Internal CDC Emails Claim Assistant Secretary For Health Blocked Release Of Fluoride Review
By Derrick Broze | The Last American Vagabond | January 5, 2023
Newly released emails reveal that leadership within the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institute of Health acted to prevent the release of a long-delayed review of fluoride’s toxicity by the National Toxicology Program. The emails specifically claim that Assistant Secretary for Health Rachel Levine intervened to stop the release of the NTP review, also known internally as a monograph.
An email dated June 3rd, 2022, shows Nicole Johnson, Associate Director for Policy, Partnerships and Strategic Communication in CDC’s Oral Health Division contacting Jennifer Greaser, a Senior Public Health Policy Analyst in CDC’s Washington office. Johnson states:
“The latest we heard (yesterday) is that ASH Levine has put the report on hold until further notice.”
ASH Levine refers to the U.S. Assistant Secretary of Health, Rachel Levine.
The emails were released as part of the ongoing legal dispute between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and plaintiffs Food and Water Watch, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), and others who are seeking an end to water fluoridation Throughout the historic lawsuit the plaintiffs have argued that the practice violates the EPA’s Toxic Substances Abuse Act.
Hearings for the lawsuit began in June 2020, but were delayed for more than two years after U.S. District Court Judge Edward Chen put the proceedings on hold pending the release of the NTP’s review of all of the available research on fluoride. The NTP had previously claimed the review would be available in May 2022. However, the review has not been made public and hearings have been delayed and rescheduled as the judge awaited the NTP’s conclusions.
In late October 2022, Judge Chen ended the two year stay on the lawsuit when he ruled that the NTP review could be viewed in its unpublished form to better inform his final decision. However, due to concerns from the EPA, Judge Chen ruled that the report could not be made public unless the NTP releases it.
On December 14, 2022, the plaintiff’s filed several exhibits with Judge Chen, including a redacted version of the NTP’s assessment of fluoride’s neurotoxicity and internal emails between the CDC and the NTP which were obtained via Freedom of Information Act requests.
What do the #FluorideEmails reveal?
Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs, outlined the findings of the emails in several exhibits submitted to Judge Chen. “These emails confirm that the NTP considered the May 2022 monograph to be the NTP’s final report,” Connett writes. “They also confirm that the CDC was opposed to the NTP releasing the report, and that leadership at the top levels of the Department of Health Human Services intervened to stop the report from being released.”
As Connett notes, on April 28, 2022, Dr. Mary Wolfe, the Director of NTP’s Office of Policy, Review and Outreach, emailed Casey Hannan, the Director of CDC’s Division of Oral Health, and stated that the NTP’s “analysis and conclusions are set”. Dr. Wolfe also let Hannan know that the NTP had reviewed the CDC’s submitted comments, but still planned to release the review “mid/late May” 2022.
In a May 11, 2022 email, Wolfe again notifies Hannan and the CDC that the NTP has “set May 18, 2022 for publication of the monograph. The monograph will be posted to the NTP website, and we will email a notice of the posting to NTP listserv subscribers.”
However, later that day and the following day, Dr. Karen Hacker, the Director of CDC’s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), tells Dr. Wolfe that there is concern within the CDC about publishing the NTP review without an additional review by “NIH leadership”. Hacker also asked about the potential of a “interagency review” by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Dr. Wolfe subsequently told the CDC that “we (the NTP) believe the current findings, as stated in the monograph, reflect the scope of our evaluation and the available scientific literature and no revision is needed”.
Meanwhile, while Dr. Wolfe was defending the work of the NTP, internal emails among officials at the CDC’s Division of Oral Health reveal that the CDC was already preparing to prevent the release. A May 12, 2022 email from Hannan states:
“The May 18th release date for [the monograph] is almost certainly not going to happen. OASH and NIH OD are pretty clearly going to get more involved.”
OASH is a reference to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Health, the second highest office in the Department of Health and Human Services, while NIH OD refers to the NIH’s Office of the Director, the highest office within the NIH. The current Director of the NIH is Lawrence A. Tabak.
Jay Sanders, Education & Outreach Director with the Fluoride Action Network, told The Last American Vagabond he believes the emails “reveal a concerted effort at the highest level of the U.S. public health bureaucracy to squash a key report on fluoride neurotoxicity”. Sanders also stated the emails “show the lengths these agencies are willing to go to to protect their pet project, fluoridation, from any scientific scrutiny.”
Together with the June 3rd, 2022 email, these communications point to direct intervention from the head of the NIH and the Assistant Secretary for Health at the Department of Health and Human Services.
The emails confirm what has long been suspected. Namely, that government officials at some level were preventing the release of this important review on the toxicity of fluoride. The CDC interference comes on top of an already unusual process employed by the NTP to evaluate the data on the safety of water fluoridation.
“This report, which has now been reviewed 4 times, is now going to be reviewed a 5th time by the NTP,” Fluoride Action Network attorney Michael Connett stated during the October 2022 hearing. “There will be at least 5 separate peer review processes extending over 4 years. This is, to put it mildly, exceptionally unusual.”
The next hearing in the #FluorideLawsuit takes place on January 12, 2023 at 2:30 PM US Eastern.
US regulator fast-tracks dementia drug
RT | January 6, 2023
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday fast-tracked the approval of lecanemab, a drug to treat the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Made by Japanese drugmaker Eisai and Biogen and marketed as Leqembi, the drug allegedly delays cognitive decline caused by the disease, though trials have shown some alarming side effects.
While a clinical trial of lecanemab’s efficacy in early Alzheimer’s published in November found it slowed cognitive and functional decline better than a placebo, the researchers noted that it was “associated with adverse events” and recommended “longer trials” to “determine the efficacy and safety of lecanemab in early Alzheimer’s disease” – an unusual call for caution in a study co-funded by the drug’s manufacturers.
Around 17% of those who took lecanemab experienced brain bleeding during the trials, while nearly 13% suffered brain swelling or effusions, compared to 9% and 2% in the placebo group respectively, according to the New England Journal of Medicine study. Some 7% of the trial participants stopped taking the drug due to the side effects.
Lecanemab’s high price point – $26,500 for a year’s worth of treatment – has also raised concerns. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review suggested $20,600 as the price ceiling, arguing a cost-effective rate could be as low as $8,500. The company suggested it could lower the dosing frequency to cut costs.
Biogen is no stranger to controversy over its Alzheimer’s drugs. In 2021, several FDA board members resigned over concerns that Aduhelm, which the company had developed as the first drug designed to target the plaque buildup then believed to be the underlying cause of Alzheimer’s, had not demonstrated sufficient efficacy in treating moderate-to-severe dementia. While not a single member of the advisory panel responsible for reviewing the drug supported its approval, the FDA did so anyway, side effects and $56,000 annual price tag notwithstanding.
A congressional investigation that concluded last week found the approval process “rife with irregularities,” noting the FDA had “inappropriately collaborated” with the company it was supposed to be regulating.
Last year, it emerged that parts of the research that established the current plaque-based disease model of Alzheimer’s were possibly fraudulent, suggesting that the amyloid plaques found in the patients could be a symptom, rather than the cause, of the illness.
Survey shows overwhelming majority in Arab countries oppose normalization with Israel

Press TV – January 7, 2023
A new survey has found that an overwhelming majority of people in Arab countries oppose normalization of relations with Israel, and consider the occupying regime’s policies to be a threat to security and stability of the region.
The opinion poll, conducted by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies (ACRPS), indicated that 84% of the participants disapprove any recognition of Israel by their home countries, the Jewish News website reported on Friday.
The London-based website went on to say that 36% cited “colonialist occupying power in Palestine” as the main reason for opposing recognition of Israel while 9% cited Israel’s expansionist policies and the intention to dominate more Arab territory as the reason for their opposition.
Meanwhile, 8% responded that they would support recognition of Israel by their countries, and 8% were unsure or declined to answer.
The latest findings were based on face-to-face interviews with 33,000 individuals from 14 Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Bahrain and Sudan which have already normalized ties with Israel.
In Morocco, the most Israel-friendly country included in the survey, 67% of participants opposed recognition of Israel, 20% answered in support, and 13% didn’t know or declined to answer.
Among respondents from Saudi Arabia, which prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu eyes normalization of ties with, 38% rejected recognition of Israel, but 57% decided not to respond.
The survey further revealed that 72% of participants support a democratic system while 87% believe that financial and administrative corruption is widespread in their countries while 39% say they don’t enjoy full equality.
It also found 84% consider policies by Israel and the United States to be a threat to stability and security in the region, with 53% having a “very negative” view of US policy concerning the Palestinians.
Four Arab countries – the UAE, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco – agreed to normalize relations with Israel under US-brokered agreements in 2020, when former US President Donald Trump was in office.
Spearheaded by the UAE, the move has sparked widespread condemnations from Palestinians as well as nations and human rights advocates across the world, especially within the Muslim world.
Palestinians see the accords as a stab in their back and a direct affront to their cause to liberate their lands from Israeli occupation.
Israel to destroy 58 Palestinian schools
Palestine Information Center – January 6, 2023
RAMALLAH – 58 Palestinian schools are at risk of demolition in the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem, the Arab Campaign for Education for All revealed.
In a statement issued on Thursday, the campaign expressed deep concern over the Israeli violation of Palestinian children’s right to education.
Israeli authorities issued six demolition or stop-construction orders against six schools over the past year, according to the campaign.
58 other schools, serving 6,550 students, were also notified with demolition, the campaign added.
In this regard, the Arab Campaign for Education for All called on the UN concerned agencies to bear responsibility in confronting Israeli demolition policy against Palestinian schools.
The time has come for international institutions to go beyond condemnation and to move to pressure the Israeli occupation to stop its continuous violations against Palestinian education, the statement reads.
Bolton Says Possible 2024 Presidential Bid Would Be To Stamp Out Trump Influence
By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | January 6, 2023
Ex-Trump advisor and well-known foreign policy ultra-hawk John Bolton is teasing the possibility that he’ll run for the White House in 2024.
He said in a “Good Morning Britain” interview which aired Friday that “I wouldn’t run as a vanity candidate. If I didn’t think I could run seriously then I wouldn’t get in the race.” And then he said, “I would get in to win the nomination and I would do it primarily on the basis that we need a much stronger foreign policy.”
Given this is Bolton – the man who has has never encountered a US war he didn’t wholeheartedly support (or himself was a key architect of, as in the case of Iraq)… a “much stronger foreign policy” appears simply code for more war.
Bolton touted in the interview that he thinks he can beat his old boss former President Trump in securing the Republican nomination due to Trump suffering a “terminal decline” in the numbers of people supporting him.
“I think Trump’s support within the party itself is in terminal decline,” Bolton said. “I wouldn’t run as a vanity candidate. If I didn’t think I could run seriously, then I wouldn’t get in the race.”
Last month, the former national security adviser also told NBC that if Republican candidates don’t strongly denounce Trump and distance themselves from his influence, then…
“If I don’t see that, I’m going to seriously consider getting in,” Bolton said at the time, later adding: “I think to be a presidential candidate you can’t just say, ‘I support the Constitution.’ You have to say, ‘I would oppose people who would undercut it.'”
In the wake of the British TV interview, The Washington Times reported, “The British network took his comments as confirmation Mr. Bolton would launch a bid, though his team said that is inaccurate.”
A handful of media outlets are still running headlines which sound as if Bolton confirmed that he’ll run in 2024, but there’s yet to be a definitive statement from him, other than he’s still mulling the idea.
Top Cancer Expert: Aggressive Cancers Appearing After Vaccine Boosters “Not a Coincidence”
BY DR ANGUS DALGLEISH | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 6, 2023
There follows the transcript of a new video put out by top cancer specialist Dr. Angus Dalgleish, who is very concerned that the Covid boosters appear to be causing cancers, an adverse effect which he says “does not look like a coincidence”.
I’m Angus Dalgleish. I’m a Professor of Oncology at St. George’s, a Consultant Medical Oncologist, and I have started to notice that several of my patients have melanoma who’ve been stable with stage 4 disease, they’ve had very good immunotherapy or other treatment and I’ve been reviewing them from five to 20 years. I’ve noticed that I have now over six, possibly seven, even an eighth yesterday, who’ve clearly relapsed following the booster vaccine.
At first we didn’t put the two together, but when a patient said, “I felt awful since the vaccine, I’ve just been drained”, they’ve described symptoms like a Long Covid, and the next thing we know, two, three weeks, couple of months later they’ve got clear evidence of relapse. And these relapses are quite aggressive. They’re not a gentle relapse. They’re relapses that are requiring systemic therapy as opposed to a little nodule that requires surgical incision.
But it’s not just this. I’m now very much aware in my own circle of many people, they haven’t got a melanoma – they’ve never had anything before – but they’ve got lumps and bumps and they’re not felling well. And two people I’ve interviewed at great length, they all put it down to feeling awful after their booster. They were fine with the first two vaccines, they just had shivers, flu etc. But they’ve described being very tired, very fatigued, wanting to stay in bed, and this has dragged on to the point were they’ve gone to the doctor and they’ve had blood counts and investigations and I now know seven of them, two of them have leukemias, and others have lymphomas, and one of them has a very bad melanoma, which he is absolutely sure was instigated by the booster as he developed dreadful symptoms.
So really I want to bring to everybody’s attention that I think that this does not look like a coincidence to me and we need to join forces and see if this is a real effect and if it is we must stop all the boosters immediately. Thank you.
Read Professor Dalgleish’s earlier articles in the Daily Sceptic warning of this potential adverse effect here and here.
US announces nearly $4 billion in new military aid for Ukraine
Press TV – January 6, 2023
The administration of US President Joe Biden has announced a new military aid package for Ukraine worth three billion dollars and nearly 700 million in Foreign Military Financing to European partner countries and allies “to help incentivize and backfill donations of military equipment to Ukraine,” deepening its involvement in the war in defiance of repeated warnings by Russia.
The White House said on Friday the package is expected to include Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers and self-propelled howitzers.
The United States is also planning to provide Ukraine with Bradley armored vehicles, which provide medium- and long-range firepower, with the capability of destroying other military vehicles, including tanks.
The US administration will also be sending artillery systems, armored personnel carriers, surface-to-air missiles and ammunition to Ukraine as part of the $2.85 billion drawdown from the Department of Defense.
The funds also include $225 million in Foreign Military Financing to go towards Ukraine building its “long-term capacity and support modernization,” US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement.
This will be used “to cover wartime requirements of the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” Blinken said, and may also be used to support the sustainment of equipment previously provided to Ukraine.
The new US military funding marks the 29th drawdown of American arms and equipment for Ukraine since August 2021, according to the Washington-based The Hill newspaper.
Another part of the nearly $4 billion package includes $682 million in Foreign Military Financing to European partner countries and allies “to help incentivize and backfill donations of military equipment to Ukraine.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a video address on Friday that Bradley Fighting Vehicles are exactly what his country needs.
Zelensky said the formal announcement showed his visit to Washington last month had produced concrete results.
“For the first time we will receive Bradley armored vehicles – this is exactly what is needed,” Zelensky said. He thanked Biden and the US Congress.
Germany also said it plans to send 40 Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicles and a Patriot air-defense to Ukraine as part of a new phase of Western military support for Kiev.
Zelensky also thanked Germany. “So, as of now, there are more air defense systems, more armoured vehicles, western tanks – which is a first – more cannons and shells … and all this means more protection for Ukrainians and all Europeans against any kind of Russian terror,” he said.
The Russian embassy in Berlin on Friday condemned the German government’s move to send armored vehicles and a Patriot missile system to Ukraine to fight Russian troops.
In a statement, the embassy said: “We strongly condemn this decision and see it as another step toward escalating the conflict in Ukraine. Its adoption looks especially cynical on the eve of the Orthodox Christmas holiday, which is highly revered in the Christian world, and also against the backdrop of ceasefire unilaterally announced by the Russian President in this regard.”
Since Russia launched its “special military operation” in Ukraine in late February 24, Western countries have been flooding Ukraine with weapons and ammunition at a rate unprecedented since World War II.
Russia has repeatedly warned that supplying Kiev with more and more weapons will only exacerbate the conflict, which is now in its eleventh month.
Continuously flooding Ukraine with weapons “will only drag the conflict out and make it more painful for the Ukrainian side, but it will not change our goals and the end result,” the Kremlin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said last year.
Peskov insisted that the US was in reality engaged in the Ukraine conflict. “The US de facto has become deeply involved.”
The Kremlin spokesman’s remarks echoed those of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who also believed that the US is involved in the war.
Washington has “been participating de facto in this war for a long time,” said Lavrov, adding, “This war is being controlled by the Anglo-Saxons.”
Lavrov has also warned the arms suppliers that the shipments of weapons to Ukraine would be legitimate targets for Russian forces.
Two Serbs shot in Kosovo Christmas Eve attack
RT | January 6, 2023
Ethnic Serbs blocked a major road in the south of Kosovo on Friday, in protest over a drive-by shooting of two youths on Christmas Eve. An 11-year-old boy and his 21-year-old cousin were shot not far from Strpce from a passing car, identified as belonging to an ethnic Albanian, as they walked with oak branches traditionally used to celebrate the holiday in the Orthodox Christian tradition.
“Someone wanted to give us a bloody Christmas,” tweeted Petar Petkovic, the Serbian government’s commissioner for Kosovo. He described the shooting as “an attempted murder.”
Cousins Milos and Stefan Stojanovic were taken to a hospital in nearby Gracanica. “One was shot in the hand and the other in the shoulder, and they survived only by sheer luck,” Petkovic’s office said in a follow-up statement. They blamed the attack on the “anti-Serb policy” of the ethnic Albanian authorities in Pristina, and demanded “a swift and decisive response from the international community.”
Even though the attacker’s vehicle was positively identified by local residents, the ethnic Albanian police let the suspected shooter go, according to the outlet Kosovo Online. The outraged residents of Gotovusa, a Serb village near Strpce, have blocked the road and intend to protest until the perpetrator is brought to justice.
Serbian media said on Friday evening that a 33-year old man was detained by local authorities in connection to the shooting incident.
A group of Polish soldiers from NATO’s KFOR peacekeeping mission has set up an observation post nearby, local media reported.
NATO troops took control of Kosovo in 1999, after nearly three months of bombing Serbia on behalf of ethnic Albanian insurgents. The province’s provisional government declared independence in 2008, but Belgrade has resisted US and EU pressure to recognize it, relying on support from Russia and China.
Last month, Serbs in the north of Kosovo set up roadblocks to protest the deployment of heavily armed ethnic Albanian police in their communities. The barricades were removed shortly before the New Year holiday, after the government in Belgrade claimed it received solid guarantees from Washington and Brussels that they would keep Pristina in line.
Masks – again
Despite the absence of evidence, governments want us to mask up again. Why?

By Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghan | Trust the Evidence | January 3, 2023
Those who thought they had seen the last mask mandates were badly mistaken.
It starts with the message on masking, and let’s see how the public reacts. It won’t be long before governments resort to reintroducing compulsory mask use to address the “winter crisis”. They say masks will decrease the number of respiratory infections that are the major cause of the recurring winter crisis.
Readers will recall that in early December, we challenged the evidence base cited by Lord Markham as proof that masks work. We wrote:
‘According to the UKHSA, the official scientific rationale for mask mandates in the community is based on a review last updated in the summer of 2021 of 28 studies, two of which are trials and the rest studies of abysmal quality. The review, identified through a Parliamentary Question, is in two parts: the main body and supplementary tables reporting the data. The problem is that the review is full of errors: the two parts do not match and appear to have been written separately and not even proofread.’
Most of the studies in the review are observational, making claims such as an 80 per cent reduction in cases after mask introduction – making masks use a miracle, not a human intervention. If that were the case, SARS-CoV-2 had been sent packing years ago, and with it, all the other respiratory viruses.
We also cited the co-author of Mr Hancock’s pandemic memoir, revealing that Johnson, Whitty and Hancock knew from the start that masks do not do the job, and yet they went ahead and coerced Britons to wear them.
The reality is different. Clinical trials in various settings – across vastly different ranges of circulation rates – from low influenza-like illness to pandemics have failed to show any effect. Which tallies with everyone’s personal experience of mask “protection”. So, why the sudden reintroduction?
Something odd is happening. We live in a world with more information and reactive media that fails to grasp the reality of the problem. Managing the message becomes more important than fixing the problem, particularly when you know you won’t be in your job much longer. Masks are a distraction.
The reality is a merry-go-round as new ministers, advisors, and experts pop up. They look to a simple solution to gloss over rather than fixing the long-term structural problems in the NHS.
We learnt this painful lesson with Tamiflu in the Swine flu Pandemic. Ministers reiterated, as did public health officials, that what mattered is they needed to be seen to be doing something. Whether it was evidence-based or not was immaterial. A complex problem requires a simple fix – a highly visible one: masking fits the bill perfectly.
Part of the problem is officials go unchallenged, no one asks for the evidence, and if they do, they feel intimidated – as an anonymous BBC reporter disclosed. You can virtually state anything in this modern era. By tomorrow the media will have moved on.
However, for now, let’s follow the jungle cry: do something! What? It does not matter; we have to be seen to be doing something!!!!
Review of studies: The science we’re meant to be following pervasively obfuscates the risk of mRNA jabs for young men
Of the few studies that even attempt to assess population-wide risk of myocarditis following vaccination, nearly three-fourths neglect to include proper stratifiers
eugyppius: a plague chronicle | January 6, 2023
This review, co-authored by Vinay Prasad, sets out to assess the literature on the risk of myocarditis in young men following vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. Of 758 articles considered, the vast majority (89%) didn’t attempt any systematic risk assessment at all, and only 29 looked at population-wide risk. Of this meagre number, only eight properly stratified adverse events by sex, age, dose and vaccine manufacturer. This matters enormously, because the risk of myocarditis is heavily concentrated in men under forty following their second Pfizer or Moderna vaccination.
By failing to break out these specific categories, scientists can write studies that overlook the risk of the vaccines for younger men, effectively by spreading their heightened risk across broader subgroups or even the whole population:

This chart indicates the highest myocarditis incidence found in each of the studies reviewed. The fewer the stratifiers, the lower the stated incidence. M: male, D2: dose 2.
By looking only at men, or only at which dose, or only at which vaccine, you can reduce the highest stated incidence of myocarditis enormously, putting you in an excellent position to argue that, yes, myocarditis is a rare side effect from vaccination, but the risk of myocarditis from infection is greater.1 This is a game that is played at both ends, with complementary studies that massively overestimate the rate of myocarditis from Covid by considering only documented infections. Almost everyone with a severe outcome will have an official positive test at some point, while vastly fewer people who recover without incident will bother. A similar tactic, would be inflating the risk of severe outcome by looking only at hospital patients, or inflating the case fatality rate by looking only at those receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
The problem isn’t that a memo went out from Science Headquarters instructing researchers to cover up the obvious fact that the vaccines are clearly and beyond all cavil a bad deal for males under 40. It’s rather that science is subordinate to broader political, social and cultural forces, all of which incentivise research showing that the vaccines are safe and effective, and disincentivise research showing anything else. One kind of finding will get you promotion and grant funding, the other will – in the best case – simply be ignored. Cast in this light, the sheer paucity of studies looking at population-wide risks from vaccination in the first place begins to look deeply ominous. This is an entire area nobody wants to look into, for fear of what they might find.
It will be a long time indeed before we have any clarity on exactly how risky the vaccines are, and for whom.
1 At this point, it is convenient for the vaccinators to forget that their elixirs do not actually prevent infection, in service of presenting the false alternative.
Where Have the Voices for Liberty Gone?
By Michael Lesher | Brownstone Institute | January 4, 2023
In early 2020, when American liberals wailed in unison that the First Amendment’s guarantee of the right of free assembly was a prescription for national suicide – and not one significant American civil rights organization protested – I should have known where we were headed.
Still, almost 3three years later, I am dumbfounded by how rapidly a nation that once boasted of its attachment to “liberty” has succumbed to the priorities of totalitarianism. Thought policing on social media, once a dystopian fantasy, is now taken for granted.
So is the massive electronic surveillance system that was hawked to Americans (and others around the world) as a “health” measure, but which actually gives Big Brother a convenient way to monitor people’s whereabouts and which has already been turned against political dissidents in Israel, India and elsewhere. Health care workers – once the heroes of the fear propaganda that rationalized illegal mass quarantines in 2020 – have now been forced from their jobs in alarming numbers for refusing to be injected with experimental drugs that demonstrably protect no one.
Mass media, far from raising questions about all this, are cheering on the juggernaut. CNN’s Michael Smerconish has confessed with chilling directness that the COVID drug experiment is essentially a lesson in Gleichschaltung:
“This is really about which people in this country are going to control virus-related behavior – the unvaccinated or the vaccinated…. [A]llowing the unvaccinated to control virus policy, that’s unjust and unhealthy.”
After all, as Congressman Jamie Raskin put it (in conversation with ex-poisoner-in-chief Deborah Birx), the most important thing for the State is to ensure “social cohesion” – even if it takes some official lying to coax the population into lockstep. Hitler could hardly have put it better.
I might readily fill this column with a catalog of the false statements about COVID-19 that have been peddled to the public over the last three years. But the chicanery of the muzzle-and-lockdown propagandists is not limited to scientific malfeasance.
I do not minimize the importance of demonstrating that we have been fed a steady diet of lies about COVID-19 since the beginning of 2020 (a task that has been ably shouldered by many other Brownstone contributors). But what’s at stake here is not just a debate about medical policy. What is happening involves nothing less than the fundamental reshaping of our body politic, a massive assault on the constitutional system of civil liberties and on the presuppositions undergirding that system.
Add to this the shameful silence of American liberal institutions as the tentacles of a police state wind ever more tightly around us all, and you will understand why my call to the incoming year is: when will I hear more voices raised in resistance?
Or, to put it more bluntly: what are you waiting for, America?
Where were your voices when the suspension of representative democracy made virtual dictators out of some four-fifths of America’s governors in 2020 – an arrangement which, according to Anthony Fauci, could be reimposed at any time?
Where were your voices when state after state discarded the Bill of Rights in favor of some version of the Emergency Health Powers Act – a bill that, when first proposed in 2001, was sharply criticized by the American Civil Liberties Union, along with conservative groups like the Free Congress Foundation and the American Legislative Exchange Council, as “a throwback to a time before the legal system recognized basic protections for fairness?”
Where were your voices when the President of the United States defied the Nuremberg Code by ordering 3.5 million federal employees to submit to the injection of untested drugs, while his administration did its level best to ensure that what little information was available about the safety of those drugs would be concealed from the public for as long as possible? Where were your voices when those who objected to this embrace of a repurposed Nazi war crime were purged from our government?
Where were your voices when the State shuttered your children’s schools, forced muzzles onto two-year-olds, and terrorized young people to the point that fully a quarter of them contemplated suicide? When as many as 23 million children were placed by American school systems under computerized surveillance that monitored their every keystroke and tracked their internet contacts, a 1984-ish scenario for which COVID-driven school closures served as the pretext?
If you ask me, the most important word in the preceding sentence is “pretext:” COVID-19, though in medical terms never nearly as dangerous as we were told it was, has been extremely effective as a battering ram to civil liberties. Once upon a time, government health policy was fashioned to achieve medical goals. Today, factitious medical “goals” are deployed on behalf of a policy aimed at dismantling American democracy.
So please remember: this is not about your health. It’s about your country, whose highest aspirations are under unprecedented assault. If you don’t object now, you may lose your right to object at all.
And don’t think the vaunted liberal media, or civil rights “advocates,” or high-minded academics, or self-aggrandizing “progressive” politicians will speak up for you if you don’t speak up for yourselves.
A few years ago, CNN’s Jim Acosta made his reputation posing as a champion of press freedom (supposedly under mortal threat because Donald Trump had said some unflattering things about American reporters). Yet by the summer of 2021 Acosta was out-Trumping Trump, claiming that Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis had caused the COVID-19 Delta variant and denouncing people who dared to think they had a right to breathe in public.
Have Acosta’s fellow liberals objected to his hypocrisy? On the contrary: his public media profile is a virtual hagiography, even while he’s attacking the free speech rights of press outlets like Fox News for airing commentary he doesn’t agree with. Trusting such people with defending the Bill of Rights is like leaving your wallet with Bernie Madoff.
Nor can you plead a lack of adequate knowledge. Even if you ignore the sources of genuine information about COVID policy – and several are available via internet – there have been epiphanic moments when the propagandists have actually exposed themselves, as when New York’s Governor Kathy Hochul told a megachurch audience that God had commanded Americans to take the COVID-19 “vaccines,” or when an unrepentant Colonel Birx admitted to Congress that she had misrepresented facts when ordering the public to submit to the same experimental drugs.
Do you really need any more evidence of the megalomaniac lust for power driving these democracy-haters, as they dismantle the US Constitution piece by piece?
There can be no doubt about where State power is drifting – if we do nothing to stop it. Writing as far back as 1935, Albert Jay Nock predicted the future of the accelerating centralization of authority:
What we… shall see is a steady progress in collectivism running off into a military despotism of a severe type. Closer centralization; a steadily growing bureaucracy; State power and faith in State power increasing;… the State absorbing a continually larger proportion of the national income…. Then at some point in this progress, a collision of State interests… will result in an industrial and financial dislocation too severe for the asthenic social structure to bear; and from this the State will be left to “the rusty death of machinery”…
As we enter 2023, we don’t need to read deeply into political theory to understand the threat we face. We only have to review the record of the previous three years.
An accurate assessment of that record, it seems to me, will tell us that we are quite possibly on the cusp of the dissolution of the American republic. Maybe it is already too late to resist the authoritarian Zeitgeist. But I suggest we all ponder the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn about the failure of the Soviet public to resist the repression that had included his own arrest in the 1940s: “If only we had stood together against the common threat, we could easily have defeated it. So, why didn’t we? We didn’t love freedom enough.”
For us, that “common threat” is much weaker than the one Solzhenitsyn had in mind. We don’t need weapons to fight it; in fact, weapons would only get in the way. What we need are voices – lots of them – raised in protest every time a bureaucrat or a tame Ivy League “expert” or a lying “journalist” or a shyster in sheep’s clothing tries to rob us of one more bit of our human dignity, one more inch of our civil rights.
Then we need to clamor for all we’re worth. While there is still time.
Do we love freedom enough for that?
Michael Lesher is an author, poet and lawyer whose legal work is mostly dedicated to issues connected with domestic abuse and child sexual abuse. A memoir of his discovery of Orthodox Judaism as an adult – Turning Back: The Personal Journey of a “Born-Again” Jew – was published in September 2020 by Lincoln Square Books. He has also published op-ed pieces in such varied venues as Forward, ZNet, the New York Post and Off-Guardian.
US meddled in Saudi-Yemen peace process

The Cradle | January 6, 2023
Lebanese daily newspaper Al-Akhbar reported on 6 January that Saudi Arabia has expressed its readiness to end the status quo in Yemen and withdraw under the conditions set by Ansarallah.
The kingdom agreed to lift the blockade, and pay compensations for the war after retreating under a pledge not to interfere in the country’s political process.
For that, Riyadh demanded the government in Sanaa present a set of “guarantees” that it will not threaten Saudi Arabia and its security, nor allow hostilities to originate from Yemeni soil.
According to Al-Akhbar, these demands were reiterated by Iran and the Sultanate of Oman, who assured the kingdom of Ansarallah’s willingness to meet Riyadh’s demands.
Despite that, no progress has been made to end the current state, which has left Yemen torn between peace and war. This lack of progress has prompted Ansarallah’s leadership to publicly reject that this limbo becomes a permanent reality.
In an interview with Al-Masirah TV on 1 January, Ansarallah’s spokesman and peace envoy, Mohammed Abdel Salam, demanded a permanent ceasefire between Yemen and Saudi Arabia.
“We are working to reach a point of clarity in Yemen, in which we move into either a truce or permanent ceasefire, and we have presented our point of view to the Omani mediator,” said Abdel Salam.
He added that this would require opening all ports, airports, and roads, and paying salaries with the revenue generated from Yemen’s oil and gas exports.
A source close to Ansarallah in Sanaa revealed to The Cradle that Saudi Arabia agreed to this demand in October 2022, and was ready – along with Qatar – to finance the salaries of all government employees in northern Yemen.
However, the US sabotaged this agreement and blocked the solution by pressuring Riyadh to cease its efforts.
The leader of Ansarallah, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, has ordered the military to prepare for a scenario in which all prospects for peace diminish, as the status quo is no longer acceptable.
On the other hand, the UN coordinator for Yemen, Hans Grundberg, and US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Arabian Gulf Affairs, Tim Lenderking, met in Riyadh on 5 January, to discuss the developments with the head of the Yemeni Presidential Leadership Council, Rashad al-Alimi.
According to local media, the meeting tackled the UN’s efforts to coordinate with the international community to keep the peace process on track and explore ways to end Yemeni suffering.
However, progress has yet to materialize, and no plan has been set to find ways to establish communication with the Sanaa government, as a key to peace.
