The term ‘moral injury’ is a new one for me, as it probably is for most. It’s more commonly applied in a military context and only recently in health and social care, since 2020 to be precise. Indeed, the literature gently, knowingly or unknowingly, nudges us into believing that moral injury, reframed as occupational moral injury, isn’t a new concept but an inevitable consequence of working in an ethically challenging health and social care system.
Moral injury is understood as the damage done to an individual’s conscience or moral compass when they perpetrate, witness or fail to prevent acts that transgress their own moral beliefs, values or code of ethics. The term is thought to have originated after the Vietnam war when returning veterans and their carers struggled to make sense of high levels of anguish, anger and alienation that couldn’t be explained in terms of a mental health diagnosis such a post-traumatic stress disorder. It doesn’t take much stretch of the imagination to understand why veterans were morally injured but the Moral Injury Project at Syracuse University in New York cites examples such as using deadly force in combat and inadvertently causing harm or death to civilians and colleagues, giving orders which result in the injury or death of colleagues, failing to provide medical aid to civilians or colleagues and failing to report incidents such as sexual assaults.
When lockdowns were implemented in 2020, the health and social care workforce faced insurmountable and intolerable challenges when it was deemed unsafe in many situations to have close contact with fellow human beings who were in need of assistance. In essence, a workforce who function on the need for human contact could endanger life by simply doing their job. Subsequently, care and support was withdrawn or compromised through almost non-existent face-to-face interactions or time limited, with minimal physical contact if they took place at all.
Moral injury therefore makes sense in the context of health and social care. Staff were forced to deny medical and compassionate care to the injured and dying, leave adults and children in risky situations which in some cases led to death and injury, isolate frail older people from the life-giving company of family and friends and ignore or dismiss situations that previously justified urgent attention; all done while hiding smiles and humanity behind useless and potentially dangerous masks.
Moral injury during the pandemic can surely be applied across most professions and indeed the population: the police officer investigating a peaceful family gathering, the funeral director separating distressed relatives, the religious leader closing the door of a place of worship or the teacher who forced children to wear masks for hours on end. There were also the children who isolated their parents and parents who isolated their children, neighbours and community groups who withdrew essential help and support, and friends and family who got angry or fell out with those they disagreed with. Emotions and tensions ran high, leading me to think that many of us are morally injured to some degree or another. Is it any wonder that so many are struggling with poor mental health?
The growing number of articles drawing attention to moral injury, the most significant in the BMJ in July 2020 and a reference point for further articles, all focus on reassuring staff that a conflict of morals and the potential for injury is a normal consequence of doing what was necessary to prevent illness and death from Covid-19. At no point are the logic and morality of the rules called into question, which is surprising because the Moral Injury Project makes reference to two other potential causes of moral injury that are not referred to in recent literature:
‘Following orders that were illegal, immoral, and/or against the Rules of Engagement or Geneva Convention’;
‘A change in belief about the necessity or justification for war, during or after one’s service’.
As the realisation slowly dawns on the world that the inhumane actions which staff were forced to take were in fact unnecessary and based on flawed concepts with no robust evidence base, are we facing a rising tide of the morally injured? All measures were applied in the absence of risk/benefit analysis, despite common knowledge that blanket approaches to managing risk are likely to cause more damage than the presenting problem. Yet the whole population was terrified into believing we were all at equal risk of severe illness or death from a lethal virus, to which we had no natural immunity and was quietly spread from those with no symptoms, especially children. Lockdowns, school closures, testing, mask wearing, social distancing, mass vaccination programmes and subsequent passports were said to be necessary but in reality were unjustified and immoral. Dismissing the question of the necessity and morality of these measures and normalising moral injury as a natural consequence of a warlike situation places accountability solely on those who enforced the polices and vindicates those who created them.
A morally injured workforce is evidence that the response to Covid-19 was morally wrong. None of us know how we would have behaved in the shoes of the workers who enforced immoral policies that contravened their conscience and moral compass. However, we can be sure of one thing: many of the injured will need support to come to terms with the realisation they have inadvertently played a part in injuring some of the very people they intended to protect.
The sub district court has ruled that the University of Groningen (RUG) may dismiss lecturer Tjeerd Andringa. An external investigation had been launched into the lecturer, alleging that he had used too many “one-sided alternative sources”.
Andringa was suspended early last year for allegedly spreading “conspiracy theories” at the university. The investigators argued that there was “an insufficient” safe learning environment in Andringa’s class.
The investigation committee “concluded that conspiracy theories played an inappropriate role in teaching”. The university subsequently decided to dismiss Andringa. He took the matter to court, but lost.
The kakistocracy
Andringa told students that “alternative media cover a lot more topics”. He also commented on their quality: “If you know how to find them, you will see that they are also of a much better quality.”
What are these so-called “conspiracy theories”? For example, he argued that intelligence agencies most likely organise sex parties with children to recruit new members for the kakistocracy, a form of government by the worst, least fit or unscrupulous citizens.
This, he said, is evidenced in part by the fact that intelligence agencies have close ties with terror groups and paedophile networks. “If you are looking for the most unscrupulous people, sex parties with children are an excellent selection mechanism.”
Attacks on their own populations
He also said he did not believe the official narrative about the September 11, 2001 attacks. “Just take Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, and yet collapsed. Twenty minutes before Building 7 collapsed, a BBC correspondent was already confirming it on TV, with the then still proudly erect building clearly visible in the background.”
He said in an interview with Novini that governments do often attack their own people in order to make their citizens fearful and docile. “What is certain is that secret organisations have carried out attacks on their own population. Operation Gladio is a clear example.”
Basing wars on lies, like the one against Iraq, he said, was typical of a kakistocracy.
Most citizens aren’t interested in such knowledge, however. “That’s because through the mainstream media they don’t come into contact with these kinds of ideas very much, if at all. People don’t want to know either. People who cannot criticise the system they are part of, cannot bear the thought of contributing to a kakistocracy.”
Speaking to radio Kossuth, Peter Szijjarto commented on recent remarks by the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, who pushed for fighter jets and long-range weapons to be sent to Kiev. According to the minister, EU lawmakers’ decisions on Ukraine “have generally caused damage to Europe,” and further weapons deliveries will only worsen the hostilities.
He went on to blast the EU legislature, claiming that its “credibility is practically zero.” Szijjarto pointed to a recent graft scandal as proof that the EU parliament is “one of the most corrupt organizations in the world.”
He was referring to the recent arrest of the parliament’s former vice president, Eva Kaili, who has been charged with taking bribes from Qatar in exchange for illegally lobbying the interests of the Gulf state.
Szijjarto noted that in Western countries, war rhetoric sounds “incomparably louder than the rhetoric of peace,” while nations outside “the transatlantic bubble” tend to prefer peace to a deadly conflict.
The minister went on to question the West’s anti-Russia sanctions. He argued that they have failed to force Moscow to end the conflict, while Europe’s economy has “faced incredible difficulties,” and that “the tenth sanctions package will only be suitable for causing further damage to us Europeans, similar to the previous nine ones.”
Since the start of large-scale hostilities in Ukraine almost a year ago, Hungary, which is heavily dependent on Russian energy, has been critical of Western sanctions against Moscow. It has also refused to support Kiev with weapons, or allow arms transfers across its border with Ukraine.
The chairman of the AfD parliamentary group, Tino Chrupalla, has called for investigative committees to be set up in connection with the attack on the Nord Stream gas pipelines. Both the Bundestag and the EU Parliament must investigate whether the US and Norway had actively participated in blowing up the pipelines, he said.
Chrupalla called for an investigation into the claims: “The suspicions of the Pulitzer Prize winner must be investigated.” All the serious questions must now be “answered by committees of inquiry”. The Bundestag has “a right to know what knowledge the federal government had”.
The AfD boss underscored that such an inquiry should establish whether government officials were involved in the planning. “Were government officials privy to the planning of the attack?”
Biden, but also Scholz, Greens exposed
According to Hersh, after some “wobbling” Olaf Scholz decided to be on the American team. He was referring to a meeting between the German Chancellor and US President Joe Biden on February 7 last year. At the joint press conference, the American head of state said about the then imminent war in Ukraine: “If Russia invades, there will be no more Nord Stream 2. We will put an end to this.”
LNG deliveries from the US have increased by 143 percent from the previous year which has been a catastrophe for the climate, critics argue. “The biggest hypocrisy in decoupling Europe from Russian oil and gas supplies concerns environmental policy. The production and transport of LNG from the USA results in a CO2 footprint that is twice as large as that of conventional Russian gas,” according to Le Monde Diplomatique.
The sabotage act to enforce the “rules-based international order”, furthermore triggered a massive release of methane causing major damage to the environment, to marine life, including to dolphins, whales and plants. This fact has been of no interest to various EU Green party supporters nor to Greta Thunberg.
The AfD parliamentary group leader pointed out that the US had attacked an ally: “Has the leading power of NATO carried out an attack on our country’s vital critical infrastructure in European waters?” If so, one would have to question whether the alliance guarantees security in Europe or rather endangers it. The withdrawal of all US troops should be the consequence.”
According to Chrupalla, all the findings of national authorities should be laid out before the European Parliament: “The European states must not put up with such violent interference. They are even less allowed to participate in it.”
Norway profits from German loss
Until Wednesday, the investigative journalist had always been known as “a legend” in leading German media screeds – as a famous sleuth successfully uncovering numerous American state crimes. Since his [Nord Stream] revelations, he has become “controversial” however.
The treatment of the Hersh revelations in German mainstream media – either totally ignoring them or blaming the Kremlin – will most probably give the already low credibility of the “leading outlets” their final deathblow.
Moreover, it appears that Germany’s most trusted “ally” had no difficulty in persuading Norway as a member of the European “community of values” to take part in a criminal endeavour in order to sell its energy exports to Germany much more profitably.
But in order to do so, Norway became actively involved in an act of terrorism, breach of international law, as well as a breach of the United Nations Charter.
When US Special Forces covert actions in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Honduras included mining the coast of Nicaragua to stop locals from fishing and other marine activities, the case was successfully brought to the International Court of Justice in June 1986. This means that the International Court of Justice, which was established by the UN Charter, has jurisdiction in this case, legal scholars believe.
Following the sabotage, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden launched separate inquiries into the attack, further highlighting the disunity of EU members. Sweden was reportedly the first to leave the planned joint investigation team; Denmark followed suit. To date, no European country has made its findings public.
Hersh’s revelations are especially a challenge for conservatives and right-wing Atlanticists. Because if Hersh’s comprehensive account of the events, which is based on high-ranking sources in Washington, is correct, then “there can be no other consequence than the demand for the withdrawal of all American troops and military bases from Germany,” according to Wolfgang Hübner, a long-standing city councilor and parliamentary group leader of the Bürger für Frankfurt (BFF).
Legal hurdles for team Biden
The executive branch under Biden may have unilaterally decided to wage war on Germany, but there are many legal problems associated with their project, such as the failure to inform Congress or even the powerful congressional Gang of Eight.
According to Hersch, the US Navy performed the destruction of a foreign government’s property at the direction of President Biden. Claiming that they were just following orders would not go far in court, since bypassing Congress is evidently illegal.
Specifically, the Gang of Eight includes the leaders of each of the two parties from both the US Senate and House of Representatives, and the chairs and ranking minority members of both the Senate Committee and House Committee for intelligence as set forth by 50 U.S.C. § 3093(c)(2).
It is also telling that US military service chiefs did not raise the alarm when the Biden team decided to blow up Nord Stream.
Well before Hersch’s report, Norwegian investigative reporter, Alf R Jacobsen, had written a detailed analysis of the Nord Stream sabotage. In October 2022, Jacobsen challenged the idea of Russia’s involvement in the blasts. According to him, Hersh’s piece is credible.
US officials are basically admitting that they were behind the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, which was perpetrated to prevent rapprochement between Moscow and Berlin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said.
“The US decided that we [Russia] have been cooperating too well with Germany over the past 20 or 30 years; or rather, the Germans cooperated with us too well,” he said in an interview published on the Foreign Ministry’s website on Sunday.
The “powerful alliance” based on Russian energy resources and German technology “began to threaten the monopoly position of many American corporations,” Lavrov explained.
So, Washington decided to destroy this alliance between Moscow and Berlin, and did it “literally” by attacking the pipelines, which were built to deliver Russian gas to Europe through Germany, he added.
“American officials are basically admitting that the explosions that occurred at Nord Stream 1 and 2 were their doing. They even speak about it with joy,” the foreign minister stated.
Lavrov was likely referring to a confession made by US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland during a Senate hearing in late January. “I am, and I think the administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now… a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea,” she said at that time.
“The vileness of Western politicians is well known,” Lavrov continued, suggesting that “the plan, which is now being implemented through ‘inciting’ Ukraine against Russia and waging a war by the entire West against Russia by means of Ukraine, is to a large extent aimed at preventing a new rapprochement between Germany and Russia.”
The comments by Russia’s top diplomat come just days after iconic American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh released a bombshell report, blaming Washington for sabotaging the Nord Stream pipelines last year.
According to an informed source who talked to Hersh, explosives were planted at the pipelines in the Baltic Sea back in June 2022 by US Navy divers under the guise of a NATO exercise. They were detonated in late September, rendering the key European energy infrastructure inoperable.
US National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson denied the report by the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, calling it “utterly false and complete fiction.” No one among high-ranking American officials has even commented on the accusations made by Hersh.
For months, the Russian authorities have been pointing to the fact that the only side to benefit from the destruction of Nord Stream was the US, which has seen supplies of its more expensive liquefied natural gas to Europe increase massively since the explosions.
Up to one fifth of all warming reported across the planet by around 20,000 weather stations is invalid due to corruption from non-climatic data. This finding is the latest revelation from two atmospheric scientists seeking to measure the effect of human-caused urban heat on global surface temperature measurements. The news is sensational because it depresses further the major slowdown in warming observed since around 1998. With the global temperature warming by little more than 0.1°C over the last two decades, it makes claims of 4°C warming by the end of the century seem even more implausible.
The latest finding arises from the ongoing work of Dr. Roy Spencer and Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville. The two scientists looked at the 19,885 temperature stations in the Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) distributed around the world from latitudes 20N to 82.5N. They found that over the last 40 years, virtually all of them had experienced growth associated with human settlement. The global work is said to be at an early stage, but “very preliminary calculations” are said to suggest that urban heat averaged across all stations is about 10-20% of GHCN trends.
Major global temperature compilers such as the U.S.-based National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) claim to remove urban heat effects by homogenisation techniques, but the scientists say this is unlikely. Abrupt changes in station data can be removed, but they cannot correct “for any sources of slowly increasing spurious warming”. In their latest work, the scientists undertake a critical investigation of NOAA’s homogenisation procedure and astonishingly conclude it is on average “spuriously warming station temperature data trends when it should be cooling them”. The detailed reasons are given in the latest note published by Spencer, where he asks why NOAA adjustments are going in the wrong way? “To say the least, I find these results …. Curious,” he says.
The GHCN forms the core of all the major global surface temperature datasets including the Met Office’s HadCRUT. In the recent past, all these datasets have been subject to considerable upwards retrospective adjustments, and these have largely removed the pauses and slowdown seen over the last two decades. This has enabled further ‘record’ high temperatures to be declared, and the continued Net Zero-helpful promotion of improbable multi-centigrade warming in the near future. Last month, NOAA claimed that the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2010.
In a recently published paper, Nicola Scafetta, a climate research scientist at the University of Naples, noted that the Met Office HadCRUT database had recorded warming of 0.03°C per decade during the hiatus years of 2000-2014. In 2013, Scafetta noted that HadCRUT version 4 increased the warming to 0.08°C per decade. HadCRUT5 further adjusted the 2000-14 figure to supply warming of 0.14°C per decade. A period of pause – a pause that the Met Office actually wrote about – was converted to strong warming. Needless to say, accurate satellite temperature data shows the first pause, along with a current one that is over eight years long.
In their ground-breaking work, Spencer and Christy use a satellite dataset of urbanisation called ‘Built Up’ to determine the average effect that urbanisation has had on surface temperatures. Urbanisation differences were compared to temperature changes from closely-spaced weather stations. Earlier findings suggested that in the last 50 years, there was a remarkable 50% less warming across the eastern United States. Again the work is preliminary and the scientists suggest it is likely to be at the upper limit of de-urbanisation adjustments. Nevertheless, there were many surprises, not least in data from airports. These places contribute many readings to global datasets, but massive distortions were found. One of the worst examples was Orlando International Airport where the warming was measured at 0.3°C per decade. This fell to a de-urbanised figure of just 0.07°C.
In fact, NOAA does make a serious attempt to track U.S. temperatures away from any urban or human corruptions. A rarely-publicised database is compiled from 114 nationwide stations designed to provide continuous recordings well away from any urban heat distortions. The measurements started in 2005, and to date show little if any warming. It is called the US Climate Refence Network, and the latest graph is posted below.
Intriguingly, the scientists are finding that the strongest urban heating occurs at near-rural sites. Others have noted that the urban heat effect is strongly non-linear with, for example, a 2% increase in urbanisation at rural sites producing much more warming than a similar rise at an urban site. “This means that a climate monitoring dataset using mostly rural stations is not immune from spurious warming from creeping urbanisation, unless there has been absolutely zero growth,” they commented.
There is increasing evidence that surface databases that supply a global temperature are too inaccurate to rely on. Yet they provide bedrock data for collectivists to argue that the climate is collapsing and only a strict political re-ordering of society along Net Zero lines will save the planet from Armageddon. Satellite readings are widely used in climate science but their temperature findings are largely ignored in favour of adjusted and corrupted surface measurements. As regular readers will recall, Dr Spencer is a former NASA scientist and has plotted temperature data from satellites for over 40 years. Last year his blog page providing current monthly readings was ‘demonitised’ by Google Adsense on the grounds of “unreliable and harmful claims”.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
It’s time to courageously stand up to the self-serving politicians, corporate media, and Big Tech who are weaponizing our tax-payer funded institutions against us, undermining our freedom and democracy. Our love for America can give us the strength to win this battle.
Former Democratic US Representative Tulsi Gabbard has said Hillary Clinton is a “dangerous character” who is “envious” of President Joe Biden because she believes Biden is “channeling her warmongering ways.”
Gabbard made the remarks following the ex-secretary of state’s recent visit to India where she visited salt pan workers in Gujarat where and announced a $50-million initiative aimed at empowering women and communities to fight against climate change.
Gabbard told Fox News that the trip served little purpose and said that Clinton’s visit to drum up support for alternative clean energy shows that she still covets diplomatic authority and is “envious” of Biden’s presidency.
“Her desire to be commander-in-chief that she’s had for a very long time has nothing to do with ensuring the safety and security of the American people,” Gabbard said. “It has everything to do with the fact that if there’s a war to be fought, she wants to be the one with her finger on that proverbial trigger.”
She added that she believes Biden to be “channeling her warmongering ways.”
Clinton has previously called Gabbard a “Russian asset,” which incited the former Hawaii Democrat to launch a defamation lawsuit.
Gabbard also stated that Clinton’s visit to India did nothing to address India’s more pressing issues and that its only purpose was to increase her own public profile.
“This is what makes her such a dangerous character,” Gabbard said. “She feels that she’s not accountable to anyone because she’s not suffering those consequences.”
The 42-year-old Gabbard served as a congresswoman in the US House of Representatives between 2013 and 2021, and as vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) between 2013 and 2016. She quit DNC’s vice chairwomanship to protest the Democratic Party’s presidential primary process, blaming then-DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schulz for rigging the vote in favor of former Obama secretary of state Hillary Clinton against Vermont’s progressive Senator Bernie Sanders.
She quit the Democratic Party in October last year, blasting its leadership for being an “elitist cabal of warmongers driven by cowardly wokeness.”
Gabbard said that today’s Democratic Party is “under the complete control of an elitist cabal of warmongers.”
“I can no longer remain in today’s Democratic Party,” she tweeted.
Gabbard also served two tours of war in the Middle East, including a tour in Iraq as a member of the Hawaii National Guard, and ran for president in 2020, where her evisceration of former California Attorney General – and current US Vice President — Kamala Harris by pointing to the latter’s record of incarcerating African Americans on petty drug offenses forced Harris to drop out of the presidential race before any primaries or caucuses were held.
She has long been among the top critics of US military interventions across the globe. She traveled to Syria in 2017 and censured Washington’s attempts at regime change there, and also slammed US military aid for Ukraine, pointing to the risk of the conflict escalating into a Third World War with Russia.
Gabbard has called Clinton the “embodiment of corruption” and “the queen of warmongers.”
Gabbard, an Iraq war veteran, has repeatedly spoken against neoconservative war hawks with a history of supporting regime change wars. On the contrary, Clinton has supported America’s imperialist wars.
American writer Stephen Lendman once said Clinton is “a war goddess” who has supported all of the United States’s “imperial wars from Afghanistan, to Iraq, to Libya, to Syria.”
Amidst the backslapping about how wonderful solar power is, the BBC present this graph:
WOW!! Most people reading this would believe that electricity from fossil fuels is declining rapidly, while solar and wind power now claim a share well over 20%.
Most of those same readers would be unaware what the BBC mean by “capacity”, or that “capacity” and “generation” are two totally separate and different things.
And when we look at generation, we can see how badly misled those readers have been:
BP Energy Review
Far from being major players, wind and solar together only supply 10% of the world’s electricity. And since 2010, the increase in fossil fuel generation has exceeded that of wind and solar.
A rather different picture to the one the BBC would like you believe, I think you might agree!
In a Digital Committee hearing of German’s federal parliament (the Bundestag) Twitter was accused of failing to provide answers about the implementation of German’s Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) and efforts to comply with the upcoming censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA).
Twitter’s head of Europe Global Government Affairs Ronan Costello said that even before Elon Musk took over Twitter in October 2022, AI identified 65% of all content flagged for removal.
However, he could not say, among other things, the number of Twitter employees still remaining in Germany and the number of accounts unblocked since Musk took over. Costello said the answers would be provided later, reports stated.
The members of parliament were skeptical about Twitter complying with the requirements of NetzDG, especially because of Musk’s decision to lay off about half of Twitter’s staff. However, Costello insisted that Twitter was committed to complying with the law. He insisted the platform was more transparent, noting that the latest transparency report contained more data required by the NetzDG than in the same period the previous year.
Costello also said that the “Community Notes” tool, which allows other Twitter users to fact-check misleading content by providing more context, will soon launch in Europe. In the US, the tool has over 20,000 users.
The CDC’s information page on Covid-19 vaccines contains the following bullet points on “How mRNA COVID-19 vaccines work:”
First, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle or upper thigh, depending on the age of who is getting vaccinated.
After vaccination, the mRNA will enter the muscle cells. Once inside, they use the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein…. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it, leaving the body as waste.
Or, in other words, as we have long been told, “it” – the mRNA – “stays in the arm.” And then, after having instructed the muscle cells to produce the spike, is disposed of.
But look at the below picture from a recent presentation on mRNA vaccination at the European Parliament. The picture was posted on Twitter by Virginie Joron, a French member of the parliament. The speaker is no less an authority than Özlem Türeci, the Chief Medical Officer of BioNTech: the German biotech company that developed what has come to be known to most of the world as the “Pfizer” Covid-19 vaccine.
Have a closer look at Türeci’s slide, which tells a very different story than that which the CDC has been telling Americans for the last two years.
Far from “staying in the arm” and entering the muscle cells at the injection site, the injection site is only the point of departure for a journey that is supposed to take the mRNA rather to the lymph nodes. The subtitle of the slide is “Bringing mRNA to the right cells at the right places.” The deltoid is not the right place; the lymph nodes are.
Once in the lymph nodes, a specific sort of cell, the dendritic cells, is supposed to manufacture the spike protein: here colorfully described as the “wanted poster” that will help the immune system to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus in case of subsequent exposure.
A passage from The Vaccine, the book that Türeci and her husband, BioNTech CEO Ugur Sahin, wrote which journalist Joe Miller, explains why BioNTech’s platform specifically targets the lymph nodes:
What Ugur learnt was that the location to which a vaccine delivers its ‘wanted poster’ really mattered. The reason for this, the couple’s team in Mainz later realised, was that not all dendritic cells … were created equal. The ones that resided in lymph nodes – of which the spleen is the largest – were particularly adept at capturing mRNA and making sure the instructions it carried were acted upon. These kidney-bean shaped organs, found under our armpits, in our groins, and at several other outposts in the body, are the information hubs of the immune system. (p. 98)
Indeed, Sahin and Türeci were so determined to get their mRNA into the lymph nodes that they had an earlier mRNA construct injected directly into the patient’s lymph nodesin the groin (p. 104).
Needless to say, such an approach was not likely to obtain wide acceptance as a vaccine! This is why the couple, as explained in their book, needed to package the mRNA in lipid nanoparticles, in order to ensure that mRNA administered by way of an intramuscular injection would, nonetheless, be widely distributed around the body and thus reach the lymph nodes.
This is to say that the wide biodistribution of the mRNA that came to light after rollout was never a bug. It is a feature of BioNTech’s mRNA technology. Having elicited an immune response by way of injection into the groin, Sahin is even said to have wondered, “How substantial could the immune response be if a vaccine got into all lymphatic tissues around the body, and recruited all the resident DCs [dendritic cells] into action?” (p. 105)
So, why has the CDC been lying about this for the last two years and insisting that the mRNA “stays in the arm?” Well, the obvious answer is that the idea of the mRNA staying at the injection site is reassuring, since otherwise we could fear systemic adverse effects of precisely the sort that have emerged since rollout.
It is worth noting, moreover, that in developing its vaccine, as discussed in my earlier article here, BioNTech simply skipped the so-called safety pharmacology studies whose purpose is precisely to test a candidate vaccine for potential systemic adverse effects – and regulators, including the FDA, let the company do it.
Robert Kogon is a pen name for a widely-published financial journalist, a translator, and researcher working in Europe.Follow him at Twitter here. He writes at edv1694.substack.com.
The US Biden administration has reportedly presented a plan to cool tensions between Palestinians and Israelis, which have dramatically escalated since the formation of Israel’s new right-wing government.
As reported by Axios, following up on a request made by US secretary of State Antony Blinken, during his visit to the Middle East late last month, his Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Barbara Leaf, stayed behind and worked on presenting a roadmap towards preventing a violent escalation in the region. Antony Blinken had urged both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to “pause” provocative steps in order to avoid further hostilities.
The requests made by the Biden administration were originally geared towards the Palestinian Authority (PA) taking significant steps, whilst minimal requirements were put on the Netanyahu government. Antony Blinken urged Mahmoud Abbas to implement a “security plan” presented by US security coordinator Lt. Gen. Michael Fenzel, who proposed creating a special PA Security Force wing that would be trained by the US to fight Palestinian militias that have formed over the past two years in the Jenin and Nablus areas. Later on, the US also requested that Israel reduce the number of raids on Palestinian towns and refugee camps, in addition to halting their plans for significant settlement expansion; both of which Israel refuses to follow through on.
Rogue militias
In September of 2021, the Jenin Brigades armed group announced its formation out of the Jenin refugee camp, later growing and expanding its areas of operations to the wider Jenin area. The armed group does not have any traceable command-and-control structure. It consists primarily of men between the ages of 18 and 25, mostly formed of members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) movement and Fatah Party members who are no longer loyal to the ruling clique in the party that commands the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority. Later, in September of 2022, the Lions’ Den armed movement also announced its formation in the old city of Nablus, claiming to belong to no political party. Due to the rise of newly formed armed groups, which hasn’t happened in the West Bank since the early 2000s, the Palestinian Authority’s security forces have lost control of much of the northern West Bank.
The US proposal for the Palestinian Authority to form a special force to fight against the armed militias is an extremely dangerous intervention in the affairs of the region. It is reminiscent of the UK-backed “peace bands” formed under the British Mandate in the late 1930s, when the British took the initiative to use Palestinians to fight each other. However, unlike then, there is no support for anti-militia activities from the Palestinian public today. In fact, the overwhelming majority support the Jenin Brigades, Lions’ Den and other armed groups, according to all available polling data. The PA has been significantly weakened over the past three years due to a financial crisis, corruption, the lack of any diplomatic breakthroughs, the postponement of national elections, and the killing and detention of Palestinians for the sake of Israeli security.
Third Intifada coming?
The Palestinian Authority has even been engaged in limited armed exchanges with the newly formed militias in the West Bank over the past year, triggering mass protests from angry West Bank residents. The number one issue that Palestinians in the West Bank have with the PA is its ‘security coordination’ with Israel, which essentially means that the PA’s security forces work with the Israeli military, intelligence and border police, in order to combat Palestinian threats against Israelis, but not the other way around. When Israel raided the Jenin refugee camp last month, killing 10 Palestinians, including three civilians, one of whom was an elderly woman, the PA announced the suspension of security coordination in response.
The US assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs met last week with Israel’s National Security Advisor Tzachi Hanegbi, and President Abbas’ senior advisor, Hussein al-Sheikh, to propose that the Palestinian Authority return to security coordination with Israel, in exchange for Israel slowing down settlement expansion. The US also sought for the PA to pause its attempts to take Israel before the International Court of Justice and the UN for alleged war crimes – a move for which the PA has been punished with Israeli sanctions.
Last Thursday, CIA director Bill Burns expressed his concern over the possibility of a ‘third intifada’ [Palestinian uprising] erupting inside the West Bank, stating that “a lot of what we’re seeing today has a very unhappy resemblance to some of those realities that we saw then [during the Second Intifada] too”. His concern is congruent with the reality on the ground, where last year was the deadliest for West Bank Palestinians since the end of the Second Intifada in 2005, according to the United Nations. Palestinian attacks against Israeli settlers and soldiers are also a daily occurrence now.
Two-state solution blocked
Despite the US government clearly identifying the nature of the escalation, it shows complete ignorance of its own role in creating the current hostilities. The bulk of the US secretary of state’s visit to Palestine-Israel was tailored to forwarding Arab-Israeli normalization efforts and to expanding the ‘Negev Forum’, which Morocco, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt form with Israel, in order to advance their own ties. At the same time, Antony Blinken spoke of reaching a “two-state solution” between Palestinians and Israelis as being the only path to any lasting peace.
Under the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002 (also known as the Saudi Initiative), a “two-state solution” (meaning the recognition by Israel of a Palestinian state and the end of occupation of Palestinian territories) is a precondition for the normalization of ties between Israel and Arab states. By pushing for normalization without that precondition, Blinken effectively seeks to deprive the Palestinian Authority of its best bargaining chip and leaves it powerless to extract any concessions from the Israeli government, whose officials will not even consider sitting down for meetings with their Palestinian counterparts.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already stated that he is not willing to halt settlement expansion, as proposed by the US government, with Israel’s Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, openly announcing that there will be no freeze on settlement construction, which is considered illegal by the UN and most world powers. Israel has also announced its intention to increase raids and further military activities in the West Bank, in what it deems to be a preparation for likely hostilities during the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan.
Hope for Palestinians is the only way to peace
Despite the PA having announced the end of its security coordination with Israel, it is clear that some coordination is still occurring and that the announcement was more of a public relations move for President Abbas, who is feeling the pressure from a disgruntled Palestinian population. This in itself is a key indicator that the PA is feeling the pressure from Palestinian society at large and a sign that any US-trained PA force to combat the militia groups could lead to a disaster, whereby the Ramallah-based authority could even be overthrown due to the outrage such a step would cause. When the CIA worked to create the “new PA security force” during the latter years of the Second Intifada, it only worked after the PA itself had participated in the fight against the Israeli military and still maintained some degree of popular support. In addition to this, the Israeli army had conducted ‘Operation Defensive Shield,’ which led to the assassinations or arrests of the most prominent militia leaders inside the West Bank.
The only way the PA could possibly regain control of Jenin and Nablus is by proving to the Palestinian people that it is on their side, and not fighting for the US and Israel. It is also the reality that many of the leading fighters in the militia groups, especially in Jenin, are actually members of the PA’s security forces that have gone rogue. Armed militias also seem to be forming in areas like Bethlehem, al-Khalil and even Jericho, which proves that the re-emergence of the armed struggle in the West Bank is not only limited to the north of the territory.
The only way to properly combat the escalation and to stop this from growing into a much larger confrontation, is to provide hope for the Palestinian people inside the West Bank, something that the US will not even consider. Instead of the US working as an objective mediator, it works solely for Israel’s immediate interests and accepts the political restraints of each Israeli government as an excuse for repeatedly violating its own red lines. The US considers every single Palestinian political party as a terrorist organization, other than the mainstream branch of the Fatah Party, meaning that they will not even talk to any Palestinian representatives other than those that adhere to their own demands. The obsessive pursuit of Saudi Arabia normalizing ties with Israel, seemingly for political gain on behalf of the Biden administration, also contributes to robbing Palestinians of any hope for peace.
The situation inside the West Bank cannot be resolved using bombs and bullets. Even if every single member of all the armed groups were to be killed, the same problem would again emerge for Israel in the future. Despite this, Washington will never look critically at what is going on and realize that there are two sides to this conflict. At this time the US government is dealing with the escalation as if Israel has a termite problem and not that there are people who are rising up in an ongoing struggle for statehood.
Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News.
Western sanctions were supposed to “ruin” Russia not only economically, but also technologically – according to the well-known announcement by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.
The ban on supplying electronics was intended to paralyze the Russian armaments industry. But Western war planners appear to have gotten even the most basic facts wrong. As is now apparent, an “isolated” Russia has managed to circumvent US-imposed sanctions in the technology sector. What’s more, Russia is importing even more microchips and semiconductors than before the war.
Among other things, the US and the EU banned the supply of microchips and semiconductors to Russia, depriving them of “70 percent” of their imports. The most important companies in the sector, such as Intel, AMD, the Taiwanese chip giant TSMC and Nexperia from the Netherlands, stopped doing business in Russia almost overnight.
At the end of March, US President Biden confidently announced that Russia would no longer be “able to rebuild those devastating weapon systems” and was on its way back “to the 19th century” as a result of the Russian operation in Ukraine, while US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo stated: “We have reports from Ukrainians that when they find Russian military equipment on the ground, it’s filled with semiconductors that they took out of dishwashers and refrigerators”.
Raimondo spoke at a Senate hearing in May last year, noting that she had recently met with Ukraine’s prime minister. “Our approach was to deny Russia technology — technology that would cripple their ability to continue a military operation. And that is exactly what we are doing.”
And in September, the President of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, defiantly announced that Russia’s industry was in ruins. “The Russian military is taking chips from dishwashers and refrigerators to repair their military equipment because they are running out of semiconductors. Russian industry is in tatters,” she claimed in a speech in the European Parliament.
Total Western failure to predict outcomes
But the Russian armed forces never had to do that during the war, as is now evident. Referring to an official report, the weekly German newspaper Zeit reported that Western sanctions in no way reduced Russian imports of electronic components – on the contrary: Russia imported even more processors and semiconductors in 2022 than before the war. Overall, imports in this segment have increased from 1.8 billion euros to 2.45 billion euros.
Beyond that, Russian imports fell by just 16 percent on a yearly basis. This was also confirmed by US economist and sanctions advocate Matthew Klein. According to his calculations, Russian imports in November were only 15 percent below the monthly average for 2021. At the beginning of 2022, shortly after the Russian operation started, Western “experts” had expected a slump of at least 30 to 40 percent.
The fact that Russia was able to circumvent the sanctions is due to countries like China, Turkey or the United Arab Emirates, which quickly filled the gaps left by Western corporations. They also act as a location for Russian intermediaries who obtain Western technology from letterbox companies.
At the same time, Russians have been manufacturing their own goods to fill the gaps that have arisen as a result of sanctions and the withdrawal of western corporations.
IMF expects Russia’s economy to grow
Until recently the West doubted that Russia’s economy would survive under sanctions, but the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is now sounding more optimistic than even the Russian government. Known for its gloomy forecasts, The IMF has predicted that Russia’s GDP will expand this year.
By far the most important trading partner for Russia is China. Overall, imports from China rose by 13 percent in 2022. Many Western companies such as Apple or Ikea had supplied the Russian market before they withdrew. This decision to leave could be compensated for.
China’s companies now deliver the majority of new cars and smartphones, computers, but also heavy equipment such as construction machinery and trucks. In fact, exports of trucks from China more than tripled in 2022 while imports of construction equipment have doubled.
Most importantly from a Russian point of view, however, are the imports of microchips. Together with Hong Kong, China shipped $900 million worth of semiconductors to its neighbour in 2022, more than double than the figure for 2021.
The volcanic mineral medicine will not patent — for the toxic burden medicine will not name
Lies are Unbekoming – October 30, 2026
Zeolite is old. It is in Roman concrete that has held for two thousand years. It’s in the water filters of ancient cisterns. It’s in the stomachs of Pacific livestock whose keepers knew, somehow, that this grey crumbling rock made the animals healthier. It’s in Soviet clinical protocols from the 1960s. It’s in the standard emergency response to the Chernobyl explosion.
In 1986, after the Chernobyl reactor failure, the Soviet Union manufactured and distributed natural zeolite at industrial scale — for soil remediation, for livestock feed, for human consumption, for the cleanup itself. Karl Hecht, who had been director of the Institute for Experimental and Clinical Pathophysiology at the Charité of Humboldt University Berlin, spent the six decades after that building the clinical research base — on silicon’s role in human health, on zeolite’s clinical safety, on its applications in ageing. In 2018, Pavelić and colleagues published a comprehensive clinical safety review of natural clinoptilolite in Frontiers in Pharmacology. In 2019, Mastinu analysed its binding affinities. In the Western medical literature, these works sit largely uncited.
What has not been treated at book length, until now, is how a volcanic mineral with six decades of Soviet clinical work behind it, two major peer-reviewed Western reviews, and ongoing clinical use across the former Eastern Bloc, remains almost entirely absent from Western medical practice — and what the toxic burden it’s meant to address actually is.
The Zeolite Book gathers the Soviet clinical record, the Western peer-reviewed studies, three contemporary practitioner voices, and three serious counterviews into one honest treatment. That’s why the book runs to seven appendices. 288 pages, four parts, three practitioner voices, three counterviews, seven appendices. The honest treatment is the argument.
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Zeolite is old. It is in Roman concrete that has held for two thousand years. It’s in the water filters of ancient cisterns. It’s in the stomachs of Pacific livestock whose keepers knew, somehow, that this grey crumbling rock made the animals healthier. It’s in Soviet clinical protocols from the 1960s. It’s in the standard emergency response to the Chernobyl explosion.
