aware of just how much of a failure the Neo-Nazi junta’s much-touted counteroffensive has been, leading to attempts to thwart any possible Russian counterattack that might have devastating consequences for the Kiev regime. This might be attempted through direct intervention by NATO, as the political West probably believes that such escalation could be controlled. And a possible false flag operation simulating a Russian attack on the South Ukraine NPP (or even the Zaporozhye NPP) might be used as an excuse for that. Still, considering how risky such a scenario is, the belligerent power pole might even contemplate the delivery of nuclear weapons to the Neo-Nazi junta in an attempt to cause a localized nuclear confrontation with Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has already hinted at this possibility, warning that the delivery of nuclear-capable F-16 fighter jets might be the way for the political West to achieve such a scenario. However, for its part, Moscow has warned that this would certainly not be a localized confrontation, as the Kiev regime’s puppet masters would also suffer the consequences of their rabidly Russophobic actions in Ukraine. The already thin line between global peace and thermonuclear annihilation is getting thinner by the day due to the US-led belligerent power pole’s unrelenting aggression against Russia. The political West has a clear choice of considering an off-ramp solution that might avert a catastrophe of global proportions. Still, it’s pushing for further escalation.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | False Flag Terrorism | , , | 1 Comment

Aluminium and Breast Cancer

Building the scientific case

BY DR CHRISTOPHER EXLEY | JUNE 20, 2023

In my recent book I write about building a case for an aetiological role for aluminium in breast cancer. Herein I will revisit the chapter in my book and examine the case for aluminium anew.

My interest in breast cancer was sparked by the research of oncologist Philippa Darbre linking breast cancer incidence and occurrence with the regular use of antiperspirants. My interest in these ‘cosmetics’ went back much further and I was concerned that antiperspirants were significant contributors to the body burden of aluminium. Please read my book for an account of the history, but to cut a long story short, I collaborated with Darbre and we showed that breast tissue biopsies obtained from women with breast cancer contained aluminium. Of particular interest was that breast tissues closest to the underarm consistently contained a higher content of aluminium. Of course, our research was ignored by the breast cancer community and campaigned against by breast cancer charities, including the charity that provided the breast tissue biopsies used in our study! However, it was followed up by a number of research groups in Europe and the US and evidence began to be put forward to support aluminium as a carcinogen in breast cancer. Perhaps foremost amongst these groups is research led by Stefano Mandriota in Switzerland. Mandriota, an oncologist of some repute, showed that mouse mammary epithelial cells underwent malignant transformations upon exposure to aluminium. Aluminium-induced tumours were the result of genomic instability. The most recent publication from this group highlights the importance of chromosome instability in aluminium’s carcinogenicity. Mandriota’s meticulous cell and animal studies are building the case for a role for aluminium in breast cancer. These studies continue today and deserve our full support.

A role for aluminium in breast cancer is not dependent upon a link to the regular use of antiperspirants. However, the most definitive clinical trial yet to fully investigate such a link makes a very compelling case. The study found both significantly increased concentrations of aluminium in breast tissue in breast cancer and a significant increased risk of breast cancer in women who used an antiperspirant several times a day. Confirmation of increased content of aluminium in breast tissue in breast cancer asks the question at least as to the role played by aluminium-based antiperspirants in the accumulation of aluminium in breast tissue. Note that contrary to the information repeatedly reported by the antiperspirant industry these ‘cosmetics’ do not prevent sweating by simply acting as plugs in the sweat gland. These ‘cosmetics’ prevent sweating by inhibition of the activity of the sweat gland by aluminium. The industry is well aware of this but cannot admit to such since this would change the categorisation of antiperspirants from simple cosmetics to a medicine. The latter requiring authorisation through clinical trials demonstrating both safety and efficacy. (Well, this used to be the case prior to covid vaccines.) Since sweating is a significant route of excretion of aluminium from the body, inhibiting sweating in the underarm region is likely to promote accumulation of aluminium in the surrounding tissue.

The industry actively ignores the science and attempts to defend itself by funding studies that desperately look to minimise the role of antiperspirants in the accumulation of aluminium in breast tissue. Let me be frank about such published work. I do not believe them. They set out to prove a point and, hey presto, the results prove their point. The recent study I have highlighted is wholly funded by the antiperspirant industry, its interpretation is wholly dependent upon the premise that antiperspirants are simply acting as plugs in sweat glands and as a clue to its bias one can notice that it only cites industry publications and completely ignores all previous independent research in this field. One can only surmise that the journal editor and manuscript referees are either stupid or, perhaps more likely, industry affiliates.

I have built a case for a role for aluminium in breast cancer and I will continue to watch with interest the new and independent research that tests this role. In the meantime those who are interested might like to visit the website of my good friend Eileen whose untiring work endeavours to bring this story to a wider audience.

June 26, 2023 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries