Governments should endorse a global moratorium on mRNA vaccines until all questions about their safety have been thoroughly investigated, according to the authors of a new, peer-reviewed article on the COVID-19 vaccine trials and the global vaccination campaign published last week in Cureus, Journal of Medical Science.
Cureus is a web-based peer-reviewed open-access general medical journal using prepublication peer review.
The authors surveyed published research on the pharmaceutical companies’ vaccine trials and related adverse events. They also called for the COVID-19 vaccines to be removed immediately from the childhood immunization schedule.
After the first reports from vaccine trials claimed they were 95% effective in preventing COVID-19, serious problems with method, execution and reporting in the trials became public, which the paper reviewed in detail.
Evidence also shows the products never underwent adequate safety and toxicological testing, and since the vaccine rollout, researchers have identified a significant number of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs).
Authors M. Nathaniel Mead, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., Russ Wolfinger, Ph.D., Jessica Rose, Ph.D., Kris Denhaerynck, Ph.D., Steve Kirsch and Dr. Peter McCullough detailed the vaccines’ potential serious harms to humans, vaccine control and processing issues, the mechanisms behind AEs, the immunological reasons for vaccine inefficacy and the mortality data from the registrational trials.
They concluded, “Federal agency approval of the COVID-19 mRNA injectable products on a blanket-coverage population-wide basis had no support from an honest assessment of all relevant registrational data and commensurate consideration of risks versus benefits.”
They also called for the vaccines to be immediately removed from the childhood immunization schedule and for the suspension of the boosters.
“It is unethical and unconscionable to administer an experimental vaccine to a child who has a near-zero risk of dying from COVID-19 (IFR, 0.0003%) but a well-established 2.2% risk of permanent heart damage based on the best prospective data available,” they wrote.
Finally, the authors called for a full investigation into misconduct by the pharmaceutical companies and the regulatory agencies.
It is the first peer-reviewed study to call for a moratorium on the COVID-19 mRNA products, Rose told The Defender.
“Once a proper assessment of the safety and efficacy claims was made herein — upon which the emergency use authorization (EUA)’s and ultimate final authorizations were granted — it was found that the COVID-19 injectable products were neither safe nor effective,” she added.
According to McCollough, “mRNA should never have been authorized for human use.”
Lead author Mead told The Defender, “Our view is that any risk-benefit analysis must consider how much the presumed benefit in terms of reduced COVID-19 related mortality is offset by the potential increase in vaccine-induced mortality.”
Here are six takeaways from the review:
1. The COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ are reclassified gene therapies that were rushed through the regulatory process in a historically unprecedented manner
Before the seven-month authorization process for the mRNA vaccines, no vaccine had ever gone to market without undergoing testing of at least four years, with typical timelines averaging 10 years.
To speed the process, the companies skipped preclinical studies of potential toxicity from multiple doses and cut the typical 6-12 month observation period for identifying longer-term adverse effects and the established 10-15-year period for monitoring for long-term effects such as cancer and autoimmune disorders, the authors wrote.
The trials prioritized documenting effective symptom reduction over SAE and mortality. This was particularly concerning, the authors argued, because mRNA products are gene therapy products reclassified as vaccines and then given EUA for the first time ever for use against a viral disease.
However, the gene therapies’ components have not been thoroughly evaluated for safety for use as vaccines.
There is an uninvestigated and major concern that the mRNA could transform body cells into viral protein factories — with no off-switch — that produce the spike protein for a prolonged period causing chronic systemic inflammation and immune dysfunction.
The spike protein in the vaccine, the authors said, is associated with more severe immunopathology and other AEs than the spike protein in the virus itself.
The authors suggested that massive government investment in mRNA technology, including hundreds of millions before the pandemic and tens of billions once it began, meant, “U.S. federal agencies were strongly biased toward successful outcomes for the registrational trials.”
The financial incentives along with political pressures to deliver a rapid solution likely influenced a series of flawed decisions that compromised the integrity of the trials and downplayed serious scientific concerns about risks with the technology, they added.
2. Steps were taken in trials to overestimate vaccine efficacy
Because the trials were designed to assess whether the mRNA vaccine reduced symptoms, they did not measure whether the vaccines prevented severe disease and death. Yet the vaccine makers repeatedly claimed that they do.
“No large randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials have ever demonstrated reductions in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, hospitalization, or death,” the authors wrote.
Additionally, the number of people who contracted clinical COVID-19 in both the placebo and intervention groups was “too small to draw meaningful, pragmatic, or broad-sweeping conclusions with regard to COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.”
Pfizer’s 95 % efficacy claims were based on 162 of 22,000 placebo recipients contracting PCR-confirmed COVID-19 compared to eight of 22,000 in the vaccine group. None of the placebo recipients died from COVID-19. In the Moderna trials, only one placebo death was attributed to COVID-19.
There was also a much larger percentage of “suspected COVID-19 cases” in both groups, with participants showing COVID-19 symptoms but a negative PCR test. When factoring in those cases, measures of vaccine efficacy drop to about 19%.
The trial subject pool was comprised of largely young and healthy individuals, excluding key groups — children, pregnant women, elderly and immunocompromised people — which can also obscure the vaccine’s actual efficacy and safety.
Findings from reanalyses of data from the Pfizer trials can be interpreted as showing the vaccines made “no significant difference” in reducing all-cause mortality in the vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups at 20 weeks into the trial, the authors wrote.
Even the six-month post-marketing data Pfizer presented to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed no reduction in all-cause mortality from the vaccine.
The authors reanalyzed that data, adjusting the analysis of deaths to better account for the fact that when Pfizer unblinded the study people from the placebo group took the vaccine, and found the vaccine group had a higher mortality rate (0.105%) than the unvaccinated group (0.0799%), which they said was a conservative estimate.
One of the most glaring issues with the registrational trials, they noted, was that they exclusively focused on measuring risk reduction — the ratio of COVID-19 symptom rates in the vaccine group versus the placebo group — rather than measuring absolute risk reduction, which is the likelihood someone will show COVID-19 symptoms relative to people in the population at large.
According to FDA guidelines, accounting for both approaches is crucial to avoid the misguided use of pharmaceutical products — but the data were omitted, leading to an overestimation of an intervention’s clinical utility.
While both vaccines touted an approximately 95% risk reduction figure as their efficacy figure, the absolute risk reductions for Pfizer and Moderna’s vaccines were 0.7% and 1.1% respectively.
“A substantial number of individuals would need to be injected in order to prevent a single mild-to-moderate case of COVID-19,” the authors wrote.
As an example, using a conservative estimate that 119 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent infection, and assuming that COVID-19 had a 0.23% infection fatality rate, they wrote that approximately 52,000 vaccinations would be necessary to prevent a single COVID-19-related death.
However, “Given trial misconduct and data integrity problems … the true benefit is likely to be much lower,” they wrote.
And, they added, one would need to assess that benefit along with harms, which they estimate to be 27 deaths per 100,000 doses of Pfizer. That means, using the most conservative estimates, “for every life saved, there were 14 times more deaths caused by the modified mRNA injections.”
They also noted that post-rollout evidence confirmed the efficacy claims were overstated. For example, two large cohort Cleveland clinic studies showed the vaccine could not confer protection against COVID-19 — instead, in those trials, more vaccinated people were more likely to contract COVID-19.
One study showed the risk of “breakthrough” infection was significantly higher among people who were boosted and that more vaccinations resulted in a greater risk of COVID-19.
A second study showed adults who were not “up-to-date” with their shots had a 23% lower incidence of COVID-19 than their “up-to-date” colleagues.
3. The trials underestimated the adverse events, including death, despite evidence in the data.
Harms were also underreported and underestimated for a number of reasons, according to the authors, a practice that tends to be common in randomized industry-sponsored vaccine trials in general and “exceptionally evident” here.
First, because Pfizer unblinded the trial within just a few weeks of the emergency use authorization and allowed people in the placebo group to take the vaccine, there was not sufficient time to identify late-occurring harms because there was no longer a control group.
“Was this necessary, given that none of the deaths in the Pfizer trial were attributed to COVID-19 as the primary cause, and given the very low IFR [infection fatality rate] for a relatively healthy population?” they asked.
Also, trial coordinators were “haphazard” in their approach to monitoring AEs. They prioritized documenting events thought to be related to COVID-19 rather than to the vaccines for the first seven days and only recorded “unsolicited” AEs for 30-60 days. After that period, even very SAEs, like death, were not recorded. Even for the AEs recorded in the first seven days, they only solicited data from 20% of the population.
None of the trial data was independently verified. “Such secrecy may have enabled the industry to more easily present an inflated and distorted estimate of the genetic injections’ benefits, along with a gross underestimation of potential harms,” they wrote.
Subsequent analysis by Michels et al. revealed that deaths and other SAEs — like life-threatening conditions, inpatient hospitalization or extension of hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, a congenital anomaly, or a medically significant event — did occur after the cutoff period and before the FDA advisory meeting where emergency authorization was recommended.
During the first 33 weeks of the Pfizer trials, 38 subjects died, according to Pfizer’s own data, although independent research by Michels et al. estimated that that number is only approximately 17% of the actual projected number due to missing data.
And after that, the rate of deaths continued to increase. Michaels et al. found Pfizer failed to report a substantial increase in the number of deaths due to cardiovascular events. They also found a consistent pattern of reporting delays on the date of the death on subjects’ case reports.
Overall, the review authors reported that there were “twice as many cardiac deaths proportionately among vaccinated compared to unvaccinated subjects in the Pfizer trials.”
In their discussion, the authors wrote “Based on the extended Pfizer trial findings, our person-years estimate yielded a 31% increase in overall mortality among vaccine recipients, a clear trend in the wrong direction.”
This raises serious red flags about how the registrational trials were conducted, Mead said. “Assessments of the safety profile of the COVID-19 modified mRNA injections warrant an objective precautionary perspective, any substantial upward trend in all cause mortality within the intervention arm of the trial population reflects badly on the intervention.”
4. Numbers of SAEs in the trials and post-rollout reporting are well-documented, despite claims to the contrary.
Both Pfizer and Moderna found about 125 SAEs per 100,000 vaccine recipients, or one SAE for every 800 vaccines. However, because the trials excluded more vulnerable people, the authors note, even higher proportions of SAEs would be expected in the general population.
The Fraiman et al. reanalysis of the Pfizer trial data found a significant 36% higher risk of SAEs, which included deaths and many life-threatening conditions in the vaccinated participants.
Official SAEs for other vaccines average around only 1-2 per million. Fraiman et alestimated 1,250 SEAs per million vaccines, exceeding that benchmark by “at least 600-fold.”
After the vaccine rollout, analyses of two large drug safety reporting systems in the U.S. and Europe identified signals for myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, cardio-respiratory arrest, cerebral infarction, and cerebral hemorrhage associated with both mRNA vaccines, along with ischemic stroke.
And millions of AEs have been reported to those systems.
Another study by Skidmore et al. estimated the total number of fatalities from the vaccines in 2021 alone was 289,789. Autopsy studies have also provided additional evidence of serious harms, including evidence that most COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related deaths resulted from injury to the cardiovascular system.
In multiple autopsy studies, German pathologist Aren Burkhardt documented the presence of vaccine-mRNA-produced spike proteins in blood vessel walls and brain tissues. This research helps to explain documented vaccine-induced toxicities affecting the nervous, immune, reproductive and other systems.
The Pfizer data also showed an overwhelming number of adverse effects. According to a confidential document released in August 2022, Pfizer had documented approximately 1.6 million AEs affecting nearly every organ system, and one-third of them were classified as serious.
In Pfizer’s trial, Michels and colleagues found a nearly 4-fold increase (OR 3.7, 95%CI 1.02-13.2, p = 0.03) in serious cardiac events (e.g., heart attack, acute coronary syndrome) in the vaccine group. Neither the original trial report nor Pfizer’s Summary Clinical Safety report acknowledged or commented on this safety signal.
“The serious adverse events are all well documented,” Mead said. “Yet it’s surprising to see so many in the medical field continue to ignore or dismiss outright the latter half of the equation when considering all cause mortality trends.”
5. The failure to appropriately test for safety and toxicity poses serious problems.
Researchers have raised concerns that the mRNA technology is inherently unstable and difficult to store, which leads to batch variability and contamination linked to different rates of AEs.
Recent findings by McKernan et al. that found Pfizers’ mRNA vaccines are contaminated with plasmid DNA that shouldn’t be present — and wasn’t present in the vaccines used in the trials – raising serious safety issues.
That’s because “Process 1,” used in the trials to generate the vaccines involved in vitro transcription of synthetic DNA — essentially a “clean” process. However, that process isn’t viable for mass production, so the manufacturers used “Process 2,” which involves using E. coli bacteria to replicate the plasmids.
Removing plasmids E coli. can result in residual plasmids in the vaccines and the effects of their presence is unknown.
McKernan’s work also revealed the presence of DNA from simian virus 40 (SV40), an oncogenic DNA virus originally isolated in 1960 from contaminated polio vaccines, induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals, raising other safety concerns.
Researchers from Cambridge published a paper in Nature in December 2023, where they found an inherent defect in the modified RNA instructions for the spike protein in COVID-19 immunizations that causes the machinery that translates the gene to the spike protein to “slip” about 10% of the time
This process creates “frameshifts” that cause cells to produce “off-target” proteins in addition to the spike. These proteins, which developers either failed to look for or did not report to regulators, cause undesirable immune responses whose long-term effects are unknown.
6. There are many different possible biological mechanisms that cause AEs and vaccine ineffectiveness.
The review points readers to a series of papyrus that explain a number of different theories to explain the high number of AEs from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.
“The mechanisms of molecular mimicry, antigen cross-reactivity, pathogenic priming, viral reactivation, immune exhaustion, and other factors related to immune dysfunction all reinforce the biological plausibility for vaccine-induced pathogenesis of malignant and autoimmune diseases,” they wrote. And these mechanisms of immune activation are distinct from the body’s response to a viral infection.
They also note the toxic effects of the primary adjuvant, PEG, and of the spike protein itself.
They close their analysis of the vaccines with a complex explanation for the different immunological basis for protection provided by the vaccines versus natural immunity through infection. They explain the mechanisms for vaccine failure and problems generated by the ability for the mRNA vaccines to perpetuate the emergence of new variants.
Brenda Baletti Ph.D. is a reporter for The Defender. She wrote and taught about capitalism and politics for 10 years in the writing program at Duke University. She holds a Ph.D. in human geography from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a master’s from the University of Texas at Austin.
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.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
‘Many are also pledging not to take donations from Big Pharma’
More than 100 candidates for public office and nearly as many current officeholders across 35 states have publicly declared that they believe the COVID-19 vaccines should be “immediately discontinued” in the interest of public safety, according to a group of medical freedom advocates.
Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, an otolaryngology and sleep medicine specialist who is also president of the group Americans for Health Freedom (AHF), announced Sunday that the tally of public figures who have signed their COVID declaration is up to “106 candidates, 103 elected officials and 1 Surgeon General [Dr. Joseph Ladapo of Florida] from 35 states.”
“Many are also pledging not to take donations from Big Pharma,” she added. “Over 17,000 physicians stand behind them.”
She shared the list of the newest signatories in her announcement post on X (Twitter). Most were state-level candidates, though three are currently running for Congress.
The complete list of signatories can be found at AHF’s website, which also contains the declaration itself.
“We declare, and the data confirms that COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end,” it reads. “All COVID-19 and other modified mRNA ‘vaccines’ must be immediately discontinued. We demand that Covid-19 vaccines be removed from the pediatric vaccine schedule […] We declare injury from COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ must be recognized. Compensation must be provided for those injured by these injections. Funding must be allocated to the study of these syndromes and the development of diagnostics and treatments should be pursued.”
“We declare Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca studies were severely flawed, and they withheld safety and efficacy information from patients and physicians. They should face legal consequences for their dereliction of scientific duty which resulted in countless unnecessary disability and deaths,” the declaration also says. “We declare governments, media, global regulatory bodies, and medical agencies, such as CDC, FDA, NIH, NIAID, MHRA, NHS, TGA, SAPRA etc., and unelected international bodies including but not limited to WHO, WEF, UN, GAVI, and EcoHealth Alliance must be held accountable for mandating policies and procedures, and directing funding for reckless gain of function research that resulted in massive harms.”
The public health establishment has been overwhelmingly averse to investigating problems with the mRNA-based COVID vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, which were developed and reviewed in a fraction of the time vaccines usually take under former President (and likely 2024 Republican presidential nominee) Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed initiative, yet concerns persist thanks to a large body of evidence affirming they carry significant health risks.
The federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports 36,986 deaths, 213,536 hospitalizations, 21,335 heart attacks, and 28,052 myocarditis and pericarditis cases as of December 29, among other ailments. An April 2022 study out of Israel indicates that COVID infection itself cannot fully account for the myocarditis numbers despite common insistence to the contrary.
Jab defenders are quick to stress that reports submitted to VAERS are unconfirmed, as anyone can submit one, but U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) researchers have recognized a “high verification rate of reports of myocarditis to VAERS after mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination,” leading to the conclusion that “under-reporting is more likely” than over-reporting.
A 2010 report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ (HHS’s) Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) warned that VAERS caught “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events.” On the problem of under-reporting, the VAERS website offers only that “more serious and unexpected medical events are probably more likely to be reported than minor ones” (emphasis added).
In 2021, Project Veritas shed light on some of the reasons for such under-reporting with undercover video from inside Phoenix Indian Medical Center, a facility run under HHS’s Indian Health Service program in which emergency room physician Dr. Maria Gonzales laments that myocarditis cases go unreported “because they want to shove it under the mat,” and nurse Deanna Paris attests to seeing “a lot” of people who “got sick from the side effects” of the COVID shots, but “nobody” is reporting them to VAERS “because it takes over a half hour to write the damn thing.”
Further, VAERS is not the only data source containing red flags. Data from the Pentagon’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) shows that 2021 saw drastic spikes in a variety of diagnoses for serious medical issues over the previous five-year average, including hypertension (2,181%), neurological disorders (1,048%), multiple sclerosis (680%), Guillain-Barre syndrome (551%), breast cancer, (487%), female infertility (472%), pulmonary embolism (468%), migraines (452%), ovarian dysfunction (437%), testicular cancer (369%), and tachycardia (302%).
Leading COVID shot manufacturer Pfizer donated more than $8.5 million to political candidates, leadership PACs, trade associations, and party committees representing both parties in 2022, fueling suspicion as to why only a handful of nationally prominent GOP officeholders, such as U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, are opposed to the company’s vaccine.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | COVID-19 Vaccine, United States |
Leave a comment
Maryland-based Emergent BioSolutions this month signed a new contract with the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to supply the U.S. military with its BioThrax anthrax vaccine over at least the next five years, Fierce Pharma reported.
The indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract, announced Jan. 11 by the company, has a maximum value of $235.8 million. According to Yahoo Finance, “The vaccine is intended for use by all branches of the United States military as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for anthrax disease.”
Under the contract, Emergent is guaranteed a $20.1 million purchase, with future orders of an estimated $20 million or more for each of the remaining years of the initial five-year term.
After the initial term, the contract has an option for an additional five-year extension, potentially extending the deal to 2033, according to Fierce Pharma.
BioThrax is the only vaccine approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for pre-exposure prophylaxis and post-exposure prophylaxis of anthrax disease, Yahoo Finance reported. Another anthrax vaccine in the company’s portfolio, Cyfendus, is used only for post-exposure prophylaxis in adults 18 and over.
According to Yahoo Finance, anthrax is an infectious disease caused by Bacillus anthracis. It occurs naturally in soil, and commonly affects domestic and wild animals.
People can contract anthrax if they come in contact with infected animals or contaminated animal products, through skin contact, ingestion and inhalation, The Defense Post reported. It can cause organ damage, inflammation of the brain and spinal cord, and death.
In a statement, Paul Williams, senior vice president and products head at Emergent, praised the deal.
“As a part of our mission to protect and enhance lives, Emergent is proud to continue supporting and preparing our nation’s service members who have a high risk of exposure to anthrax bacteria by supplying BioThrax vaccine,” he said.
“This new contract award is a testament to the importance of Emergent’s medical countermeasures portfolio, and we look forward to delivering on our commitments to the U.S. DoD,” Williams added.
But some anthrax experts questioned the deal and the safety of the company’s two anthrax vaccines.
Dr. Meryl Nass, a widely recognized bioterrorism and anthrax expert and member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory board, told The Defender that neither vaccine is safe.
“Neither has been shown to be effective against inhalation of anthrax,” she said.
According to Nass, the DOD may say “they needed to maintain a ‘warm manufacturing base’” as a justification for the new contract.
University of Illinois international law professor Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., a bioweapons expert who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, told The Defender the U.S. government may have proceeded with the contract based on a biological warfare risk it is aware of.
“It does seem to me that the Pentagon is gearing up to fight biological warfare with anthrax. That’s the only reason for that massive contract as I see it,” he said. The U.S. government still maintains stockpiles of Amerithrax, Boyle said, which he described as “super weapons-grade anthrax” that “survives for decades.”
In June 2014, as many as 75 scientists working at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) laboratories were treated — and vaccinated — after possible exposure to live anthrax bacteria which, according to The New York Times, “were supposed to have been killed.”
The laboratories were “unequipped to handle” the samples, the Times reported.
“There’s no reason for all these labs to have all this anthrax unless they’re getting ready to use it for biowarfare purposes,” Boyle said.
In October 2022, the Biden administration announced an $88 billion National Biodefense Strategy and Implementation Plan outlining planned responses to future pandemics, public health emergencies and biological threats.
Precedence Research estimates that the global biodefense market size, which totaled $15.5 billion in 2022, will surpass $32.09 billion by 2032, while a 2021 estimate by The Insight Partners stated that the U.S. biodefense market is expected to reach $8.35 billion in 2027, up from $4.11 billion in 2019.
Boyle said that such government programs and spending violate the 1989 act he authored, which “was intended to stop the abuse of DNA genetic engineering and other forms of biological warfare weapons.”
Anthrax vaccines have caused fetal harm, ‘death and disability’
According to Nass, there is no need for an anthrax vaccine because antibiotics can be used as a treatment for exposure.
Nass told The Defender in July 2023 that if someone has a serious anthrax exposure, they typically die within several days if not treated with antibiotics.
“You can’t be sprayed with anthrax and then get vaccinated and then patiently wait a month to develop immunity. You’d be dead by then,” she said at the time, adding that the FDA requirement that the vaccine be given jointly with antibiotics is a tacit admission by the agency that the vaccine “doesn’t work.”
In an October 2020 talk, Nass said that after the 2001 anthrax letter exposures, “thousands of people took antibiotics while only 198 agreed to receive the anthrax vaccine.”
“Not a single person who was exposed to the anthrax letters who took antibiotics for prevention came down with anthrax,” she said at the time.
The FDA’s package insert for BioThrax also indicates several adverse reactions, including arm motion limitation in 63.7% of recipients. Six deaths and 62 serious adverse events were reported in clinical trials for BioThrax.
The insert also notes that Cyfendus, which has the same active ingredient as BioThrax, “can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant individual.”
“In an observational study, there were more birth defects in infants born to individuals vaccinated with BioThrax (a licensed anthrax vaccine with the same active ingredient as CYFENDUS) in the first trimester compared to infants born to individuals vaccinated post pregnancy or individuals never vaccinated with BioThrax,” the insert states.
Cyfendus uses two adjuvants, an aluminum adjuvant and a new synthetic adjuvant — CPG7909. And the vaccine contains a saline solution containing formaldehyde and benzethonium chloride as preservatives.
Aluminum adjuvant is a known cytotoxic and neurotoxic substance used to induce autoimmunity in lab animals.
As a result, “Cyfendus can be assumed to have more side effects,” Nass told the Defender.
In July 2023, the U.S. government’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) exercised a $75 million option for the purchase of new doses of Cyfendus. The FDA approved Cyfendus in July. It had previously been available since 2019 under an emergency use authorization (EUA).
Boyle told The Defender that anthrax vaccines were proven during the Gulf War to be deadly.
“I wouldn’t even call them vaccines. I would call them frankenshots,” he said. “The bottom line is that of 500,000 U.S. forces were inoculated with the previous anthrax and Botulism frankenshots, it killed 11,000 and disabled 100,000 members of the U.S. armed forces,” noting figures he cited in his 2005 book, “Biowarfare and Terrorism.”
“And those are lowball figures because the Pentagon still lies about the death and disability from the Gulf War anthrax shots, because they know they committed a Nuremberg crime on their own troops,” Boyle added.
Nass told The Defender in July that she does not believe much has changed with the currently available anthrax vaccines. Referring to Emergent, she said, “Given the history of the company’s many failures, and the lack of proper safety or efficacy testing of prior anthrax vaccines, one can only expect problems.”
One such example arises from controversies connected to Emergent’s manufacture of the Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) COVID-19 vaccine. In 2021, the company made headlines when it lost a $600 million federal contract after millions of vaccine doses were ruined.
An ingredient mix-up at Emergent’s Baltimore plant may have resulted in the contamination of 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine, which were discarded, according to an April 2021 FDA report, which also identified a series of other problems at the Baltimore facility.
In May 2021, a U.S. House of Representatives panel investigation revealed taxpayers paid Johnson & Johnson vaccine manufacturer, Emergent BioSolutions, $271 million under vaccine contracts despite “serious deficiencies” at the Baltimore plant.
Nass also told The Defender in July that anthrax vaccines have been tested only on animals, as there are too few anthrax cases worldwide to study its efficacy in people.
Anthrax vaccines may be linked to Gulf War syndrome
A 2002 commentary Nass authored for the American Journal of Public Health also noted a possible connection between anthrax vaccines and Gulf War syndrome.
“The anthrax vaccine was never proven to be safe and effective. It is one cause of Gulf War illnesses, and recent vaccinees report symptoms resembling Gulf War illnesses,” she wrote at the time, adding that “The vaccine’s production has been substandard.”
Peer-reviewed research published in Neuromolecular Medicine in 2007 linked the aluminum adjuvant in the existing anthrax vaccine to Gulf War syndrome, with symptoms including muscle aches, joint pain, dizziness, memory lapses, headaches, fatigue, insomnia, emotional disorders, posttraumatic stress reactions, headaches and memory loss.
It also noted that anthrax adverse reactions were very similar to Gulf War illness symptoms and that many veterans reported the vaccine as the cause of this illness, which they also reported in congressional hearings, according to Nass.
During her October 2020 talk, Nass said, “The vaccines were given to at least 150,000 soldiers,” during the Gulf War, while “about 25% of soldiers sent to the Gulf developed Gulf War syndrome.”
“While it was never proven what caused this, questions were raised about the role of vaccines both in the U.S. and the U.K. Several studies showed that the more vaccines a soldier received, the likelier they were to develop Gulf War Syndrome … but these studies were ignored in the post-Gulf War push to make troops impermeable to biological warfare,” Nass said at the time.
Boyle agreed that there is a connection between the anthrax vaccines and Gulf War syndrome.
Noting that the U.S. military had mandated the vaccine at the time for its service members, he said, “I still get calls today from veterans suffering from Gulf War syndrome and asking me for advice where they can get, because they can’t get proper treatment at the Veterans Administration Hospital because they get lied to. It’s that simple.”
“They really have to go into the private sector to get proper treatment,” Boyle added.
‘Odd relationship’ between Emergent, DOD
Emergent works with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, BARDA, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, to develop “countermeasures,” such as vaccines and therapeutics, for “public health threats.”
Primary purchasers for its anthrax vaccine are the CDC, which buys it for the Strategic National Stockpile, and BARDA. Those contracts alone have yielded at least $1 billion for the company.
According to Fierce Pharma, “Emergent has been a long-time supplier of anthrax countermeasures to the U.S. government. Its procurement deals have included a CDC contract worth up to $911 million in 2016 and a $258 million contract modification from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response in 2020.”
And according to Yahoo Finance, “Emergent derives a substantial portion of its revenues from sales of its anthrax and smallpox vaccines to the U.S. government, which the latter procures for the strategic national stockpile,” while also selling vaccines to domestic and international non-governmental organizations and foreign governments.
Nass told The Defender, “There has been an odd relationship between this company and the DOD since the company was formed in 1998 as BioPort and was given a full indemnity by the Secretary of the Army the day before the company purchased the Michigan anthrax manufacturing facility.”
“The company has been allowed higher profits and worse quality than other products purchased by the military,” Nass added.
Investigative reporter Whitney Webb previously discovered a direct link between Robert Kadlec, who served as the top bioterror advisor to the Pentagon prior to the 2001 anthrax attacks, and Emergent BioSolutions, the Strategic National Stockpile, the 2001 anthrax attacks and the Dark Winter simulation of an anthrax attack.
Kadlec participated in the June 2001 Dark Winter simulation, helped establish the Strategic National Stockpile and has directly advised Emergent BioSolutions, among other Big Pharma companies.
Emergent was founded in 1998, originally as BioPort, to distribute and produce the anthrax vaccine for the U.S. military, taking over the assets of the state-owned Michigan Biologic Products Institute.
The anthrax vaccine was developed and in limited use in the military since 1970.
Emergent reached its financial zenith early in the pandemic after earning lucrative contracts to produce Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines.
Nass told The Defender in July that in 1997, the DOD made the vaccine compulsory as part of the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP) for all 2.5 million military service members — including active duty and reserve personnel and civilian contractors. The DOD subsequently implemented AVIP in 1998.
Reports of adverse reactions and dissent on the part of service members led to congressional hearings and in early 2000, the House Committee on Government Reform recommended halting the mandatory program, although it was not officially halted.
As of 2000, more than 500,000 service members had received at least one dose of the vaccine, which was designed to be administered in six doses.
The plant where the government produced the anthrax vaccine faced a series of regulatory issues and was closed in 1997, according to Nass.
When BioPort acquired the plant from the state-owned Michigan Biologic Products Institute in 1998, it rebuilt it, but it was not FDA-authorized to produce the vaccine. So for a period, the vaccines were unavailable.
Then, starting on Sept. 18, 2001 — a week after the 9/11 attacks — media outlets began reporting that a sophisticated, weaponized and fatal form of anthrax had been sent via mail to numerous news outlets and American politicians. These letters continued to appear over the next six weeks.
Subsequently, the media and figures such as John McCain linked the anthrax to Saddam Hussein in Iraq. In 2008, the FBI accused U.S. Army scientist Bruce Ivins of being responsible for the attacks, although Ivins took his own life before he could be prosecuted. The FBI’s claims are widely doubted and its evidence has been questioned.
The Government Office of Accountability (GAO) and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines also found that the FBI lacked data to back its claims.
Yet, fears arising from the anthrax letters helped inspire the Patriot Act and led to calls to continue producing the anthrax vaccine and administering it to military service members.
In 2002, shortly after the FDA approved BioPort’s new vaccine plant, the GAO issued a report to Congress on the AVIP, noting a significant number of adverse reactions to the vaccine — more than double the rate reported by the manufacturer — along with a mass exodus of military pilots and other military personnel who refused the mandate.
From 2000 to 2018, the military anthrax mandate was challenged several times in court for lacking FDA approval and licensure, and for lacking proven potency against fatal inhalation of anthrax. During this time, the DOD restricted the anthrax vaccine to a smaller group of “at-risk troops” and halted and resumed the program several times.
Prior to 2001, the DOD concluded that biological agents such as anthrax were not a threat for mass casualties due to the limited number of countries with the expertise and sophistication required to weaponize and disseminate anthrax.
According to an investigation by Webb, the 2001 anthrax attacks also rescued Emergent, then BioPort, from certain financial ruin.
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.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | United States |
Leave a comment
Synthetic assembly method posited in 2022 paper found in DEFUSE draft
There’s a great scene in the 1986 film Manhunter in which the protagonist—an FBI behavioral sciences profiler named Will Graham—correctly postulates that the fingerprints of a remarkably twisted serial killer will be found on the corneas of his female victim. The Bureau and the guys in the latent print lab are skeptical and think that Will is himself being a weirdo, and are then astonished to discover that he is right.
To put Will Graham’s character in Jungian terms: he is an excellent detective because he possesses a keen understanding of the Shadow—that is, the archaic, aggressive, lustful, power-hungry side of human nature that lurks in all of us. All humans are capable of evil, above all those who walk around with the smug, unexamined belief that they never would be.
I was reminded of this scene today as I read an extraordinary report by “Right to Know” investigative reporter, Emily Kopp, who obtained early drafts of the DEFUSE grant proposal, authored by EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak et al., and submitted to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in 2018.
I highly recommend reading Kopp’s report, titled US scientists proposed to make viruses with unique features of SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan. The following passage goes to the heart of the matter:
The documents reveal for the first time that a virologist working with the Wuhan lab planned to engineer new spike proteins – in contrast with the collaboration’s public work to insert whole spike proteins into viral backbones. Language in the proposal indicates this work may have involved unpublished viruses, generating unpublished engineered spike proteins.
This American virologist, University of North Carolina Prof. Ralph Baric, was set to engineer twenty or more “chimeric” SARS-related viral spike proteins per year of the proposal, and two to five full-length engineered SARS-related viruses. Documents previously reported by U.S. Right to Know show that some of the experimentation could secretly occur in Wuhan at a lower biosafety level than specified in the grant, apparently to save costs.
The proposal for Professor Baric to perform Dr. Frankenstein work on SARS-related viruses will come as no surprise to those who are familiar with his seminal papers on creating chimeric SARS-related viruses using gain-of-function procedures. The real fireworks revelation in an early draft of the DEFUSE proposal is the following passage:
The passage highlighted in blue is PRECISELY the assembly procedure posited by Valentin Bruttel, Alex Washburne, and Antonius VanDongen in their 2022 paper titled Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV-2. Daszak et al. even propose purchasing the same restriction enzyme that Valentin et al. hypothesized was used in the lab synthesis of SARS-CoV-2. (Valentin’s Twitter commentary on the draft proposal fascinating and entertaining).
At the time Bruttel et al. published their paper, it was met with ridicule by prominent virologists Edward Holmes and Kristian Anderson, who called it “confected nonsense” and “kindergarten molecular biology.” Holmes and Anderson would say this, wouldn’t they? With stunning criminal energy, they have been key players in concealing the lab origin of SARS-CoV-2 since February 2020.
At the risk of tooting my own horn, I was not all surprised to read about this development. As a true crime author, I’ve spent the last twenty-five years studying criminal behavior, conspiracies, and criminal investigations. For years, Peter Daszak and his virologist compadres have obviously been in the business of modifying and enhancing bat coronaviruses in order to make them infectious and pathogenic to humans. I suspect the creation of SARS-CoV-2 and its accidental or deliberate release from a lab will eventually be regarded as the greatest true crime story in history.
It’s going to take a while for our dummy politicians and knucklehead mainstream media journalists to recognize it, “but at the length, truth will out.”
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Covid-19, Darpa, EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak, United States |
Leave a comment
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been accused of intervening in the U.K.’s domestic politics by warning Chancellor Jeremy Hunt against tax cuts so that net zero targets can be achieved.
In the latest update to its economic forecasts, IMF analysts said that the U.K. Treasury should not be considering cuts to taxation — as hinted at recently by Hunt ahead of March’s budget statement — and should instead raise it in particular areas — all at a time when ordinary Brits continue to struggle with the cost of living.
“Preserving high-quality public services and undertaking critical public investments to boost growth and achieve the net zero targets, will imply higher spending needs over the medium term than are currently reflected in the government’s budget plans,” an IMF spokesperson said.
“Accommodating these needs… will already require generating additional high-quality fiscal savings, including on the tax side.
“The IMF has recommended strengthening carbon and property taxation, eliminating loopholes in wealth and income taxation, and reforming the pensions triple lock.
“It is in this context that staff advises against further tax cuts,” they added.
U.K. conservatives, however, hit back at the global financial institution and accused it of meddling in domestic affairs ahead of a general election expected later this year.
Speaking to Remix News, Conservative MP Dame Andrea Jenkyns said: “It is simple, as Conservatives we should have lox taw and freedom of choice.
“We cannot be telling people how to heat their homes or what cars to drive. Say no to net zero!” added the former government minister.
Former Brexit Party MEP Martin Daubney accused globalist elites of wanting ordinary people to be “poorer, colder, and hungry to fund their eco-vanity projects and keep the taxes rolling in.”
“Supranational super-quango interferes in British domestic affairs in an attempt to keep us saddled with high taxes. Globalism is awful,” added the London-based Bruges Group think tank.
Ahead of the Spring Budget, Chancellor Hunt reiterated his desire to cut taxes but added that “it is too early to know whether further reductions in tax will be affordable.”
“We continue to believe that smart tax reductions can make a big difference in boosting growth,” he added.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | Human rights, IMF, UK |
Leave a comment
EU member states have reached an agreement that is expected to allow Brussels to transfer the income generated by Russia’s frozen central bank reserves to Kiev, according to the Belgian presidency of the EU Council.
“EU Ambassadors just agreed in principle on a proposal on the use of windfall profits related to immobilised assets to support Ukraine’s reconstruction,” the country’s representatives announced in a post on X (formerly Twitter) on Monday.
The Financial Times, meanwhile, has reported that EU envoys had approved a plan aiming to set aside the billions of euros in profits generated by the frozen assets of Russia’s central bank. Some €191 billion ($206 billion) out of €260 billion ($291 billion) of Russia’s immobilized reserves are currently held by Belgium’s Euroclear, a central security depository, generating billions as securities reach maturity and are reinvested.
According to the draft seen by the FT, profits generated by Euroclear will be booked separately with no dividends to be paid to shareholders until members of the bloc unanimously opt to set up a “financial contribution to the [EU] budget that shall be raised on these net profits to support Ukraine.”
The proposed measures are expected to only target future profits and won’t apply retroactively.
Last week, sources close to the discussions told Bloomberg that EU foreign ministers had backed applying a windfall tax on Russia’s frozen assets. At the same time, Reuters reported that the EU was unlikely to confiscate the funds despite G7 plans to discuss the legality of doing so at a meeting in February.
Moscow has repeatedly warned that any actions related to its assets by the US and its allies would amount to “theft,” stressing that seizure of the funds or any similar move would violate international law and undermine reserve currencies, the global financial system, and the world economy.
In April, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree establishing a mechanism to temporarily take over foreign assets in Russia in the event that other countries seize Russian private or government property in their jurisdictions, or threaten the national, energy, or economic security of the country.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Economics | European Union, Russia |
Leave a comment
More bad news for Ukraine – Japan and the UK fail to carry out preliminary agreements on supplying the struggling army with more artillery, as the silver lining at the end of the tunnel goes dim for the Kiev regime.
Efforts by the UK and Japan to replenish Ukraine’s artillery stocks have fallen through, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has reported, citing sources privy to the draft.
There are two core aspects to the issue – the technical mismatch of the British and the Japanese military blueprints, and the limited production capacity of the supposed Japanese contractor.
By the initiative, Japan was to produce 155 mm shells under an official license granted by the BAE Systems company, one of the leading global defense contractors.
The shells in question were to be manufactured at local Japanese facilities and then were supposed to be shipped over to the UK. Thus, Japan was essentially getting tacitly involved in supplying the Kiev regime with foreign arms without ever having to openly side with Ukraine in the ongoing conflict.
Last December, The Financial Times reported on a similar plan being considered between Japan and the US. The draft was aimed at replenishing the now depleted Western armory stockpiles, so that Kiev’s sponsors were in a better place to provide even more supplies without having to compromise their own military potential.
However, both plans stalled. According to the WSJ sources, British officials have assessed whether the military could use 155 mm projectiles produced by the Japanese Komatsu manufacturer, and have ultimately decided to scrap the plan altogether.
The main issue reportedly stems from troubles in using weapons and arms systems that come from different manufacturers. Besides, the WSJ also noted Komatsu’s limited manufacturing capacity of the shells.
The US and its allies ramped up their military assistance to Kiev shortly after Russia launched its special military operation in 2022. Moscow has repeatedly warned that NATO countries are “playing with fire” by supplying arms that the Kremlin said adds to prolonging the conflict in Ukraine. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, for his part, underscored that any cargo with weapons for the Zelensky regime would become a legitimate target for Russian forces.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Aletho News | Japan, UK, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
MOSCOW – The West is beginning to understand that the “Ukraine project” is failing but can not stop assisting Kiev because of its economic benefit and fear of losing “prestige,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Tuesday.
“The figures that are hidden in Ukraine, they speak a lot about how important it is for the West to prevent the ‘failure’ of their ‘Ukraine project’. Moreover, they already understand that the failure has already begun. But nevertheless they cannot stop. And not only for reasons of prestige … And also from the point of view of economic benefits,” Lavrov said during a meeting with foreign diplomats in Moscow.
Addressing the UN Security Council meeting on January 22, 2023, Lavrov emphasized that there are no interests – and there never were – in the conflict with Russia in favor of the Ukrainian people. There are only “the interests of the Anglo-Saxons, their henchmen and the criminal, rotten Kiev elite, which is tied to the West by mutual responsibility and which is afraid of being swept away the day after the end of the war.”
The Russian top diplomat pointed out that Moscow has never given up on a peaceful resolution to the Ukraine conflict.
“We never gave up on the peaceful resolution, we are always ready to negotiate — negotiate not about how to keep the leadership of the Kiev regime in place but about overcoming the inheritance of a decade-long destructive looting of the country and violence against the people, removing the reasons for the tragic Ukrainian situation,” Lavrov said. However, the key factor hindering a resolution of the conflict in Ukraine is the continued support of the West, he added.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Corruption, Militarism | European Union, NATO, Russia, Ukraine, United States |
1 Comment
The EU plans to raise up to €10 billion ($10.8 billion) in investment to create a transport corridor to Central Asia through the South Caucasus and Türkiye that bypasses Russia, the European Commission announced on Monday at a forum devoted to developing the route.
According a statement released by the European Commission, Brussels is currently ready to allocate €2.97 billion for the purpose.
For additional funding, the European Investment Bank has reportedly signed memorandums of understanding totaling €1.47 billion with the governments of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, as well as the Development Bank of Kazakhstan.
Meanwhile, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is expected to sign a memorandum of understanding with Kazakhstan regarding an investment pipeline worth €1.5 billion for projects already being prepared to develop transport connectivity in Central Asia.
The two-day Investors Forum for EU-Central Asia Transport Connectivity, which began in Brussels on Monday, is expected to address the investment that will be necessary to transform the Trans-Caspian transport corridor into “a cutting-edge, multimodal, and efficient route, connecting Europe and Central Asia.”
According to the statement, the bloc is urgently trying to find alternative trade routes between Europe and Asia that could bypass Russia.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | European Union |
Leave a comment
GAZA – Israeli occupation forces this evening stormed the courtyards of the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) and Al-Amal Hospital in Khan Yunis, in the southern Strip, amid heavy shelling and shooting.
Israeli forces demanded at gunpoint displaced persons and PRCS teams to evacuate, said PRCS.
PRCS teams and the displaced are currently in severe danger, warned the Society in a post on the “X” platform.
The Society reported that forces destroyed the external wall of the PRCS headquarters and targeted with gunfire and smoke bombs the displaced people, its crews, and the front door of its building and the hospital, causing fire to break out in several makeshift tents where the displaced are taking shelter.
Earlier today, a woman was killed and others were injured in the ongoing Israeli targeting of the vicinity of Al-Amal Hospital. The occupation’s armored tanks shelled areas near the Al-Amal hospital and the PRCS headquarters in Khan Yunis, where thousands of displaced persons are seeking refuge, killing a woman and injuring nine others, reported the Society.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | Gaza, Israel, Palestine, Zionism |
Leave a comment
In the time since the October 7 invasion of Israel there have been suggestions both from within Israel and from alternative media elsewhere that Israel used a version of a military protocol known as “The Hannibal Directive” that day, and perhaps has continued to operate upon that protocol since.
The “Hannibal Directive” is a military order which was created in 1986 in response to the kidnapping of an Israeli Defense Forces soldier in Lebanon. The premise of the original order is that in this circumstance, the IDF can prioritize stopping the kidnappers even if it endangers the hostage. The example that those within the Israeli government like to give is sniping the tires of the escape car knowing it may cause an accident which endangers the hostage, while ruling out an airstrike on the car. This highly controversial protocol was repealed in 2016 and replaced with an order whose text has remained secret. However, there is a growing body of evidence that on October 7 Israel issued a sort of “mass Hannibal Directive on steroids,” where an unknown number of Israeli civilians were killed by the IDF to prevent their becoming hostages. While there has been much discussion of this topic within Israel media, there is a near-total blackout on the topic in corporate media in the United States and United Kingdom.
Many who were already aware of the Hannibal Directive became suspicious of Israel’s actions quickly, most of all because of one particularly egregious instance which brought friendly fire casualties to light. At the Kibbutz Be’eri in what is known as “Pesi’s House,” after the owner, Hamas had taken fifteen Israelis hostage. One Hamas member ran out of the house releasing a hostage, who informed them that there were fourteen Israelis remaining in the house. A commander made the decision to fire two “light” tank shells at the house regardless, killing all but one of the hostages. The released hostage and the survivor both confirmed the same story, so it came out rapidly that Israel had knowingly shelled the house. This got a lot of press within Israel because it is such a horrible story, and people immediately referenced the Hannibal Directive. More recently, Israel’s leading news website Ynet released a large investigation which alleges that an IDF-wide Hannibal Directive-like order went out, and that Israel destroyed seventy cars returning to Gaza without regard to whether there may be hostages inside.
Some of Israel’s most prominent voices want to know if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government implemented a Hannibal Directive on October 7. The lead author of the IDF’s Code of Ethics, Asa Kasher, explained in Haaretz, Israel’s newspaper of record, that the incident at Kibbutz Be’eri needs to be investigated immediately. The Haaretz editorial board demanded an immediate investigation in an editorial published on January 8. These are among many other references to the issue within Israeli media. The Ynet investigation is extremely thorough and damning. The Hannibal Directive has also been mentioned by media sources throughout the Muslim world. However, despite the importance of this issue, and that discussion of the topic is readily available in Haaretz, there has not been any mention in any context in several major U.S. news sources since this new round of conflict began.
We are all used to the media lying and shaping narratives, but this is the most thorough campaign of ignoring news I have seen since the Hunter Biden laptop story, which was broken by the New York Post, so at least one “mainstream” source in American media was trying to talk about it. I checked several major, diverse news sources for mentions of the Hannibal Directive and did not find any which presented the question of if Israel had used this protocol. The New York Times last mentioned it in 2016 when the original order was repealed. There has been no discussion of it in The Washington Post, USA Today, or the magazine Foreign Policy. The Guardian has a single reference from October 11, where a woman says the hostility of politicians to recovering the hostages reminds her of the Hannibal Directive, but it is a random opinion, not a suggestion they used it on October 7. Tablet Magazine, a prominent American Jewish periodical, shows no search results on its website, though by using Google’s advanced search functions one can find a single mention since October 7. A Google News search finds many foreign sources, but the only American reference is from Briahna Joy Gray at The Hill, a far-left host who has been constantly attacked as an anti-Semite and is far out of the mainstream, though she happens to work for a mainstream publication. I wrote a Twitter thread documenting my attempt to find references to the Hannibal Directive in American and British media.
Those who happen to have learned about the Hannibal Directive, either from reading Israeli media or from alternative media or social media in the West, can and will draw many conclusions about what happened on October 7. But the suppression of this topic is a story in and of itself. I doubt it is any sort of explicit conspiracy. Instead, people who come to be in prominent positions in corporate media get to where they are because they know which way the wind blows and have a good instinct for what they should or shouldn’t print. The culture within American media is one where no one wants to cover this story, and if asked they would probably tell you they fear it will “empower extremists” or “promote conspiracy theories.” Most Haaretz articles which mention it seem to spend as long hemming and hawing about that concern as they do discussing the issue, but they still cover the story (even if carefully framed). These revelations greatly change how a person understand the events of October 7, and since the American government continues to support Israel, Americans deserve to know—but they certainly won’t learn about it from the corporate media.
The Libertarian Institute’s Executive Director Scott Horton recently spoke with Brad Pearce about the subject of this article and Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel. Their interview can be found here.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | Israel, Palestine, United States, Zionism |
1 Comment
The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman has strongly condemned the assassination of Palestinian patients by Israeli forces in a hospital in the occupied West Bank, calling on the international community not to remain silent in the face of the “terrorist act.”
Nasser Kan’ani made the remarks in a statement on Tuesday, after a unit of undercover Israeli special forces fatally shot three young Palestinians inside Ibn Sina Hospital in the west of Jenin earlier in the day.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman went on to say that such brutal action can pave the way for normalization of “organized terrorism” in the world, urging the international community not to remain silent and condemn the Israeli regime’s “barbaric behavior.”
Kan’ani further noted it is regrettable that the Israeli regime’s supporters are silent in the face of such obvious crimes in medical centers and the continued activity of the Zionist genocide machine.
Palestinian media outlets reported on Tuesday that members of the Israeli hit squad dressed as doctors, nurses, and even civilians went up to the third floor of the Ibn Sina Hospital and shot three young Palestinians dead with guns equipped with silencers before escaping the building.
“This morning three young men were martyred by the bullets of the occupation [Israeli] forces who stormed the Ibn Sina Hospital in Jenin and shot them,” the Ministry of Health in Ramallah said.
One of the slain Palestinians was undergoing treatment in the hospital for some three months since he was injured by the Israeli army.
There was no apparent attempt to arrest the Israeli assailants.
The Israeli military later claimed that the three Palestinians were members of a team affiliated to the Hamas resistance movement planning to carry out attacks against the regime.
Hamas said in a statement that Israel’s “crimes will not go unanswered,” adding that the killings are a “continuation of the occupation’s ongoing crimes against our people from Gaza to Jenin.”
The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs also condemned “in the strongest terms the occupation forces’ assassination of the three young men.”
Israel has ramped up its aggression in the West Bank since its genocidal war on Gaza began in early October.
Nearly 350 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank since October 7, when Israel waged the war on Gaza after Hamas carried out a historic operation against the occupying entity in retaliation for its intensified atrocities against the Palestinian people.
The Israeli aggression has so far killed at least 26,637 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured 65,387 others in Gaza. The Tel Aviv regime has imposed a “complete siege” on the territory, cutting off fuel, electricity, food, and water to the more than two million Palestinians living there.
January 30, 2024
Posted by aletho |
Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | Human rights, Palestine, West Bank, Zionism |
1 Comment
Aletho News
Aletho News 