Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Kiev failed to achieve its objectives with Kursk invasion

By Lucas Leiroz | August 28, 2024

Ukrainian authorities are admitting their failure in Kursk. Recently, the commander of Kiev’s armed forces stated that the operation’s objective was not achieved, acknowledging Russia’s success in preventing Ukraine from diverting Russian attention from other fronts. Such statements show how wrong the Western media are in trying to propagandize the Kursk case as a “Ukrainian victory.”

Colonel General Aleksandr Syrsky, Ukraine’s top military commander, stated that Kiev failed to achieve its objective in Kursk. According to him, the operation was mainly aimed at diverting Moscow’s attention, forcing the Russians to withdraw troops from Donbass and send them to the northern border. In this way, the Ukrainians hoped to make significant territorial gains in Donbass, facing unguarded Russian positions.

Syrsky acknowledges that the real result of the Kursk invasion was different: Russia further expanded its positions in Donbass, gaining new territories and deploying even more troops in the region. The Ukrainian commander believes that currently the main fronts in the Donbass are Pokrovsk and Kurakhovsk, in the west of the Donetsk People’s Republic. These cities have key strategic positions for the supply lines to Zaporozhye and Dnepropetrovsk. Since 2014, Kiev has been concerned about maintaining military fortifications in both cities, but constant Russian attacks threaten Ukrainian stability in the region.

“One of the tasks of conducting an offensive operation in the Kursk direction was to divert significant enemy forces from other directions, first and foremost the Pokrovsk and Kurakhovsk directions (…) Of course, the enemy understands this, so it continues to focus its main efforts on the Pokrovsk direction, where its most combat-ready units are concentrated (…) The enemy is trying to withdraw units from other directions, while in the Pokrovsk direction, on the contrary, it is increasing its efforts,” he said.

In other words, Kiev’s maneuver in Kursk was a desperate Ukrainian attempt to prevent – ​​or at least delay – the inevitable Russian victory in Donbass. Kiev expected a Russian withdrawal from strategic cities in the disputed zone in order to strengthen the border positions in Kursk, which sounds like a serious strategic mistake on the part of the Ukrainians.

The calculation made by Kiev was based on a reality of military weakness, which corresponds to the current situation of the Ukrainian forces, but does not reflect the military conditions of Russia. If Ukraine is attacked on a different front, Kiev can only withdraw troops from other directions to protect this new area. Ukraine is operating in a regime of full mobilization, having already spent all its military resources and depending on strict management of what is left of its troops and equipment.

On the other hand, the Russians are still using a small percentage of their defense apparatus in the special military operation. There is no need for Russia to withdraw troops from one front to protect a new attacked region. Moscow can simply send troops from the rear to this new front, without disrupting the supply of the previous lines. Moreover, Russia can simultaneously increase its presence in both the new and old positions, since there is still a large army of reservists and volunteers ready to be mobilized if necessary.

In Kursk, Russia spared the troops already involved in the main fronts of the operation and, instead of redeploying them, simply used its rear forces to neutralize the invasion. The main contribution in Kursk came from the troops of the PMC Wagner Group that had been stationed in the Republic of Belarus since June last year. Meanwhile, seeing that the Ukrainians are desperate to protect Pokrovsk and Kurakhovsk, Moscow has sent even more troops to these fronts, which is why final victory in these directions is expected soon.

By admitting the failure and revealing Ukrainian plans in Kursk, Syrsky made clear the strategic inability and military inexperience of Ukrainian decision-makers. Kiev simply ignored the fact that Russia still has thousands of troops and equipment available to protect any point on its borders without having to withdraw any of its already mobilized soldiers.

It is also interesting to emphasize how the Western media was mistaken in hurriedly reporting the Kursk invasion as a “game changer.” According to Western “analysts”, Kiev had succeeded in “bringing the war into Russia,” but the commander of the Ukrainian army himself admits that this was never the real goal of the operation.

The cost of this mistake was massive for Kiev. In the end, the situation was reversed: it was Kiev’s troops who retreated from Donbass to invade Kursk, leaving key areas of the main conflict zone vulnerable and allowing Russia to advance further.

Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.

You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.

August 28, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Теlegram’s Durov vs Meta’s Zuckerberg: How Do They Stack Up on Censorship?

By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 27.08.2024

While Telegram founder Pavel Durov waits to be formally charged by French prosecutors for multiple charges relating to the platform’s lack of moderation, no such fate is likely to befall Mark Zuckerberg. The CEO of Meta has admitted his company opted to accede to the US government’s demands to censor content.

While Telegram founder Pavel Durov waits to be formally charged by French prosecutors for multiple charges relating to the platform’s lack of moderation, no such fate is likely to befall Mark Zuckerberg.

Unlike Durov, the Meta CEO has admitted to what was an open secret anyway: that he caved to repeated White House demands to throttle content on his platform. Senior Biden administration officials, “pressured” Meta to “censor” content, acknowledged Zuckerberg in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) on August 26.

Elon Musk was quick to note there’s be no arrest for Zuck as he “censors free speech and gives governments backdoor access to user data.”

Let’s see how the two platforms and their CEOs line up:

Pavel Durov

The Russian-born IT entrepreneur co-created Telegram – a blend of private messaging and public channels –with his brother in August 2013. Durov vowed to champion encryption in messaging, not allow the moderation of messages, deny requests to store records of confidential data, telephone messages and internet traffic of clients, or hand over keys for decrypting users’ correspondence upon request.

“Telegram has historically had problems with regulators in some parts of the world because, unlike other services, we consistently defended our users’ privacy and have never made any deals with governments,” Durov wrote in 2017.”

Telegram’s unlimited in size “channels” and group chats are encrypted using a combination of 256-bit symmetric AES encryption, 2048-bit RSA encryption, and Diffie-Hellman secure key, per the Telegram team. Telegram doesn’t provide end-to-end encryption for common private and group chats, but does provide a secret chat feature. Telegram lets users post files enjoying unlimited cloud storage. There is no targeted advertising or algorithmic feed. The platform’s audience exceeded 950 million users by July 2024.

The US government wanted to get its hands on Telegram’s code to infiltrate the system and spy on its users, Durov revealed in an April interview with ex-Fox News anchor Tucker Carlson. The entrepreneur rejected pressure to allow a “backdoor” in the app for Western intelligence. Durov resisted personal “pressure” in the US, where law enforcement officials approached him, seeking to “establish a relationship to in a way control Telegram better.”

“[But] for us running a privacy-focused social media platform, that probably wasn’t the best environment to be in. We want to be focused on what we do, not on government relations of that sort,” Durov said.

Mark Zuckerberg

Zuckerberg turned his Meta (formerly Facebook) into a tool for US censorship. The platform with its standard for messaging apps end-to-end (e2e) encryption and non-open source algorithm has served up documented cases of censorship and manipulation of public opinion proven by whistleblowers and information leaks. After the 2016 US elections, conservative viewpoints were suppressed under the pretext of “hate speech” while liberal ones were elevated.

In 2018 it was revealed that UK-based political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica engaged in the harvesting of tens of millions of Facebook profiles in 2014. They were used to target users with personalized political ads, including during the 2016 US presidential campaign. The company engaged in similar harvesting and vote manipulation operations in nations across the globe.

Posts criticizing everything from US foreign and immigration policy, climate policies, to vaccines were occasionally deleted outright, but more often hidden or deranked.
Used as an election manipulation tool, whistleblowers have documented Facebook’s skewed content moderation directives regarding candidates and their supporters, in direct violation of the company’s policy on protecting political speech.

Facebook barred Donald Trump from the platform in the wake of the 6 January Capitol riot after being accused of “incitement of violence”. He was reinstated his account had “new guardrails in place.”

Biden officials “repeatedly pressured” Facebook for months to “censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire” during the pandemic, Zuckerberg has admitted. As a result, in April of 2020 Facebook announced that it was imposing limits on “harmful misinformation about COVID-19.” The decision was reversed a year later.

On the eve of the 2020 presidential elections Facebook suppressed the New York Post story based on damning files in Hunter Biden’s laptop containing evidence of a pay-to-play corruption scheme by the Biden family.

Mark Zuckerberg admitted that in an interview with Joe Rogan in 2022, claiming he was ordered to censor the story by the FBI. He has now conceded that the Hunter laptop story was not “Russian disinformation,” as it was alleged at the time by the Democrats and the mainstream media.

While Meta admitted in 2021 that Palestinian posts using words like “martyr” and “resistance” were inaccurately labeled as incitement to violence, the platform revealed its hypocrisy the following year. Meta openly supported calls for violence against Russian citizens after the start of the special military operation. In March 2022 it loosened prohibitions on violent speech for users in Eastern Europe, allowing the placement of ads with such content.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | 1 Comment

Gaza and Polio

By Richard Hugus | August 27, 2024

On July 30, 2024 the Health Ministry of Gaza declared a polio epidemic in Gaza. The World Health Organization then said it would send more than a million polio vaccine doses to Gaza. On August 16, according to Al-Jazeera, the first case was reported and the UN’s Antonio Guterres called for a ceasefire to make a vaccination campaign possible. This call was supported by Hamas.

Health authorities rightly point out that the cause of the horrific health conditions in Gaza is the ongoing Israeli genocide – the bombing of homes and infrastructure, the shelling, the withholding of food and medical supplies, the sadistic evacuations — and the authorities of course call for all these things to end. But the involvement of globalist agencies like the UN and WHO raise suspicions that the polio declaration may be just another attack on the people of Gaza concealed under a cloak of humanitarianism.

According to Al-Jazeera, the announcement of the alleged outbreak came on August 7 from one Dr. Hamid Jafari, a World Health Organization polio specialist who claimed the polio virus was found in wastewater samples in Deir el-Balah and Khan Younis. Dr. Jafari is currently employed by the US Centers for Disease Control, a deeply corrupt organization which has spent the past three years pushing vaccines for another purported virus – covid 19 – in spite of clear proof from the very beginning of multiple harms caused by the vaccine. This harm is not limited to the US. Denis Rancourt and colleagues have recently offered statistical proof of almost 31 million excess deaths globally for the period 2020-2022, deaths which they attribute to the strangely universal worldwide public health response to covid 19, to include lockdowns, business closures, isolation, harmful hospital protocols, and particularly the mRNA vaccines.

Regarding Dr. Jafari in Gaza, The CDC website tell us that he “is a graduate of CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) program, class of 1992. . .  currently serving as the Principal Deputy Director, Center for Global Health, at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.The website goes on to say that “Dr. Jafari served as the project manager of World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) National Polio Surveillance Project in India from 2007-2012. As the project manager, he was the main technical advisor to the government of India in the implementation of the nation’s large scale polio eradication, measles control, and routine immunization activities, and he directed WHO’s extensive network of more than 2000 field staff.”

Thus Dr. Jafari was in in charge of a vaccination campaign in India where, in one study, researchers found that between 2000–2017 there were “an additional 491,000 paralyzed children” above normal. The ambitious “polio eradication” program in India was funded and led by the Gates Foundation and the WHO. The number of paralysis cases was found to be proportional to the number of vaccine doses administered. The Gates Foundation and WHO are not exactly separate entities – Gates is a major funder of the WHO. Dr. Jafari’s employment at the CDC, his authoritative declaration of a polio epidemic in Gaza, and WHO’s immediate announcement of the shipment of over a million vaccines should raise red flags.

Polio is a condition that is often confused with the catchall “acute flaccid paralysis.”  Acute flaccid paralysis may even be the result of injection of polio “vaccines, but it is not polio. The polio vaccine can and does cause acute flaccid paralysis. From experience in the US since the 1950s it is known that what was often called polio was not the gut virus that humans have lived with more or less uneventfully throughout history, but a form of paralysis caused by human exposure to neurotoxins introduced in the 20th century — for example, mercury and aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines, leaded fuel, fluoridated water, pesticides and herbicides like arsenic, DDT, dioxin, and glyphosate. DDT was in widespread use in the 1950s. When it was banned, the high numbers of “polio” cases went down. The famous Salk and Sabin vaccines had little to do with it, though the medical establishment claimed victory. Indeed, as we know from what is called “the Cutter incident”  in 1955, vaccines produced by Cutter Laboratories ended up causing 40,000 cases of polio, severely paralyzed 200 children, and killed 10. Later iterations of the vaccine were found to contain a cancer-causing agent called SV-40 (SV being short for ‘simian virus’). Bernice Eddy, the scientist who discovered this, was hounded out of her job at the US National Institute of Health. Lest one think that things are surely more advanced now than in the 1950s, as recently as April 2023 a well-known scientist named Kevin McKernan found SV-40 in samples of the Pfizer covid -19 vaccine. A new term was coined to describe a common effect of the covid injections — “turbo cancer” — perhaps attributable to the SV-40 and the normally forbidden DNA plasmids also found in the samples.

In an emergency involving a projected 2,700 aid workers delivering 1.6 million doses over a short period of time (between bombings), will the parents of the one million children in Gaza be given complete information about the contents of the polio vaccine their children are about to be given? Will there be a full explanation about risks and possible side-effects? Will the parents have any understanding of the negative history of polio vaccines or of vaccines in general? Will they have the informed consent required in any medical intervention? Will they be given redress for any injuries? No, not a chance. The instructions will be “here’s your dose, now move along.” To be fair, it’s the same all over the world.

Dr. Suzanne Humphries is a well-known kidney specialist who spent years of her professional life coming to grips with organized medicine’s ignorance of the fact that vaccines may cause rather than cure disease. She found that high numbers of polio cases mysteriously went away when polio came to be named other things, like poliomyelitis, transverse myelitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, enteroviral encephalopathy, traumatic neuritis, and Reye’s syndrome. A similar trick was played when influenza suddenly disappeared between 2020 and 2023 and “covid” took its place. Incidentally, one of the common effects of the covid vaccine was facial paralysis, or Guillain-Barré syndrome. Vaccines contain neurotoxins. Neurotoxins cause paralysis and myriad other problems. When it comes to Gaza, we might ask: is the confirmed case there actually polio, or is it one of the many distinct diseases under the umbrella of acute flaccid paralysis? Does a vaccine designed for one strain of polio address some, all, or even any of the mimicking diseases? Is there documentation that the confirmed case was actually polio, or do we just have to take Dr. Jafari’s word for it?

According to Dr. Humphries, “no vaccines are safe. Having “efficacy” means an antibody response is generated, not that they keep you from getting sick. There are many other ways to keep children healthy other than injecting them with disease matter, chemicals, animal DNA, animal proteins, detergents and surfactants that inflame and weaken the blood brain barrier, potentially causing inflammation and other problems.” One way would be to stop bombing them.

The Gaza Health Ministry and Hamas are surely busy enough dealing with zionist genocide, but they need to know that in the last few years public health has been revealed as a very effective weapon of war. The US Department of Defense had a leading role in the worldwide biowarfare operation known as “covid 19 countermeasures.” The WHO and the UN were very much involved in this operation. They are not to be trusted. Like the US government, these supposed humanitarian organizations speak from both sides of their mouth – calling for ceasefire while doing nothing to stop the weapons that every day kill more Palestinians. They know that the best way to protect the children of Gaza is to bring good nutrition, clean water, clean air, housing, and an end to the trauma of psychopath Israel’s daily bombing, yet they do nothing meaningful to bring this about. They are not offering aid with their polio vaccines; they are offering more poison.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 1 Comment

US Military Escort for Philippine Ships in South China Sea ‘Reasonable Option’ – Admiral

Sputnik – 27.08.2024

WASHINGTON – The US military said Tuesday that it is “an entirely reasonable option” for it to accompany Philippine vessels during resupply missions in the disputed South China Sea region, US media reported.

“Certainly within the context of consultations, every option between two sovereign nations in terms of our mutual defense — escort of one vessel to the other is an entirely reasonable option within our Mutual Defense Treaty,” Admiral Samuel Paparo, head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said, as quoted by Bloomberg.

Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Romeo Brawner said his country’s armed forces would escort the ships when they could and “seek other options when we are already constrained from doing it ourselves.” He added that the Philippines also cooperated with countries other than the US.

Their comments followed a collision between Philippine and Chinese ships near the disputed Sabina Shoal on Sunday, amid recurring clashes.

The territorial affiliation of a number of islands and reefs in the South China Sea has been the subject of disputes between China, the Philippines and several other Asia-Pacific countries for decades. Significant oil and gas reserves have been discovered on the continental shelf of those islands, including the Paracel Islands, Thitu Island, Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands, with the Whitson Reef being part.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , , | 1 Comment

Do We Finally Have a Peace Ticket?

By Ron Paul | August 26, 2024

Just as the Harris/Walz campaign was looking for a boost from the content-free Democratic National Convention last week, real drama broke out that pulled the country’s attention back toward Republican candidate Donald Trump. Rumors had been swirling for days that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. might suspend his independent run for the White House and endorse Donald Trump and on Friday he did just that.

In his powerful speech explaining the decision, RFK, Jr. made it clear that suspending his run was difficult, as was leaving a Democratic Party that has been almost synonymous with the name “Kennedy” for many decades. On both issues RFK, Jr. explained that he was guided by principles and values over party orientation and the fluff that has increasingly come to characterize American electoral politics.

It seems the more “polarized” much of American society becomes over which political party they support, the more the rest of us continue to see less and less difference between the two when it comes to actual policy. Both parties support the warfare/welfare state. Both pursue policies leading to poverty and war instead of peace and prosperity. Both are deluded into believing that the Federal Reserve can effectively manage the economy while we amass unimaginable levels of debt.

Americans are seeking authenticity and politicians who put principles above political parties and that is exactly what RFK, Jr. did last Friday. In his speech at the Trump rally, RFK served up severe criticisms of the Democrats for their embrace of endless war.

He said: “Judging by the bellicose, belligerent speech last night in Chicago, we can assume that President Harris will be an enthusiastic advocate for this and other neocon military adventures. President Trump says he will reopen negotiations with President Putin and end the war overnight as soon as he becomes President. This alone would justify my support for his campaign.”

It was a well-aimed blow at the Biden/Harris Administration, which pretends to be seeking peace while pouring gasoline on the numerous conflicts overseas.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claimed in her speech to the DNC that Vice President Harris is “working tirelessly” toward a ceasefire in Gaza literally as the Biden/Harris Administration announced another huge shipment of bombs to be used by the Israeli military to kill more Palestinians.

What can we hope for in RFK, Jr.’s bold move? For one, we should hope that coming out in favor of principles instead of hollow party identification can reduce the power of political parties altogether. Already in the Republican Party we are seeing a “new guard” emerge that is ready to break with the tired neocon stranglehold on the party.

So does RFK Jr.’s endorsement of Trump on principles rather than parties mean that we finally have a “peace ticket” to support? The short answer is “no,” we don’t have a peace ticket. Many of us who hoped that the first Trump presidency would be that peace ticket were disappointed to see the likes of John Bolton and Mike Pompeo litter the Administration. There is always the chance of a repeat of these mistakes. And neither Trump nor RFK seem reliably in favor of an end to the slaughter in Gaza.

So no, this is not a “peace ticket.” But at least with what we have seen this past week with RFK and Trump, we get the feeling that peace is on the menu. It’s a start.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | 2 Comments

Democracy kaput: Germans want peace with Russia, but their rulers only answer to Washington and Kiev

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | August 27, 2024

Since the beginning of the Ukraine Crisis in 2013/14, German governments, first under former chancellor Angela Merkel, then under her pathetic successor Olaf Scholz, have totally failed to help find a solution through compromise. This is no minor matter, and history won’t look kindly on Germany. Representing a traditionally significant if declining and now self-diminishing power in Europe, Berlin could have made a difference – quite conceivably one that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

Yet things are what they are. Initially, under the thoroughly opportunistic yet usually intelligent Merkel, this German failure was mostly due to subservience to the US but practiced in Berlin’s then signature style of evasive shiftiness. Yes, Merkel helped Kiev sabotage the 2015 Minsk II agreement, which could have avoided large-scale war between Russia and Ukraine. But she did that on the sly and only admitted it retrospectively, when criticized for having been “soft” on Russia. “No, I wasn’t!” she, in essence retorted, “I did my part and lied like a street grifter!” What can one say? Ideas of personal dignity differ across cultures.

Under her successor, the merely opportunistic Scholz, Berlin’s approaches have reverted to a certain elementary simplicity. The so-called “Zeitenwende” (epochal turn) he announced two years ago with traditional German modesty means that his coalition government has obeyed Washington in an unprecedentedly self-harming manner. Accepting sabotage of vital infrastructure – Nord Stream – and the systematic demolishing of the German economy by America’s beggar-thy-vassal policy, Scholz has grinned submissively, while not just sacrificing national interests but taking a flamethrower to them.

At the same time – and with a certain consistency one may also observe in committed masochists – this government of death wish loyalty has also ruined Germany’s relationship with Russia with Teutonic furor and thoroughness. All to pander to a Ukrainian regime that now stands accused of blowing up Nord Stream. That accusation makes no sense. Kiev loves to do its worst, true. But it could not have done it without the US. And yet the accusation is the new party line handed down via the Wall Street Journal. It serves as yet another test of how much public humiliation Berlin will take. Answer: there’s no limit.

But Berlin is not Germany. A government so bizarrely out of touch with its own country and its interests is unlikely to represent its citizens well. For some of its members that is even a point of pride. Foreign minister and geometry expert Annalena “360 degrees” Baerbock has long declared that she doesn’t care what her voters want but only about what the Zelensky regime demands. Baerbock, then, must have been positively delighted by the results of a recent and solid opinion poll.

Conducted by the topnotch INSA pollster, the new poll proves that many Germans do not see foreign policy – especially with respect to Russia and Ukraine – the way their current, immensely unpopular and massively failing (as even the Economist admits) rulers do. Consider some highlights: Asked if they are in favor or against peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, 68% of respondents were in favor.

And 65% consider it a “good” or “very good” idea to offer Moscow a quid pro quo, in which Russia would agree to a ceasefire and negotiations, while the West would stop supplying Ukraine with weapons. It’s another matter that Moscow would be unlikely to accept such a deal; those times are over. But Germans outside the Berlin elite clearly prefer winding down the war in lieu of the forever-war scenario that NATO and EU officially promote.

A clear plurality of respondents, 46%, believe that their government has failed to engage in enough diplomacy to protect Germany from the risk of war. Only 26% feel that Berlin has done enough. Yet there is no duty more elementary for rulers than doing everything possible to protect citizens from the threat of war. They cannot always succeed. But those widely seen as not having tried hard enough lose their legitimacy. That much we have known, at the latest since English political philosopher and arch-realist Thomas Hobbes published his “Leviathan” in the seventeenth century.

Legitimacy may sound abstract. Let’s talk about elections then, especially as three important regional elections are coming up. In the länder (states) of Saxony, Thuringia, and Brandenburg, all in Germany’s East, the Berlin coalition parties are staring at serious, even devastating losses to be inflicted by two surging newcomers, the very rightwing AfD and the leftwing yet culturally conservative BSW, named after its leader Sarah Wagenknecht.

Could the decline of the coalition parties have something to do with their resolute detachment from many voters’ wishes and fears over foreign policy? Absolutely. Asked in the INSA poll if a party’s demanding or failing to demand peace negotiations for the Russia-Ukraine War is a decisive factor in casting their vote, 43% of respondents answered in the affirmative. The same share said “no.” But leaving almost half the electorate with a strong sense that you don’t care about what they care about – especially in matters of life and death, i.e. war and peace – is never a winning strategy.

It is true that the question focused specifically on an election at the federal level; that is, for Germany as a whole. Regional politics, you might be tempted to think, has different priorities. You’d be so wrong, though. For one thing, Germans love to use their many regional elections as a way to punish the federal government. Voters do not make a neat separation between voting locally and dishing out the pain centrally. On the contrary.

Second, the results of regional elections, therefore, constantly affect Berlin politics, at this point right into the sick heart of a coalition that is terminal already. Third, regional elections in what used to be East Germany before the West German takeover in 1990 are even more neuralgic, because as a rule, voters there tend to be especially skeptical about Berlin’s by now abject subservience to the US and self-defeating if neo-traditional Russophobia.

Germany’s current mainstream media, think tanks, and academic cadres – such as conformist historians Jan Behrends and Ilko-Sascha Kowalczuk – love to caricature, belittle, and patronize those Germans in the East of the country as in essence backward and brainwashed by Russians. (By the way, if you think that sounds weirdly familiar, that’s how Ukraine got its local civil war going in 2014.) Yet the Soviets/Russians haven’t had a say in eastern Germany for over a third of a century now. While Washington, of course, has maintained its propaganda grip. Maybe the proud domestic kulturträger (culture bearers) of NATO “value” Germany, and who love to look down on their eastern compatriots, should face their own lack of intellectual, political, and ethical independence instead. Where the fear of freedom cripples thought (while boosting careers), a little Kantian reliance on one’s own judgment might help.

In any case, belittling Germans in the East will make them only more determined, and rightly so, to vote their probably freer minds. And what freer minds in Germany see is a government that serves not their country but the US and Ukraine. That is a recipe for richly deserved defeat.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | | Leave a comment

Establishment Voices Attack Telegram Over Free Speech Protections in Wake of Founder’s Arrest

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 27, 2024

Legacy media and some establishment figures are busy justifying the arrest of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov, attacking the platform, but also making not-so-veiled threats aimed at other platform owners.

Ukrainian-born former member of the US National Security Council Alexander Vindman, who played a key role in the first impeachment trial of Donald Trump, took to X (calling it “Twitter”) – to warn the social site and its owner Elon Musk that there could be “broader implications” in the context of the Durov arrest.

To Musk specifically, Vindman’s extraordinary message, which reads very much like a threat, is that he “should be worried.” As ever, the accusation is that X is allowing “misinformation” – that is, not censoring enough. And the implication is that unless that happens, there could be more arrests.

In one post Vindman went through the Democrat keywords (mentioning “MAGA tech bros,” “weirdos,” referring to Trump as “sexual predator”) and expressed admiration for the EU’s way of “enforcing content moderation” – ostensibly, as opposed to his adoptive country.

Former Belgian PM Guy Verhofstadt was also on X to reiterate how EU elites see, and treat the issue of free speech while throwing around dramatically-worded accusations: “Telegram sits at the center of global cybercrime… Free speech is not without responsibilities!”

It follows that other platform owners could face a situation similar to Durov’s.

Officials who no longer hold formal office often serve to express some extreme points of view that those in government would rather not say publicly, and other handy mouthpieces are always legacy media outlets.

Thus the Guardian sees Telegram as a platform for “information and disinformation” about the war in Ukraine, but then goes on to brand it as the favorite app of “racists, violent extremists, antisemites” – this is the Guardian giving life to claims made by a pro-censorship group.

Europeans and the war again, and the Washington Post decided to disseminate the accusation originating from a senior EU security official that Telegram is “a primary platform for Russia to disseminate disinformation in Europe and Ukraine.”

According to CBS, the same is true of another war: “Encrypted messaging apps like Telegram and WhatsApp have been a huge source of misinformation and disinformation in the Israel-Hamas war. Misinformation experts say it’s because they are difficult to moderate.”

And the New York Times decided to hand-pick several of the worst examples among the hundreds of millions of Telegram users, to vilify apps in general and argue in favor of censorship.

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | 5 Comments

Telegram Founder’s Detention Shows ‘Dangerous Trend’ of Online Surveillance

By John Miles – Sputnik – 27.08.2024

Western governments are increasingly seeking to deepen their control of online platforms while looking to discredit those like TikTok and Telegram which they perceive to be beyond their control.

The mass adoption of the Internet has widely been seen as a positive phenomenon in encouraging greater openness and accountability in society.

Polling by Pew Research Center in 2022 demonstrates the largely helpful role citizens around the world attribute to the technology, with majorities of people in most countries approving of its impact. Citizens of Central and Eastern European countries like Poland and Hungary are especially approving of social media’s influence on democracy, with respondents claiming it helps them stay informed about world and local events.

The United States, however, is a notable outlier in the research firm’s survey, with 64% of Americans saying social media has had a mostly negative effect on democracy and 79% saying it has created greater political division.

The finding comes as the role of social media and the Internet has increasingly been vilified in US society, with a panic over the alleged deleterious effect of online disinformation in politics. The height of the Russiagate conspiracy theory during the presidency of Donald Trump represented perhaps the high-water mark for the trend, but Western lawmakers continue to stoke concern over online content to justify government intervention and even outright bans on some platforms.

This weekend’s arrest of Telegram founder Pavel Durov, then, can be seen as the latest development in the trend after Durov provoked the ire of Western officials earlier this year by revealing the US Federal Bureau of Investigation’s attempts to install a backdoor in the popular encrypted messaging application.

“This attempt to break down communications and free speech around the world, I think, is a dangerous trend,” warned host Steve Gill on Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program Monday. “We just saw the CEO of Rumble… fled to avoid prosecution on whatever trumped up charges they may come after him. So this is a big issue. It is a big story. And I’ve been interested that the US media isn’t paying much attention to it. They should be.”

“It’s notable that, of course, Durov was arrested on allegations and is still being held, though he hasn’t been convicted for any crimes,” noted independent journalist John Jackman.

“The investigation has alleged, essentially, that the messaging platform Telegram has been used for fraud, drug trafficking, money laundering, and a coterie of other offenses. Now, what’s interesting about this is basically what the French authorities are saying is that Durov himself is responsible for any abuse that happens on that platform.”

Western authorities have long resented Telegram, which is resistant to the kind of surveillance and content moderation imposed on other online platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or X. Telegram’s relative freedom allows dissidents to thrive and users to share information from alternative perspectives, but authorities have accused the platform of being used to facilitate myriad crimes and abuses.

Recent years have seen Western governments take increasing steps to influence the flow of information online through the implementation of moderation regimes and, more recently, the banning of TikTok. Figures such as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and X CEO Elon Musk have become more or less amenable to authorities’ attempts to exert control over their platforms, but Jackman argued that Durov has continued to chart his own course.

“Is Elon in trouble?” Jackman asked. “Well the answer is, if he stays on the right side of US foreign policy then he should be fine and continues to advocate for things like overthrowing the government of Venezuela, staying on the right side of the conflict in Ukraine, not cozying up to Russia too much, and so on. And then, of course, with Meta and Mark Zuckerberg, there’s absolutely no issue.

“One of the striking aspects of Durov’s arrest is that the French authorities actually waited until he landed to even file a warrant,” Jackman said, noting that French officials did not make the Telegram founder aware that he was wanted until he was already en route to France. “He had absolutely no indication that anything was coming. This was actually the same thing that happened with [Venezuelan businessman] Alex Saab, and it’s clear that France wanted to get their man and ensure that there was absolutely no chance of him evading the dragnet.”

Jackman called the tactic “draconian” and lamented Western governments’ attempts to repress their own citizens.

“What [censorship] means is that you’re weak, basically,” he claimed. “When you have to censor speech, when you have to be able to have the power to limit what people can say, then that means that you’re operating in a world where you’re scared of the facts, where you’re scared of truth.”

“We’ve seen this not only in contemporary and modern times, but we’ve also seen this throughout history: when great governments, empires, or nations start to lose their ability to actually govern effectively… you see these crackdowns on speech to start to try to limit the fact that the people can point out that the emperor has no clothes,” he continued. “And I think that’s exactly what we’re seeing.”

“The reason why they’re arresting people like Durov and not Elon Musk is fundamentally because the tentacles of law enforcement and intelligence agencies specifically have not, are not able to seep their way into applications like Telegram the way they are X or the Meta platforms. And so I think this is more of an issue about controlling the broader narrative rather than it is pursuing any specific types of criminal activity.”

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Durov arrest shows ‘upside-down’ West – Serbian leader

RT | August 26, 2024

Charges against Telegram founder Pavel Durov in France show that the West has abandoned the values it championed just a few years ago, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic has said.

The 39-year-old Russian was detained by French authorities on Saturday, after arriving in Paris from Azerbaijan by private jet. Durov also has the passports of France, the UAE and St. Kitts and Nevis.

Speaking on a newscast on Monday evening, Vucic said that Durov’s case was “interesting” and compared him to the persecution of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden.

“Back in 2018, when Russia put some mild legal pressure on him, some 26 groups from the West signed a petition to the Russian state to stop violating his freedom. Fast forward five or six years, and it’s perfectly normal [for them] to have him arrested and want to shut down Telegram in the West,” Vucic said.

“Everything has gone topsy-turvy, reality itself has been changed to fit their interests.”

France on Monday revealed the laundry list of preliminary charges against Durov, accusing the Telegram mogul of “facilitating” alleged illegal activities on his platform – ranging from drug dealing and money laundering to child pornography – by refusing to cooperate with French investigators going after an unnamed third party.

President Emmanuel Macron has defended the arrest, insisting that charges against Durov were “in no way a political decision.”

X owner Elon Musk, American journalist Tucker Carlson and Silicon Valley investor David Sacks have denounced Durov’s arrest as an attack on the freedom of speech.

Snowden, a whistleblower who revealed the extent of NSA spying on Americans and foreign leaders back in 2012, has accused France of holding Durov “hostage” in order to access private communications on Telegram.

Vucic brought up Durov’s situation in the context of the US and the EU criticizing Serbia for allegedly persecuting political opposition. According to the Serbian president, the EU routinely beats up and arrests protesters by the hundreds, while Belgrade is far more tolerant of outright riots.

“It’s all upside-down!” Vucic said. “When you allow the greatest of liberties, you’re a dictator. The fewer freedoms exist, the more they speak about them.”

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | 2 Comments

Mark Zuckerberg confirms Biden regime pressured Facebook on censorship, admits to throttling Hunter Biden story

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | August 26, 2024

In a revealing letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg has addressed significant controversies surrounding the platform’s content censorship practices, especially concerning actions taken during the 2020 presidential election cycle and the COVID-19 pandemic.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

Zuckerberg confirmed that senior officials from the Biden Administration exerted “pressure” on Facebook to censor specific content related to COVID-19, criticizing the administration’s approach. Despite the external pressures, Zuckerberg emphasized that the final decisions on content moderation lay with Facebook, admitting regret over some of the decisions made under this pressure.

“In 2021, senior officials from the Biden Administration… repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire,” Zuckerberg stated, reflecting on the administration’s actions which he now believes were “wrong.” He expressed regret that Meta was not more outspoken against this pressure at the time: “Ultimately, it was our decision whether or not to take content down, and we own our decisions.”

In a separate disclosure, Zuckerberg detailed interactions with the FBI, which had warned the company of a potential Russian disinformation campaign targeting the Biden family and their association with Burisma ahead of the 2020 elections. This led to the suppression of a New York Post story involving corruption allegations against Joe Biden’s family, which was later determined not to be Russian disinformation. Zuckerberg expressed regret over this decision as well, noting significant changes in Meta’s policy to avoid such actions in the future.

“It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story,” Zuckerberg conceded, alleging a policy shift to prevent future such occurrences: “We’ve changed our policies and processes to make sure this doesn’t happen again.”

Additionally, Zuckerberg addressed his contributions through the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to support electoral infrastructure during the pandemic, aiming to assist local election jurisdictions. He defended these contributions as non-partisan, though acknowledged public skepticism about the impartiality of such support.

“My goal is to be neutral and not play a role one way or another,” he affirmed, signaling a withdrawal from similar contributions in future electoral cycles.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , , , | 2 Comments

Court Finds Kennedy Has Standing in Our Consolidated Case

As I predicted, our new co-plaintiff Kennedy meets even the Supreme Court’s stringent standing requirements, the injunction against the government is back in play.

By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | August 26, 2024

As I explained in a previous post, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s companion lawsuit Kennedy v. Biden has been consolidated by the court into our Missouri v. Biden case. Based upon documents we obtained on discovery, the court recently found that Kennedy meets the Supreme Court’s stringent standing criteria. We only need one co-plaintiff with standing to bring the case and the petition for the injunction. So the injunction is back in play, and we will likely find ourselves at the Supreme Court again in a few months. Unless SCOTUS invents another technicality on which to temporize, they will be forced to rule on the merits of the evidence against the government, which we believe is overwhelming.

On the issue of Kennedy’s standing, U.S. District Court judge Terry Doughty last week ruled: “There is not much dispute that both Kennedy and CHD [Kennedy’s nonprofit Children’s Health Defense] were specifically targeted by the White House, the Office of Surgeon General, and CISA, and the content of Kennedy and CHD were suppressed. Therefore, Kennedy must now show a substantial risk that in the near future, at least one platform will restrict the speech of Kennedy in response to the actions of one Government Defendant.” Citing evidence we uncovered in Missouri v. Biden, Doughty explained: “The Court finds that Kennedy is likely to succeed on his claim that suppression of content posted was caused by actions of Government Defendants, and there is a substantial risk that he will suffer similar injury in the near future.”

As reported in The Kennedy Beacon Substack:

The latest ruling is not only significant for Kennedy but for the future of online speech. In June of this year, the Supreme Court ruled that the state attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana did not have standing to bring their case on government directed mass censorship. Now that Kennedy and the CHD have been found to have standing in the matter, the Supreme Court will likely have an opportunity to judge the issue on its merits rather than on a technicality as it did when making its standing ruling on an injunction in June.

If Kennedy and his co-plaintiffs are able to demonstrate to judges that the Biden administration’s intrusion into the actions of major social media companies resulted in censorship, the country will be one step closer to a major legal ruling guaranteeing freedom to speak online without the censorious interference of the federal government.

In related news, Kennedy announced Friday that he is suspending his presidential campaign. While he has deep disagreements with Trump on several issues, he is endorsing Trump’s candidacy to advance the key issues on which they have substantial agreements—including stopping government censorship and propaganda. His 48-minute speech announcing this decision was an extraordinary moment in American politics and is worth watching. In addition to discussing the issue of government censorship, which seriously hamstrung his ability to campaign, Kennedy’s remarks focus also on the root causes of the current epidemic of chronic disease in the United States.

While there is online buzz that Trump may tap Kennedy as Attorney General, I anticipate if Trump is elected he will appoint Kennedy to his cabinet as Secretary of Health and Human Services, a department which includes the CDC, FDA, and NIH. This could prove a welcome opportunity for the reform of our public health agencies. I am currently working with a team of policy analysts and health freedom advocates on concrete policy proposals for just such reforms, and will keep you posted on our progress with that project.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

What Does a Fraudulent Vaccine Safety Study Look Like?

By Dr. William H. Gaunt | The Defender | August 26, 2024

New vaccines should be proven safe before they are accepted onto the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine schedule.

Here is what is actually happening: Vaccine companies are doing studies that claim to demonstrate the safety of new vaccines but are carefully designed and conducted to intentionally hide the toxicity of these vaccines.

To see how this is done, read on.

What does an honest vaccine safety study look like? 

An honest safety study must have a test group that gets the vaccine and a control group that gets a harmless placebo. Injuries and deaths are compared in the two groups.

If the test group has many more adverse events than the placebo control group, the vaccine is not safe.

Most people would be shocked to learn that none of the vaccines on the CDC vaccine schedule have been safety tested in this way.

What does a fraudulent vaccine safety study look like? 

Rule No. 1 for conducting a fraudulent study: Do not have a placebo control group. Here is where the fraud is happening: The “control group” is deliberately given something that is as toxic as the vaccine being tested. It can be an older vaccine or the vaccine ingredients minus the antigen.

The results will show that the injuries and deaths are similar in both groups. That is because they are both receiving toxic ingredients. The new vaccine is then illogically declared safe.

If there is no placebo control group, the toxicity of the vaccine is hidden. This is both clever and diabolical. Can you see it?

The public is unaware of this subterfuge

“Turtles All The Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth” is the most thorough and brutally honest book ever written about vaccines.

The authors tell us on page 81:

“As we have seen in this chapter, vaccine trials are designed and performed in such a way as to ensure that the true extent of adverse events is hidden from the public. There is not a single vaccine in the US routine childhood vaccination schedule whose true rate of adverse events is known.”

Two examples of how unsafe toxic vaccines got on the CDC vaccine schedule

Prevnar-13 (a pneumococcal vaccine) was given to the test group of children and the “control group” was given the older Prevnar vaccine.

Severe adverse events occurred in 8.2% (one out of every 12 children) in the test group. Severe adverse events also occurred in 7.2% (one out of every 14 children) of the control group.

What percent of a placebo control group would have had severe adverse events? Probably 0% because they would have received something harmless. We can’t know because the authors of this study chose not to have a placebo control group.

The Prevnar-13 vaccine was declared “safe” and was approved for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). You don’t have to be a doctor or scientist to suspect that both the Prevnar and the Prevnar-13 vaccines are unsafe. “Turtles All The Way Down” covers this fraudulent vaccine safety study on pages 60 and 61.

Here is the second example, which the authors describe on pages 77 and 78:

“In one of the DTaP vaccine trials, 1 in every 22 subjects in the trial group was admitted to the hospital. A similar hospitalization rate was also reported in the ‘control group’ (which received the older-generation DTP vaccine).”

Again, there was no placebo control group. Both vaccines appear to be decidedly unsafe yet the newer DTaP vaccine made it onto the CDC vaccine schedule. DTP and DTaP vaccines contain antigens for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.

Why is this happening?

Ultimately, the answer is greed. It is enormously profitable to get a vaccine on the CDC schedule. Vaccine companies will do whatever it takes to accomplish this. If it takes a little scientific fraud, so be it.

The vaccine companies are cheating on vaccine safety studies by omitting placebo control groups, thereby lying about the safety of vaccines. The FDA and CDC are complicit because they are doing nothing to stop this fraud.

Corporate capture or regulatory capture

The FDA and CDC are regulatory agencies. The original function of these agencies was to protect the public from dangerous drugs and vaccines.

Unfortunately, these agencies have been captured by Big Pharma. They no longer focus on protecting the public. They focus on protecting and promoting the interests of pharma companies.

Can we compare the health outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children?

Theoretically, yes but not if we expect our health authorities or pharma companies to do these types of studies. Chapter 6 of the “Turtles” book is titled “The Studies That Will Never Be Done.”

On page 207 the authors tell us:

“No study that compares the health of vaccinated children to that of unvaccinated children has ever been done by the medical establishment.”

If such a study showed that vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children, it would have been published and been headlined in every newspaper and been the lead story on the nightly news. That hasn’t happened. We suspect that such a study has been done internally at the CDC.

The unwanted conclusion that they won’t allow to see the light of day is that unvaccinated children are far healthier than vaccinated children. This study has likely been done and buried instead of published. Such a study is verboten because it would be a disaster for the vaccine companies.

Private studies show that unvaccinated children are healthier

Here are two privately funded studies:

  1. “Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses Along the Axis of Vaccination” by Dr. Paul Thomas and James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D.
  2. “Analysis of health outcomes in vaccinated and unvaccinated children: Developmental delays, asthma, ear infections and gastrointestinal disorders” by Brian S. Hooker, Ph.D., and Neil Z. Miller.

Another great resource is the book “Vax-Unvax: Let the Science Speak,” by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Hooker. They report on many studies where unvaccinated children have better health outcomes compared to vaccinated children.

Science is for sale

The book “Science for Sale: How the US Government Uses Powerful Corporations and Leading Universities to Support Government Policies, Silence Top Scientists, Jeopardize Our Health, and Protect Corporate Profits” by David L. Lewis, Ph.D., tells the story of how corporate profits can frequently trump true science.

This happens in many industries, not just in vaccines. It is not unusual for government agencies to take the side of the corporations. The author was fired from the EPA for revealing details of how this happens.

The health of the public is subverted by powerful corporations in these situations. Does that sound familiar? Lewis doesn’t cover vaccines in his book except in Chapter 7 where he describes how Dr. Andrew Wakefield was unjustly crushed for questioning the safety of the measles-mumps-rubella or MMR vaccine.

Are vaccines the main cause of autism?

If the answer is yes, that would be very bad for vaccine companies. The “Turtles” authors point out on page 209 how our health authorities are trying hard not to find the correct answer to this question:

“Over the past 15 years, dozens of epidemiological studies have been conducted examining the association between vaccines and autism, but not a single one compared the rate of autism in fully vaccinated and fully unvaccinated children.”

If they actually wanted to answer this question, they would do vax/unvax studies. Such studies are easy to do but our health authorities refuse to do them.

Why do health authorities favor epidemiological studies?

The “Turtles” authors provide the answer on page 198:

“Epidemiological studies are the tool of choice for health authorities and pharma companies to maintain a facade of vaccine safety science. They are cheap, relatively simple to conduct, and, above all, their results are easily manipulated.”

It is entirely possible to get an epidemiological study to conclude whatever its authors want it to conclude. These types of studies are not the gold standard.

What caused the drastic decline in infectious disease mortality?

We are supposed to believe that vaccines have been our saviors. Not true. The huge decline in infectious disease mortality was largely due to sanitation, hygiene and improved nutrition (the availability of fresh fruits and vegetables year-round).

The “Turtles” authors make this clear on page 293. They reference a report by the American Institute of Medicine, which states:

“The number of infections prevented by immunization is actually quite small compared with the total number of infections prevented by other hygienic interventions such as clean water, food, and living conditions.”

The claim that vaccines alone saved us is false and our health authorities know it is false.

Below is a simple graph that causes cognitive dissonance in those who believe that vaccines saved us from high rates of infectious disease mortality.

We can clearly see that deaths from measles were reduced to near zero by the interventions mentioned above BEFORE the measles vaccine was introduced.

Similar graphs for other infectious diseases are shown in the book “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History” by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk. The mortality rate for all infectious diseases was dropping rapidly before vaccines were introduced.

Do you smell a rat?

Yes. And it has been dead for quite a while. We have been bamboozled (deceived, cheated, swindled and defrauded).

Vaccines are now doing far more harm than good by causing a huge increase in chronic diseases like autism, asthma, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or ADHD, Type 1 diabetes, learning disabilities, seizures and much more.

It is way past time to use honest unbiased science to sort it out. Imagine what will happen when honest science is applied to vaccine safety studies.

Here is how the ‘Turtles’ authors sum it up

On page 518:

“Science belongs to the people. It belongs to humanity, not to corrupt government agencies and pharmaceutical giants who collude to rewrite the principles of science in order to continue the decades-long cover-up of their crimes against humanity.

“The magnitude of these crimes is enormous — these entities are in way too deep to ever be able to admit any wrongdoing. They will do whatever is necessary to protect the great vaccine hoax. For them, it is a matter of life and death — literally. And so it is for us.”

The lie that vaccines are safe and effective and that serious adverse events are exceedingly rare is still believed by many people — yet trust in pharma and our coopted regulatory agencies is now rapidly eroding. For example, only a tiny percentage of people are continuing to take the COVID-19 vaccine boosters.

Also, the percentage of parents who are choosing to obtain an exemption to vaccines for their children is increasing. This can be done in almost all states.

It is becoming obvious to a growing number of people that we are being intentionally misled regarding vaccines and vaccine safety.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »