Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Lead author of Cochrane mask review responds to Fauci’s dismissal of evidence

BY MARYANNE DEMASI, PHD | SEPTEMBER 4, 2023

Former chief medical advisor to the US President Anthony Fauci, was questioned over the weekend by CNN reporter Michael Smerconish, about face masks being able to curb the spread of covid-19.

“There’s no doubt that masks work,” said Fauci.

“Different studies give different percentages of advantage of wearing it, but there’s no doubt that the weight of the studies … indicate the benefit of wearing masks,” he added.

Smerconish brought up the 2023 Cochrane review which found no evidence that physical interventions like face masks could stop viral transmission in the community and cited my interview with lead author of the study Tom Jefferson who confirmed, “There is just no evidence that they [masks] make any difference. Full stop.”

Fauci replied,“Yeah but there are other studies,” stressing that masks work on an individual basis.

“When you’re talking about the effect on the epidemic or the pandemic as a whole, the data are less strong…but when you talk about an individual basis of someone protecting themselves or protecting themselves from spreading it to others, there’s no doubt that there are many studies that show there is an advantage,” said Fauci.

Professor Tom Jefferson, who says he is committed to updating the Cochrane review as new evidence emerges, has responded to Fauci’s comments.

“So, Fauci is saying that masks work for individuals but not at a population level? That simply doesn’t make sense,” said Jefferson.

“And he says there are ‘other studies’…but what studies?  He doesn’t name them so I cannot interpret his remarks without knowing what he is referring to,” he added.

Jefferson explains that the entire point of the Cochrane review was to systematically sift through all the available randomised data on physical interventions such as masks and determine what was useful and what was not.

Since 2011, the Cochrane review only included randomised trials to minimise bias from confounders.

“It might be that Fauci is relying on trash studies,” said Jefferson. “Many of them are observational, some are cross-sectional, and some actually use modelling. That is not strong evidence.”

“Once we excluded such low-quality studies from the review, we concluded there was no evidence that masks reduced transmission,” he added.

The problem with Fauci is that his story has changed.

Initially, Fauci said that masks were ineffective and unnecessary. In March 2020, Fauci told 60 minutes, “Right now in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks.”

But only a few weeks later, he did a U-turn and began recommending widespread use of face masks.

Fauci defended his U-turn saying, “When the facts change, I change my mind.”

Jefferson retorted, “What facts changed?  There were no randomised studies, no new evidence to justify his flip-flop. That’s simply not true.”

Since then, Fauci has remained adamant that face masks not only stop people from infecting others, but they also protect the wearer.

Fauci advocated for the use of cloth masks, and even encouraged double-masking in the absence of evidence.

“You put another layer on, it just makes common sense that it would be more effective,” Fauci told NBC news.

“What Fauci doesn’t understand is that cloth and surgical masks cannot stop viruses because viruses are too small and they still get through,” said Jefferson.

He laments that public figures have tried to undermine the Cochrane review, despite it representing the gold standard of evidence.

Columnist Zeynep Tufekci wrote an article in the New York Times titled, “Here’s Why the Science Is Clear That Masks Work,” claiming that Cochrane’s mask study had misled the public.

Cochrane’s editor in chief, Karla Soares-Weiser capitulated to pressure and “apologised” for the wording in the plain language summary of the review because it “was open to misinterpretation” and may have led to “inaccurate and misleading” claims.

And former CDC director Rochelle Walensky misled Congress after claiming the Cochrane review had been “retracted” which was patently false.

As it stands, the Cochrane review will continue to be the subject of attacks because it presents a major roadblock for implementing masking policies. Jefferson says he doesn’t know what motivates people to ignore the facts.

“Could it be part of this whole agenda to control people’s behaviour? Perhaps,” he speculated.

“What I do know,” said Jefferson, “is that Fauci was in a position to run a trial, he could have randomised two regions to wear masks or not. But he didn’t and that’s unforgivable.”

Fauci, who served as the federal government’s top infectious disease specialist for nearly 40 years, stepped down in Dec 2022 and is now a professor at Georgetown University’s Department of Medicine, in the Division of Infectious Diseases.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 2 Comments

‘Deeply Flawed’ Report Praising Pandemic Mandates Used to Promote ‘Lockdown Doctrine,’ Critic Says

By John-Michael Dumais and Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 1, 2023

The U.K.’s Royal Society — acclaimed as the world’s oldest scientific academy — last week issued a report saying there was “clear evidence” that lockdowns, masks, contact tracing, travel restrictions and other nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were effective at reducing COVID-19 transmission “in some countries.”

However, in an article published Wednesday in UnHerdKevin Bardosh, Ph.D., research director at Collateral Global — which is “dedicated to researching, understanding and communicating the global impacts of policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic” — called the report “deeply flawed,” saying it revealed “an unfortunate detachment from reality in our prestigious scientific institutions.”

Bardosh called out the report, particularly for its use of the word “unequivocally,” which stated:

“In summary, evidence about the effectiveness of NPIs applied to reduce the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 shows unequivocally that, when implemented in packages that combine a number of NPIs with complementary effects, these can provide powerful, effective and prolonged reductions in viral transmission.”

Bardosh, whose work has focused on the epidemiology and control of human, animal and vector-borne infectious disease in over 20 countries, is co-author of more than 50 peer-reviewed publications.

In this 2022 analysis of the unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy, published in BMJ Global Health, Bardosh and co-authors concluded: “mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policies have had damaging effects on public trust, vaccine confidence, political polarization, human rights, inequities and social wellbeing.”

Failure to ‘evaluate the harmful consequences’ of policies

Bardosh said the central problem with the Royal Society report — and similar work like last year’s Lancet Commission report and Nature’s review — is that they fail to comprehensively evaluate the harmful consequences of pandemic policies.

Instead they “exclude or minimize the uncomfortable outliers and data that question orthodoxy and sidestep the hard policy questions.”

Without such critical inquiry, “simple narratives and comfortable popular projections” become entrenched, said Bardosh, in part by the mainstream media’s constant repetition of messages — like “masks worked” and “lockdowns slowed the spread” — and by admonitions to not question the conclusions or the authorities or institutions responsible for pushing them.

Among the most glaring yet unexamined consequences, according to Bardosh, are the hundreds of millions of people pushed into poverty and food insecurity by COVID-19 pandemic mandates and the lost educational opportunities for children.

In another article in UnHerd, Bardosh called out the U.K. COVID-19 inquiry — after more than 40 child rights charities and advocates issued a “scathing indictment” — saying it “must address the harms to children,” and that “lockdown ‘experts’ need to be held to account.”

Bardosh wrote:

“Children were not vectors of disease, despite pervasive media propaganda that toddlers would kill grandma. They were at minuscule risk from severe outcomes. Schools were never places of high transmission, something known as early as April 2020.

“Yet the expert classes, media and politicians hyped the risk to kids, dressing it up in a garb of unquestionable moralism that fed on our deepest fears: hurting children.”

What’s wrong with the Royal Society analysis?

The Royal Society report found individual NPIs in isolation had no effect on transmission, and it considered only the reduction of transmission in its overall analysis, not the illness or death outcomes, Bardosh pointed out.

In its analysis of lockdown and social distancing data, the Royal Society inconsistently applied targeting of time periods and effect sizes, and failed to distinguish between voluntary and mandated behavior change, he said.

Bardosh further criticized the report for relying heavily on observational studies from high-income countries and for cherry-picking cases from countries like South Korea, New Zealand and Hong Kong while ignoring those from Sweden, India, Haiti and Nicaragua.

“For the 17% of the world that could stay home (about 500 million people) during the height of global lockdown, reports are now written that render the other 83% invisible,” he wrote.

The report’s review of the evidence on masks, noted Bardosh, contradicts the recently updated meta-analysis of 78 randomized control trials (RCTs) by Cochrane which, while admitting the flaws in the study, nonetheless found “the pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks” and “wearing N95/P2 respirators … may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness.”

In his article last week about mask mandates, Bardosh also cited the recent RCT studies of community-wide cloth masking in Bangladesh and Guinea-Bissau during the pandemic, which found little to no benefit from the interventions.

Bardosh wrote:

“Before Covid, population-wide medical masks were not viewed as a particularly effective tool for respiratory viruses. In a 2018 address at the National Academy of Medicine, science writer Laurie Garrett stated that ‘the major efficacy of a mask is that it causes alarm in a person and so you stay away from each other.’”

The many downsides of facemask use also remained unexplored in the report. In his masking article Bardosh wrote:

“Oddly, the pro-mask narrative ignores the … harmful effects on social and emotional cognition, the toxicity of poorly manufactured masks, environmental pollution, psychological and physical discomfort (especially in people with a history of trauma or abuse), as well as increased social conformity to illogical bureaucracy and greater acceptance of mass surveillance technologies.”

Collateral Global in April brought together a group of 30 scholars, activists and experts from across the globe to discuss the impacts of pandemic restrictions in low- and middle-income countries — many of which were not considered in the Royal Society study, according to Bardosh.

They issued a report calling for focusing on human rights and centering local actors’ knowledge and experience, disaggregating risk based on local conditions, consistent public investment in healthcare across the world, open and accurate information flow from central authorities to regional areas and back, and for governments to avoid unnecessary and unworkable restrictions on movement, freedoms and the economy.

They also called out the acceleration of the global trend toward authoritarianism, the unlawful granting of emergency powers to the state and the manipulation of public opinion through the exploitation of fear.

Bardosh warned of a global policy “domino-effect” where lockdown policymaking in major countries invariably leads, through political pressure, to the herding of lower-income countries into the same mandates, regardless of the social and economic harm.

A new ‘lockdown doctrine’?

Despite the shortcomings of the Royal Society report, it is already being used as a rallying point for a new global preparedness vision, according to Bardosh, to make sure that NPIs such as lockdowns are rolled out early in the next pandemic.

This is part of the 100-day mission roadmap promoted by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness (CEPI), Bardosh said.

CEPI, a global partnership of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust and the World Economic Forum (WEF), was launched in 2017 in Davos, Switzerland, home of the WEF.

CEPI is closely connected to efforts to develop a vaccine for “Disease X,” raising over a billion dollars from governments and organizations such as the Gates Foundation.

According to the 100 Days website, “In preparing for Disease X, it’s important to be clear about the knowns and the unknowns: The X in ‘Disease X’ stands for everything we don’t know” and “What we do know is that the next Disease X is coming and that we have to be ready.”

CEPI recently hosted the Global Pandemic Preparedness Summit with the U.K. government “to explore how we can respond to the next ‘Disease X’ by making safe, effective vaccines within 100 days,” stating it has a $3.5 billion “pandemic-busting plan” that “will kickstart and coordinate this work.”

According to the Daily Mail, countries have pledged $1.5 billion for this plan.

Bardosh called this “our new lockdown doctrine.”

In a June article, he wrote that this doctrine represents the consolidation of the world’s resources toward pandemic preparedness and building “the critical infrastructure for rapid lockdown,” and that “Shutting down harder and faster next time is the wrong idea.”

Bardosh wrote:

Sir Jeremy Farrar, previous director at the Wellcome Trust and current WHO [World Health Organization] Chief Scientist, warned the inquiry not to be complacent in our ‘new pandemic age.’

“Views expressed this week sounded similar to those outlined in Bill Gates’s recent book, ‘How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.’ The Gates Foundation has become the WHO’s second largest donor, giving it an oversized influence in determining the shape of future pandemic responses.

“In his book, Gates outlines a plan echoed so far in the U.K. inquiry: lock down fast and make reopening dependent on a vaccine.”

Bardosh warned the successful rollout of lockdowns, vaccines and therapeutics would require “mechanisms to shape public opinion, curtail civil liberties and deploy massive government spending programs.”

Bardosh sees the Royal Society report — driven by “powerful interests, spin and egos” — functioning as just such a mechanism, forming the latest brick in the wall of a new and expanding global command-and-control system.

“We have seen in the years since 2020,” he wrote, “that once you impose a slew of government mandates, repealing them is just as difficult.”

Bardosh hopes that “skeptical academic oddballs” like him can make enough noise to make a difference.


John-Michael Dumais is a news editor for The Defender. He has been a writer and community organizer on a variety of issues, including the death penalty, war, health freedom and all things related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

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

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

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

Spiegel schoolmarm demands that Germans “act responsibly” and “get their masks back out”…

… so that she doesn’t feel uncomfortable being the only “oddball” wearing a face diaper in public

eugyppius: a plague chronicle | September 6, 2023

We’ve encountered Head Girl Science Fan Veronika Hackenbroch here at the plague chronicle once before. She’s a medical writer for Spiegel who defended lockdowns until the very end and is still fighting a halfhearted rearguard action to keep Corona alive. Her latest is a diatribe demanding that Germans “Get their masks back out” because “Covid infections are rising again. If you’re smart, you’ll wear a mask, even if the government doesn’t make you.”

To make this argument, Hackenbroch must first surumount a considerable hurdle, namely that the venerated Covid prophet Christian Drosten has been increasingly noncommittal about masking, at one point even saying he won’t mask in unmasked company because he “doesn’t want to be Dr. Strange.” For someone like Hackenbroch, whose entire worldview is shaped by the opinions of arbitrary Science Authorities, this is no small thing, but she can take some comfort in the fact that the French Health Minister is still a committed fan of face diapers who believes that “masking must become commonplace.” There’s also the fact that nasal spray vaccine enthusiast Akiko Iwasaki “currently travels wearing an FFP2 mask.”

There are people who spend thousands acquiring handbags sported by their favourite film stars, and there is Veronika Hackenbroch, who does whatever the Yale virus luminary Iwasaki does.

Only after urging her readers to imitate the personal eccentricities of assorted Covid celebrities does Hackenbroch bother to address the scientific evidence:

Masks, especially FFP2 masks, can significantly reduce the risk of infection. In a California study, the risk of corona infection was 66 percent lower in study participants who wore a medical mask for two weeks than in people without masks. For FFP2 mask wearers, the figure was as high as about 83 percent.

Masks are even better than for self-protection when it comes to protecting the community: if everyone wears a correctly fitted FFP2 mask, including those who are unknowingly infected and already contagious, the risk of infection drops into the per thousand range even in close contact, according to a study by the Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organisation in Göttingen.

The California study finds that respirators lower the odds of infection by 83%, a clearly impossible statistic contradicted by many other studies, natural experiments and also by publicly available case data. The Max Planck study merely looks at the mechanics of masking – things like “respiratory particle size distribution” and “exhalation flow physics” – to predict how well masking ought to work. Its insane results that FFP2 masks can reduce the risk of infection nearly to zero are replicated nowhere in the real world, and seem to be in tension with the California study Hackenbroch cited just a few sentences earlier.

Then things really go off the rails:

That mask-wearing permanently weakens the immune system due to the lack of contact with pathogens (“immunodeficiency”) is a myth. It is not true that you have to be sick regularly to have healthy immune defence. You don’t have to train your immune system like a muscle. On the contrary, several viral infections only increase the susceptibility to further infections.

The adaptive immune system is a real thing, and in the absence of regular exposure to constantly evolving pathogens, adaptive immunity loses its ability to respond to new infections. Or does Hackenbroch not think that regular Covid vaccination is necessary, because “you don’t have to train your immune system”?

As with fellow Covid harpy Christina Berndt, of course, Hackenbroch’s primary concern is that if not enough people mask, she won’t feel comfortable masking. She concedes that “now is the time to make masks compulsory again,” but she does hope that more will “act responsibly” so she doesn’t have to worry about passersby thinking she’s “an oddball.” It’s a remarkably petty concern on behalf of a measure that Hackenbroch believes so strongly will protect her from a virus she continues to insist is quite dangerous.

On the one hand, it is amusing to watch the Hackenbrochs of the world stomp their feet and demand that all of society bend to their eccentric preferences. For the early years of the pandemic, they rode a massive wave of propaganda-induced virus panic and helped shape the hygiene hysteria of millions. Now their ranks have been reduced to a few isolated ninnies whose opinions, thankfully, very few care about. That they themselves don’t seem to have noticed this shift is an occasion for low comedy. On the other hand, sporadic local mask mandates are returning, and this thing won’t be fully over until every last one of these mask nags is shamed into silence. Masking is deeply irrational, it has no demonstrable purpose, it seems to have addictive properties for some people, and if done frequently enough it threatens merely to increase public hygiene anxiety and set off another self-reinforcing virus panic spiral.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

JFK Plotters Could Never Have Been Convicted

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | September 5, 2023

To this day — almost 60 years after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy — it would be impossible to convict any particular official of the U.S. national-security state of having participated in the plot to assassinate Kennedy. That’s because there simply is insufficient evidence to convict any one of them beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Oh, sure, there is more than sufficient circumstantial evidence to convict some national-security officials of having had a motive to kill Kennedy, the motive being that they concluded that his policies posed a grave threat to “national security.” But motive would be insufficient to garner a criminal conviction in a court of law. The prosecutor would also have to show that the defendants actually participated in a plot to assassinate Kennedy.

However, if it were possible to indict the U.S. national-security establishment for the assassination, a prosecutor could establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s because of the two central points that I set forth in my books The Kennedy Autopsy and An Encounter with Evil: The Abraham Zapruder Story. 

First, the evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the military establishment conducted a fraudulent autopsy on Kennedy’s body on the very evening of the assassination. 

Second, the evidence also establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the CIA produced a fraudulent copy of the Zapruder film of the assassination on the Sunday following the Friday assassination. 

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, there is no innocent explanation for a fraudulent autopsy or a fraudulent film. They necessarily convict the national-security establishment of the assassination itself. There is no way around that. 

However, that leaves some people frustrated because they feel that the individual plotters within the national-security establishment went to their death beds having gotten away without being convicted and punished for their crime of having orchestrated the assassination of a U.S. president.

What they fail to realize, however, is that under U.S. national-security law, there is no reasonable possibility that those officials would have been convicted, even if the evidence conclusively established their guilt. 

Here is why this is true. 

The criminal prosecution of those military and CIA officials would have taken place in Dallas County. That’s because the JFK assassination was a murder case under Texas state law. The federal government had no jurisdiction over the crime, given that it was not a federal offense to assassinate a president at that time. 

Let’s assume that the Dallas County prosecutor had more than sufficient evidence to convict those officials. Let’s assume hypothetically, for example, that he had a tape recording of the defendant’s planning the assassination. Let’s go even further and assume that the plotters, faced with that tape recording, openly, proudly, and patriotically confessed to having orchestrated and planned the assassination in order to protect “national security” from a president whose policies, they said, constituted a grave threat to “national security.” 

Despite their confession, those officials would still not have been convicted under U.S. national-security law.

The defendants would have petitioned to remove the case to a federal district court, arguing that they were operating within the course and scope of their authority as officials of the national-security establishment when they orchestrated and planned the assassination. 

The officials would have argued that the Kennedy assassination was nothing more than another regime-change operation, one based on the same grounds as other regime-change operations — that is, the protection of “national security” from a political leader whose policies posed a grave threat to “national security.”

They would have shown Kennedy’s betrayal of the CIA-trained Cuban exiles at the Bay of Pigs, his rejection of Operation Northwoods, his resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis that left Cuba permanently in communist hands, his befriending the Soviet Union in his Peace Speech at American University, his defense of the civil-rights movement that was considered to be a communist front, his Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets, his order to withdraw U.S. troops from Vietnam, his outreach to the Cuban communist regime, and, most important, his determination to move America in a direction that was totally different from that desired by the U.S. national-security establishment. (See FFF’s book JKF’s War with the National-Security Establishment: Why Kennedy Was Assassinated by Douglas Horne.)

Undoubtedly, the federal judge would have granted the removal petition. 

At that point, the officials would have sought immunity for what they had done. They would have shown that the removal of Kennedy from office was a national-security regime-change operation, no different from the U.S. regime-change operations conducted in Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, and the Congo in 1961. 

There is no question but that the federal judiciary, including the U.S. Supreme Court, would have upheld their claim of immunity and dismissed the prosecution.

How do we know that this would have happened? Because the federal courts have made it clear that they lack the jurisdiction, much less the competence, to second-guess any regime-change operation carried out by the U.S. national-security establishment. Thus, if a citizen of Iran, Guatemala, or Congo filed suit for wrongful deaths arising from those regime-change operations, the federal courts would have summarily dismissed the suits, holding that when it comes to regime-change operations, the national-security establishment is sovereign and supreme and that officials operating within the course and scope of their authority are immune from liability. 

Even if the federal courts disagreed with the reasons for removing Kennedy from office, it would be irrelevant. That’s because under U.S. national-security law, it is the national-security establishment, not the federal courts, that has the final say on what constitutes a threat to “national security” and what needs to be done to resolve it. If the national-security establishment decides that the leaders of Iran, Guatemala, Congo, Chile, Iraq, the United States, or any other country pose a threat to U.S. “national security,” it wields the omnipotent, non-reviewable power to remove that threat. Moreover, its officials are immune from civil and criminal liability for orchestrating or engaging in such regime-change operations.

Where does the Kennedy assassination leave us then? It provides further confirmation of a central point that I have long made regarding the achievement of a genuinely free society: that an essential prerequisite to restoring our rights and liberties and our democratic processes is the dismantling of the national-security state form of governmental structure and the restoration of our nation’s founding governmental system of a limited-government republic. 

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , | 1 Comment

Congratulations To Germany On Achieving More Than 50% Of Its Electricity Production From “Renewables”!

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | August 29, 2023

On the march to Net Zero carbon emissions from usage of energy, the key first step is to eliminate fossil fuels from the generation of electricity, replacing them with the magical “renewables.” Or so we are told. Once electricity generation is fossil fuel-free, then all energy use can be switched to electricity, without any of the evil emissions. Voilà — Net Zero!

But somehow, in the places that have tried to go this route with wind turbines and solar panels, the push to get more electricity generation from “renewables” has seemed to stall out at around 40 – 45%. (Some small countries with lots of hydropower get higher percentages by counting the hydropower as “renewable.”). Countries may build more and more solar panels and wind turbines, but somewhere in the 40s the percentage that those things contribute to electricity generation just doesn’t seem to budge very much any more.

And that’s why it’s so exciting that in the first half of 2023 Germany finally crashed through the 50% barrier, becoming the first significant country with little hydropower to achieve more than half of its electricity generation from “renewables.” With a simple internet search, you can find large numbers of news sources relaying the great news. For a few examples, here are Reuters, June 27 (Renewable share of German power use climbs to 52.3% in first half”); Fraunhofer, July 3 (German Net Power Generation in First Half of 2023: Record Renewable Energy Share of 57.7 Percent”); Clean Energy Wire, June 27 (Renewables covered more than half of German electricity consumption in first half of 2023”); and Solar Quarter, July 5 (Germany Achieves Record 57.7% Renewable Energy Share in Net Power Generation for First Half of 2023”). Why the exact percentages vary a little from article to article, I cannot explain; but they are all at least a little in excess of the key 50% figure.

So this is surely Germany continuing to lead the way to the green energy transition. Certainly, Germany has only accelerated its pursuit of the idea that the route to Net Zero is the building of more and yet more solar panels and wind turbines. A site called Renewable-Energy-Industry.com compiles data on additions to Germany’s wind and solar generation capacity just in the first half of 2023: Record Additions in Germany: 8,000 MW of New Wind And Solar Capacity in The First Half of 2023.”:

[S]olar energy in particular is booming in Germany. From January to June 2023 alone, around 465,000 new solar plants with 6,500 MW capacity . . . went into operation and produce electricity, more than ever before in a six-month period. . . . In the first six months of 2023, just under 350 new wind turbines with a capacity of around 1,750 MW went into operation. . . .

The addition of 8000 MW of generation capacity in just six months is a huge increment in a country where peak electricity usage is less than 85,000 MW (or 85 GW).

So are these large additions to capacity what has succeeded in pushing Germany over the 50% threshold? Unfortunately, if you read deep into the Reuters piece linked above, you will start to get a very different understanding. It turns out that Germany’s percentage of electricity from renewables increased not because the production of electricity from renewables increased, but rather because Germany’s economy is shrinking. After decades of effort and hundreds of billions of dollars of subsidies and greatly increased consumer electricity prices, the contribution of wind and solar energy in Germany’s economy remains almost insignificant.

Despite all its new solar and wind facilities, Germany’s production of electricity from those sources has lately been going down rather than up. Here is the story for the first half of 2023) (from the Reuters piece linked above:

Renewables, at 137.5 TWh, represented 51.7% of total output, up from 46.4% in first half 2022, even as green power production volumes decreased by 0.6%.

The 137.5 TWh of electricity that Germany’s “renewable” facilities produced in the first half of 2023 is a pitiful percentage of their supposed theoretical capacity. A chart at Clean Energy Wire gives Germany’s generation capacity of solar, plus onshore and offshore wind as 130.8 GW as of 2022. (In a country with only about 85 GW of peak usage!). Add the new 8 GW of capacity added in the first half of 2023, and you would have 138.8 GW of wind and solar capacity, or 602.9 TWh hours of capacity (138.8 x 24 x 181) for the 181 days in January to June 2023. That would mean that the wind and solar facilities combined produced at a rate of only 22.8% of capacity over that period.

So if production of electricity from “renewables” actually decreased, how could the percentage of electricity production from the “renewables” have increased from 46.4% to 51.7% of the total? Easy — the production from all other sources (fossil fuels and nuclear) went down dramatically:

Conventional energy sources – nuclear, coal, natural gas and oil – provided 128.4 TWh of output, down from 160.0 TWh a year earlier.

They ran the conventional generators less because the demand for electricity was not there:

The fall in conventional production reflected the phase-out of nuclear energy by mid-April and operators cutting output to match weak demand.

The change from 160.0 TWh to 128.4 TWh from conventional sources would be a 19.75% decline. That’s rather enormous in one year. Now, how could it be that Germany is experiencing that kind of a huge decline in the demand for electricity? You might check out the big front page article from today’s Wall Street Journal, “Germany’s Shrinking Economy Sparks a Struggle for Solutions.” (different headline online). The world leader in the supposed “green energy transition” turns out also to be in the unique position of having an economy that is shrinking, and not by a little:

Germany will be the world’s only major economy to contract in 2023, with even sanctioned Russia experiencing growth, according to the International Monetary Fund.

The WSJ piece goes into a variety of factors that may be contributing to the shrinking economy. But self-inflicted high energy prices turn up again and again:

Energy costs are posing an existential challenge to sectors such as chemicals. . . . Energy prices in Europe have declined from last year’s peak as EU countries scrambled to replace Russian gas, but German industry still faces higher costs than competitors in the U.S. and Asia.

And meanwhile, with Germany’s massive investments in wind and solar electricity generation, are those sources actually making any major inroads in the overall market for primary energy in the country? Here is an extremely revealing chart, again from Clean Energy Wire, with data from 2022:

In the “renewables” category for all primary energy (not just electricity), we learn that they include “biomass” as a “renewable.” Probably, that’s mostly wood, used for heating homes, and hardly a zero carbon source. The amount of energy produced from the “biomass,” at 1,040 PJ and 8.8% of primary energy, far exceeds the combined total from wind and solar (713 PJ and 6.0% of primary energy).

The whole “more than 50% from renewables” mantra turns out only to apply to electricity (far less than half of primary energy usage). And rather than representing the advance of the mythical wind and solar, the whole thing is just an artifact of a shrinking economy, largely itself caused by the destructive build-out of the wind and solar facilities. They are destroying their economy, and have almost nothing to show for two decades and hundreds of billions of dollars invested in the useless wind and solar farms.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

What Surfing Taught Me About Crumbling Concrete

BY DR MARK SHAW | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | SEPTEMBER 6, 2023

The news that so much disruption is being caused by the construction material RAAC (reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete) brings to mind a decision I had to make a couple of years ago as to whether to buy a more modern, so called ‘advanced technology’ epoxy surfboard, or to stick with my more traditional fibreglass ones.

Being typically sceptical I decided to look in depth as to how each type of board was constructed and what the relative pros and cons were. It turned out to be an easy choice but I seemed to be swimming against the tide and could well have been accused by some of being too sceptical.

The epoxy boards are sold as being much lighter, stronger and ‘progressive’. It is true that they have particular advantages for some and allow for more radical surfing – aerial manoeuvres in particular – for those skilful enough, but the major drawback for me was that if you damage your board with just a small ding and you don’t get out of the water immediately, the heavily aerated (98% air) lightweight eps foam can absorb huge amounts of water capable of spreading rapidly through the board and potentially making it economically unviable to repair. As an experienced surfer I know how often surfers can emerge from the sea only then to realise that their board (fibreglass or epoxy) has been cracked during their surf. I also have heard enough reports to know that the epoxy boards are nowhere near as strong or dense as the manufacturers claim and that the manufacturers and retailers don’t inform their customers adequately about the drawbacks of these expensive boards – only the advantages. I speak to surfers about their new purchases and it is clear many of them are unaware.

A similar material science lies behind the retrofitting of insulation (especially cavity wall insulation and external wall insulation) where devastating disruption to people’s lives and thousands of pounds may have been wasted on materials that eventually absorb excessive moisture, rendering them ineffective, and then possibly thousands more being spent to repair the resulting damage. The Grenfell disaster has similar echoes of a complete failure to recognise a very basic link between material science, structural engineering and health and safety. As soon as I looked Into RAAC it became clear that it should never have been used as a load bearing construction material in buildings that people occupy for any reason whatsoever.

And so it was confirmed this week in an interview with Dr. John Roberts, a past President of the Institute of Structural Engineers, on BBC Radio 4’s World at One.

What the mainstream media seem to be focusing on is a lack of funding as a root cause of the whole problem. This allows for a lot of political mudslinging that has diverted attention from the more salient issues that are brought up in the interview:

  • RAAC was not properly assessed by those who should have been responsible as a potentially immediate problem rather than a medium to long term one;
  • the material never resembled ordinary concrete in the slightest;
  • RAAC was not truly designed by structural engineers but bought out of a catalogue by manufacturers;
  • the ‘concrete’ wasn’t marketed as a short-life material, should never have been used for the purpose it ended up being used for and was inherently mis-sold.

Known as ‘aerobar’, ‘aircrete’ and RAAC, the cheap lightweight alternative to traditional concrete mixes was used in thousands of U.K. public buildings from the 1950s to 1990s. By the 1980s it had started to fail and buildings had to be demolished.

Through the decades that RAAC has been allowed to be installed, where is there any accountability? The manufacturers have long since gone bust or disappeared and those responsible for signing off the projects seem to be missing. Who can explain why there are no proper records of exactly which public (and private) buildings are involved and thus the true extent of the problem – or should we say scandal?

Schoolchildren and the public at large shouldn’t have to wait until all the affected buildings are demolished and reconstructed, or until the cost of living goes up yet again to pay for repeated mistakes, to realise that those responsible for all these gross failures in due diligence and poor evidence-based risk assessments really haven’t a clue. As with lockdowns and coercive experimental vaccinations, the ignorance and lack of accountability by so-called experts is so extensive and staggering that being a ‘daily sceptic’ should immediately be everybody’s priority for their health and safety in the 21st century.

Dr. Mark Shaw is a retired dentist.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | | Leave a comment

Iran reports major surge in exports of semi-finished steel

Press TV – September 6, 2023

Iran has seen a major surge in its exports of semi-finished steel this year amid a ramp-up in domestic manufacturing activity.

The Iranian Steel Producers Association (ISPA) said on Tuesday that exports of semi-finished steel from the country had increased by 24.8% year on year in the five months to August 22 to reach a total of 3.093 million metric tons (mt).

Semi-finished steel products are ingots known as billet, blooms and slab which are used in steel mills to manufacture finished steel products.

ISPA figures showed that total domestic production of semi-finished steel in Iran had reached over 13 million mt over the five months to late August.

The ISPA said Iran’s exports of steel sheets and long steel products had also increased by 15% over March-August without mentioning the exact volume of the shipments.

Exports of sponge iron, or what is known technically as direct reduced iron (DRI), reached 0.708 million mt in the five months to late August, up by more than 232% compared to the same period last year, showed the figures.

The major surge in Iranian steel exports come as steel mills in the country have ramped up their output to respond to a growing demand for the metal in the domestic manufacturing sector.

The increased output has also enabled Iran to respond to the rise in regional and global demand for steel amid a war in Ukraine that has affected supply chains.

That comes as Iranian steel producers were facing restrictions in their access to electricity this summer.

Figures by the World Steel Association released this week showed that Iran had produced 18.1 million mt of steel in the seven months to July, up 4.1% compared to the same period in 2022.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Iran to help Burkina Faso build new oil refinery: Minister

Press TV – September 5, 2023

Iran will contribute to building an oil refinery in Burkina Faso and will supply the West African country with oil products it needs, according to a statement from Iranian Oil Minister Javad Owji.

Owji said on Tuesday after a meeting with Burkinabe Foreign Minister Olivia Rouamba in Tehran that petroleum sector cooperation between Iran and Burkina Faso will expand in the future as part of agreements reached between the two countries in recent months.

“It was agreed in the meeting with foreign minister of Burkina Faso that a refinery will be constructed through cooperation between engineers and experts of the two countries based on agreement signed earlier,” the minister told reporters after the meeting.

Owji said that he and Rouamba had also agreed on the launch of oil products exports from Iran to Burkina Faso.

He did not elaborate on financial details of petroleum contracts signed between Iran and Burkina Faso but said that the African country has some good mines that can service the needs of Iran’s metals sector.

Rouamba, who has been in Iran for an official visit since early on Monday, said after the meeting with Owji that Burkina Faso seeks to import oil products from Iran to respond to rising domestic demand for fuels in her country.

She said her talks with Owji had centered on the results of previous discussions between Burkinabe trade officials and the Iranian authorities.

The minister said there are bright prospects for cooperation between engineering companies of the two countries for construction of a new refinery in Burkina Faso.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Here’s why NATO isn’t able to help Ukraine win

By Ilya Kramnik | RT | September 6, 2023

More than 18 months into the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, NATO military aid to Kiev remains a constituent part of the war. This factor seeps into public consciousness, influences the political perception of the conflict, and affects the situation on the battlefield, whichever side of the hostilities people find themselves on. All these aspects are important in their own right, and each will influence the course of the conflict and its eventual outcome. But how long will NATO be able to provide military assistance to Ukraine?

Gloomy prospects for Ukraine

NATO began providing assistance to Kiev as soon as the conflict started in 2022, and the volume of aid increased throughout the course of last year. This assistance largely influenced the attitude of ordinary Ukrainians toward the hostilities and reinforced the myth of a speedy and inevitable “victory” for Kiev, certain to happen because “the whole world supports us.”

The same attitude prevailed in the area of public policy – the aid provided by a particular country indicated whose side it was on: Ukraine’s “allies” in NATO (primarily the US) provided direct military assistance, while “neutral” countries offered only financial and organizational assistance, or no help at all.

On the battlefield, NATO aid is fully responsible for the combat capabilities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (UAF). If this aid is discontinued, the Ukrainian army will lose its combat capability within a few weeks, or as soon as the current ammunition stocks run out.

How likely is it that NATO assistance will continue? To answer this question, we need to understand the stocks of weapons and military equipment among members of the bloc – and it is important to note that many are lacking in this regard.

The US stands out for its available resources, and its weapons arsenal is larger than that of all other NATO countries. However, even though Washington has provided Kiev with large quantities of weapons and ammunition, it is still only supplying a relatively small share of what it has. Other countries with large weapons arsenals are Greece and Turkey. However, these stocks exist because of age-old tensions between the two countries, which limits their possible transfer to Ukraine.

In most other NATO countries, military stocks are relatively small and are intended mainly for export, particularly when the buyer is interested in used equipment which can be put to use in its existing condition or modernized.

These factors impose a limit on the volume of aid allocated to Ukraine, and are why military assistance to Kiev, which started in 2022 and peaked in early 2023, has begun to decline. It also means that unless the US starts handing over reserve military equipment, or, together with other allies, finds alternative suppliers, assistance will be cut further.

Why have things turned out this way?

NATO could have avoided this situation by increasing the production of weapons and military equipment back in 2022, and deploying additional production facilities. In this case, some progress would already have been visible by the winter of 2023-24.

However, the bloc did not have a unified vision regarding additional weapons production, which severely complicated the decision-making process. Not a single NATO politician was ready to guarantee arms manufacturing companies a steady, large-scale demand for weapons once the conflict in Ukraine ended. Moreover, even though the scale of the conflict is significant, it is in some cases insufficient to ensure the necessary demand for new weapons. Finally, it should be noted that a number of Western politicians and military leaders believed that the current military aid to Ukraine would suffice to meet the goals of 2023 – obviously, this was due to false conclusions made as a result of the battles in the Kharkov and Kherson regions in the summer-fall of 2022.

The result of these misguided conclusions has been twofold. On the one hand, Ukraine did not receive the necessary equipment and weapons to break through Russia’s well-prepared defensive lines. Indeed, we can posit that no army within NATO is currently prepared for this, and that perhaps this lack of practical and theoretical readiness prevented the bloc from realistically assessing the capabilities of Russian troops and their defensive positions.

As a result, the Ukrainian counteroffensive was launched with a clear lack of artillery, tanks, and particularly engineering equipment, despite the fact that NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Christopher Cavoli declared that Ukrainian troops were fully equipped.

On the other hand, NATO made a number of decisions and signed contracts to equip Ukrainian troops on a long-term basis. This included the transfer of missile defense systems and other weapons which, due to insufficient production capacities, will not be available for several years. Like the decision to transfer fighter jets – which hasn’t yet been publicly finalized in terms of volume and timing – these contracts were assessed by numerous experts as “post-war,” i.e. intended to compensate after the conflict for the losses sustained.

However, the unsuccessful course of the Ukrainian counteroffensive launched in July makes the full-scale implementation of these contracts and intentions uncertain. Their prospects will be even more doubtful in the event of a successful Russian offensive in the coming fall or winter.

The upcoming US elections give rise to more doubts concerning NATO’s assistance to Ukraine in the coming year, considering that the subject of military aid will come under fire from the Republicans. There is no need to exaggerate the “pro-Russian” aspect of this criticism, since some Republican politicians treat Russia pragmatically at best – but little will prevent them from publically pointing out every mistake of the Biden administration, exclusively in their own interests.

What does it all mean?

Will NATO be able to significantly increase aid to Ukraine in the near future? No. Military production is an inertial industry, and even if the decision to considerably increase the production of weapons were made tomorrow, it would take up to two years to yield any results. Considering the unfavorable public image of Ukraine’s unsuccessful counteroffensive, it may take even longer.

Interestingly, Soviet-made military equipment, or Eastern European equipment produced under a Soviet license, has turned out to be the most effective for Ukraine’s army. Soviet tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, and other equipment that does not require special training, maintenance, infrastructure, and ammunition can be put into battle immediately, and its combat readiness level is higher compared to Western models that need to be incorporated into the new environment.

If, back in 2022, NATO had made use of Eastern European military-industrial cooperation, which allows the production of T-72 tanks, BMP-2 infantry fighting vehicles, a number of 122-152 mm artillery systems, and some other types of weapons and military equipment, this decision could have had consequences for the course of the conflict. However, this never happened, and – given the fact that the Polish defense industry is now shifting to the licensed production of South Korean-designed equipment – will likely not happen in the future. This means that for Ukraine, issues such as the insufficient supply of military equipment, the vastly different types of weapons, the shortage of ammunition, and the resulting problems with the management of troops will all remain unsolved. In such circumstances, the success of a new counteroffensive is hardly possible.

Generally, the ball – or in other words, the military-technical initiative in the conflict – is now in Russia’s court, and it depends on Russia how well this opportunity is used. It is quite likely that the initiative to transfer Western fighter jets to Ukraine will be quietly abandoned, since the AFU will no longer be able to use them. Russia knows full well that this is the case. In theory, this state of affairs should increase the willingness of the US to negotiate, although the upcoming election season will greatly complicate any potential talks.

So, unless something extraordinary happens, the West will most likely continue to support the Ukrainian armed forces to the extent necessary to continue resistance. This means Ukraine will not have enough equipment and weapons to launch a large-scale new counteroffensive unless the US decides to share its weapons arsenals. Such a decision, however, would go against US practice in recent years as well as its strategic planning, which sees China as the main rival on which to focus its financial, military, and technological resources.

Ilya Kramnik is a military analyst, expert at the Russian International Affairs Council and researcher at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 1 Comment

WW3 has already begun – Ukraine’s security chief

RT | September 6, 2023

The head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council has claimed a third world war is already underway, with the Moscow-Kiev conflict pulling in countries far beyond the region.

Speaking at the Kiev Security Forum on Tuesday, Aleksey Danilov argued that NATO needs Ukraine as a member, as global turbulence is set to continue. “We’re going to strengthen the alliance,” he insisted.

“If somebody thinks that World War III hasn’t started then it’s a huge mistake. It has already begun. It had been underway in a hybrid period for some time and has now entered an active phase,” he said.

Sitting on stage beside former CIA Director General David Petraeus, Danilov said that “if somebody thinks that it [the conflict in Ukraine] is about settling the scores between Kiev and Moscow then it’s a mistake. Things are much more complicated.”

Petraeus also highlighted the scale of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, saying: “I haven’t seen anything like it since World War II,” he said.

“The Russians are not particularly impressive in terms of knowledge or performance on the battlefield, but they have created a rather outstanding defense system, and it is quite difficult to punch it through,” he claimed.

On Tuesday, Russia’s Defense Ministry said that during the three months of its counteroffensive, Ukraine has lost some 66,000 troops and 7,600 pieces of heavy weaponry while failing to achieve any significant gains. Kiev has so far claimed the capture of several small villages, but they are some distance from the main Russian defense lines. Speaking about the Ukrainian counteroffensive earlier this week, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin insisted that it “is not stalled; it is a failure.”

Moscow has been saying for months that the fighting in Ukraine is a “proxy war” waged by the US and its NATO allies against Russia. It warned that the supply of arms and training to Kiev’s troops and intelligence-sharing means that Western nations are already de-facto parties to the conflict.

Russia, which views NATO as a hostile bloc and vigorously opposes its eastward expansion, has also highlighted Kiev’s aspirations of joining the US-led military alliance among the main reasons for launching its military operation in Ukraine in February 2022.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | 1 Comment

Anti-Russian paranoia turns against Estonian prime minister

By Lucas Leiroz | September 6, 2023

A crisis of legitimacy is rising in Estonia, with collective anti-Russian paranoia turning against the government itself. Local media spread data proving the involvement of Arvo Hallik, husband of Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, with business in the transport sector in Russia. Given the pro-Kiev mentality of Estonian politicians, the reaction was immediate, with the country’s president demanding explanations and even suggesting that Kallas should resign.

Hallik is one of the partners in the transport company Stark Logistics, which is said to have continued operating in Russia after the start of the special military operation in Ukraine, violating the Western sanctions imposed on Moscow. Outraged by the situation, the country’s president, Alar Karis, said at the time that Estonian society was “waiting for explanations” from the prime minister.

On that occasion, Kallas stated that she had no knowledge of her husband’s business and asked not to be questioned about matters concerning her personal life. But obviously that was not enough to stop the scrutiny against her. The case continued to have repercussions in the media, generating a real national scandal.

Kallas has not renounced her severely anti-Russian stance, stressing again and again that all business with Moscow must cease to comply with European sanctions on the country. She also maintained a solid attitude in saying that she would not resign from her post because of the pressure she was under. Her husband, in the same vein, announced that he was selling all his shares in the company so that he could end all his businesses involving Russia.

The situation became even more complicated when the investigators of Kallas’ personal life discovered that she had made loans to her husband in recent years, totaling 372,000 euros. Kallas explained that the loans were made before the Russian military intervention, but the opposition in Parliament began to question the source of these funds, investigating the possibility of corruption.

The political crisis has been getting worse over the days. A special budget control and anti-corruption parliamentary committee was opened in order to investigate Kallas and her husband’s business. The Prime Minister criticized the measure and did not attend the committee’s sessions, stating that her family’s personal affairs are not of interest to the Estonian State.

More than that, Kallas’ image is already becoming disapproved by the Estonian population itself. In recent polls, it was revealed that 57% of citizens want her to resign. The numbers are significant and reflect the advanced level of anti-Russian indoctrination to which the population was subjected, resulting in a collective paranoia that now turns against the country’s own leaders.

In the same vein, the Estonian president commented on the case once again on August 4, stating that Kallas should have resigned from her post at the beginning of the crisis. According to him, this would be the appropriate way for Kallas to deal with the case, as this would preserve herself and her family from the criticism of public opinion, avoiding the increase of scandals.

“Personally, I would have liked it if the prime minister had resigned at the beginning of the series of events that has made her the focus of the crisis (…) It would have spared her, her loved ones, the effectiveness of the government, and the credibility of messages coming out of Estonia”, he said.

In response to all the criticisms and demands for her resignation, Kallas emphasized that she intends to remain in her post, in which she claims to have always been fighting “for the freedom of Estonia and Ukraine”. For her, the opposition’s criticisms are an unjustified “witch hunt”, which is why she hopes that everything will be resolved soon.

“The witch hunt for me, unleashed by the opposition regarding the activities of my husband’s business partner, has exceeded all tolerable limits (…) [In Estonia] moral standards are much higher than in most countries”, she said.

In fact, this is the inevitable result of a problem created by the Baltic countries themselves: the extremist anti-Russian mentality. Choosing to automatically align themselves with NATO, the Baltic countries willingly embraced Western racist ideologies, ignoring the Soviet past and promoting ultranationalism and the rehabilitation of Nazism. The result of this is an irrational hate against everything involving Russia. Obviously, political leaders are not immune to this problem – and the Kallas’ case clearly shows this.

In the same sense, the situation reveals how much European sanctions are unreasonable and impossible to be fully respected. It is inevitable that bordering countries have some degree of cooperation in transport. The case is being politicized simply because it was spread by the media, but it is very difficult for there to be a complete end to the movement of transport companies from both countries in the border region.

It would be wise for Kallas not to seek a conciliatory policy between the anti-Russian mentality and her family businesses, but break with sanctions and launch policies to contain the advance of ultranationalism in the country. However, this scenario seems impossible to achieve, as she remains committed to the agendas that are being used against her.

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

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | | 1 Comment

Back-to-School Adderall Shortage – #NewWorldNextWeek

Corbett • 09/01/2023

Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:

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

Story #1: ADHD Drug Market Already Stretched Thin, Now Facing Back-To-School Supply Strain

https://archive.is/LwQln

The Looting Conspiracy

https://www.corbettreport.com/the-looting-conspiracy/

What the Back-to-School Adderall Shortage Really Tells Us

https://fee.org/articles/what-the-back-to-school-adderall-shortage-really-tells-us/

Finding Mental Health – #SolutionsWatch

https://www.corbettreport.com/solutionswatch-mentalhealth/

Massive Teen Hordes Swarm Two California Malls – Beatings, Gunfire, Stabbing Ensue

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-hordes-teens-swarm-california-malls-shooting-and-stabbing-ensue

Story #2: Pink Slime Returns – Viral TikTok Video Exposes Disturbing Production Of Sliced Ham

https://www.activistpost.com/2023/08/pink-slime-returns-viral-tiktok-video-exposes-disturbing-production-of-sliced-ham.html

A New ‘Miracle’ Weight-Loss Drug Really Works — Raising Huge Questions

https://archive.is/a1xS3

Corbett Report Radio 085 – Breitbart, Stratfor, and Food World Order

https://www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-radio-085-breitbart-stratfor-and-food-world-order/

“Pink Slime”

https://mediamonarchy.com/tag/pink-slime/

ABC Reaches Settlement In Pink Slime Case (Jun. 28, 2017)

https://mediamonarchy.com/20170628morningmonarchy/

Story #3: San Francisco Bakery Refusing to Serve Police Officers Over “No Guns Allowed” Policy

https://archive.is/PoVmS

Of Gay Wedding Cakes and Woke Restaurants

https://www.corbettreport.com/of-gay-wedding-cakes-and-woke-restaurants/

The New World Next Week Store

https://newworldnextweek.com/

Become a member of Corbett Report (https://corbettreport.com/members) and Media Monarchy (https://mediamonarchy.com/join) to help support independent media.

Those in the US who want to support our work can send cash, check or money order to:

Media Monarchy

P.O. Box 189

El Rito, NM 87530-0189

Thank You.

September 6, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment