Leaked tapes reveal Bolivian coup regime had plot to overturn 2020 election loss with US mercenary help
RT | June 17, 2021
Top cabinet officials in the caretaker government of Jeanine Anez plotted a second coup to stay in power in Bolivia, according to leaked documents. The plan allegedly involved hundreds of US mercenaries flown in from Florida.
Anez took power in Bolivia in November 2019, after mass protests backed by the country’s military and police forced Evo Morales to flee from the country rather than continue governing for a fourth presidential term after winning elections. The protests were triggered by claims of election fraud, which were promoted by the Organization of American States and were later proven to be groundless.
The new government used force to suppress dissenting people from Morales’ left-wing Movement towards Socialism (MAS) party and made a sharp right-wing turn. It also repeatedly delayed holding a new election, which was supposed to be the primary goal of Anez’ caretaker presidency.
Pressured by mass protests, she eventually agreed to hold the ballot last fall. MAS candidate Luis Arce, who served as Morales’ economy minister, won it in a landslide, avoiding a second round by getting 55.1% of the vote. Anez herself came a distant fourth.
As Arce was celebrating his victory, Anez and her ministers were plotting a second coup, which would allow them to overturn the will of the Bolivian people, the Intercept reported on Thursday, citing records of conversations and email exchanges detailing the conspiracy.
The key figures in the plan were Luis Fernando Lopez, who served as Anez’ defense minister, and Joe Pereira, a former civilian administrator with the US Army, according to the report. Pereira was supposed to recruit mercenaries in the US and help fly them to Bolivia. There they would join forces with elite military troops from the Bolivian army, police units and right-wing vigilante mobs to quash MAS supporters.
“I can get up to 10,000 men with no problem” Pereira bragged in one alleged conversation. “All special forces. I can also bring about 350 what we call LEPs, Law Enforcement Professionals, to guide the police.”
“If there’s something else I need, I will have them fly in as undercover, like if they were photographers, they were pastors, they were medics, they were tourists.”
The number of troops appears to be a boast on Pereira’s part. One of the US-based recruiters he turned to for help told the Intercept that one “couldn’t get 10,000 people even if Blackwater was back in business and going back to Iraq.” But email exchanges indicate the planning was in an advanced stage and that at least 250 contractors were ready to take part in the ‘Bolivia project’, before it was called off.
On the Bolivian side, officials had three Hercules C-130 transport aircraft that could airlift the hired guns and their weapons from the US. Pereira said he wanted to “pick up personnel in Southern Command in Homestead Air Force Base in Miami.” Two US military sources told the Intercept that the US Special Operations command was aware of the coup plot, but one source said that “no one really took them seriously.”
Some details of the conversations matched very closely the claims that Morales made in early November. He accused General Sergio Orellana, who was appointed commander of the Bolivian Armed Forces by Anez, of pressuring other top military officers into launching a military junta to prevent an Acre presidency. Lopez assured co-conspirators that Orellana was ready to initiate “the military operation” against MAS.
The plans were never put into action. Lopez apparently couldn’t secure support of enough military commanders and had a falling out with then-Interior Minister Arturo Murillo, who was in charge of the police. General Orellana and both ministers were among members of the Anez administration who fled Bolivia after Arce’s victory and before his inauguration.
Murillo was arrested by the FBI last month. He is suspected of taking a bribe to sign a contract for supply of tear gas from a Florida-based firm at an inflated price.
Anez was arrested and charged with crimes related to how she took power in Bolivia. Pereira is likewise held in a Bolivian jail awaiting trial on fraud charges.
The Intercept believes it was highly unlikely that the plot had some tacit approval or support of the US government. It seems closer in nature to the attempt to overthrow the Venezuelan government, which involved the private security company Silvercorp USA.
The incursion of US mercenaries, which took place in May 2020, ended in a humiliating failure and was dismissively dubbed by some media ‘Bay of Piglets invasion’, referring to the CIA-baked failed invasion of Cuba in 1961.
Are the Covid-19 vaccines “safe and effective”?
Steve Kirsch | Trial Site News | June 16, 2021
A video presentation by Steve Kirsch, Executive Director of the Covid-19 Early Treatment Fund.
Watch Video at Trial Site News
Are there any risks associated with the COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized on an emergency use basis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)? Presently three genetic-based vaccines have been authorized via the emergency order including two mRNA-based vaccines (Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech) as well as the adenovirus-based Johnson and Johnson product. Developed at historical speed under Operation Warp Speed, the mRNA-based technology foretells enormous implications for healthcare including the prospect of vaccines for cancer. An amazing research prowess has unfolded in response to the COVID-19 pandemic heralding profound breakthroughs that’ll benefit society for years to come. Governmental authorities have declared the vaccines both safe and effective and as TrialSite recently reported based on a change of law that waives the need for informed consent with investigational products. Both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA have declared that the risk-benefit analyses strongly indicate the risks of not getting a vaccination outweigh any risk of vaccination. They argue that the risks associated with COVID-19 are materially greater. Moreover, health authorities are on record that there is absolutely no correlation associated with the COVID-19 vaccines to any deaths as indicated by the CDC declaration. But have they sufficiently probed and pursued granular investigation into their own data? Have they undertaken the comprehensive analyses associated with what in the CDC VAERS is now close to 6,000 deaths. Are all of these unrelated to the vaccines? Steve Kirsch, the founder and executive director of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund (CETF), a regular contributor to the TrialSite recently conducted a more systematic and thorough analysis of the VAERS and CDC adverse event and death numbers reported in conjunction with the COVID-19 vaccines. The results are disturbing to say the least. TrialSite offers no opinion here other than the presentation of the highly successful MIT-trained engineer who has invested millions of his own funds into early stage treatment options targeting COVID-19. What follows is a summary of his deep dive into VAERS presented in this video.
Official CDC Position
The CDC is on the record that the now nearly 6,000 deaths reported in VAERS since December 2020, including “A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccine.”
The analysis provided by Kirsch suggests that while nearly 6,000 are now entered into the voluntary system, he suggests the actual number could be undercounted by a magnitude of up to 5 times and a review of direct CDC excess death data indicates what the notable entrepreneur counts as 25,000 deaths that could be associated with the coronavirus vaccines.
The Presentation
The Kirsch presentation starts with an introduction to the CDC Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System known as VAERS with a review of some key indicators including reported deaths. Open to the public, he reveals by June 4th the following adverse events were associated with the COVID-19 vaccines:
Reported Event #s Deaths 5,088 Hospitalizations 19,587 Urgent Care 43,891 Office Visits 58,800 Heart Attacks 2,190 Anaphylaxis 1,459 Bells Palsy 1,737 Thrombocytopenia/Low Platelet 1,564 Myocarditis/Pericarditis 1,087
A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines.
At 12:15 into the presentation Mr. Kirsch reveals a data distribution revealing a dramatic spike in deaths associated with the COVID-19. Moreover in this data analysis it’s revealed that the majority of deaths occur closer to the actual time of the vaccination event indicating a higher probability of a causal relationship.
At 12:49 he presents the data findings indicating that overwhelming the incidents of heart attacks associated with the VAERS COVID-19 vaccine spike within a day to three days after the vaccination event. He also emphasizes that the indication of Myocarditis/Pericarditis actually increases with vaccination as age decreases which is counter intuitive in that young people should have less probability of experiencing such heart related troubles. Is the vaccine causally connected to this data?
At 15:51 in the presentation Kirsch depicts again the growing numbers of deaths corresponding to the release of the vaccines under emergency use authorization by mid-December 2020. At 18:55 he reveals a corresponding increase in excess deaths reported by the CDC.
Kirsch goes on at 26:13 to discuss the imperative to consider a time out in the process to at least investigate these safety data signals. At 28:09 Kirsch raises the imperative for informed consent under the Declaration of Helsinki. Although as TrialSite reported the law was changed in 2016 thus waiving the need for informed consent with investigational products deemed safe.
At 32:22 Mr. Kirsch discusses early treatment options for COVID-19. He shares that considerable research has gone on pointing to a number of potential treatments for early onset COVID-19 that can serve to help combat COVID-19. A risk-benefit comparison at 41:50 showcases at least one argument that early stage treatments currently under study should be accelerated.
The presenter offers a plethora of other information that merits review for those interested in a debate on this topic.
Kirsch commented on the findings “The narrative is that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective but the truth is that the data points to an otherwise alternative conclusion.” Kirsch declared that “if anyone was paying attention they would have picked up these safety signals by the end of January.”
Data-Driven Truth or Random Coincidence?
TrialSIte cannot advocate one position over another but rather can serve to share information that fits within the guidelines of the platform for purposes of discussion and hopefully healthy debate. This isn’t a platform for attacking others but rather one that fosters awareness, transparency and engagement. The data present in the CDC VAERS database as well as the CDC death reports do indicate a material spike in activity associated with the coronavirus vaccines. Does the CDC’s position that none of these deaths are conclusively correlated to the vaccine itself despite the data in this presentation revealing a disturbing trend of adverse events and death within a day to three days within the vaccination event? It’s not clear but TrialSite invites the CDC and others on to the platform to put forth an explanation.
Biden nominates Thomas Nides as ambassador to Israel
MEMO | June 16, 2021
US [proclaimed] President Joe Biden appointed Thomas Nides as the country’s next ambassador to Israel, the White House announced in a statement yesterday.
Nides, 60, is vice chairman of Morgan Stanley, the fourth-largest US investment banking firm and has previously served as deputy secretary of state from 2011 to 2013 during the administration of former President Barack Obama.
“Thomas Nides is a distinguished public servant and business leader,” the White House said in a statement. “Nides was Chief of Staff to the US Trade Representative Micky Kantor, was Senior Advisor to Speaker of the House Thomas S. Foley, and earlier to House Majority Whip Tony Coelho,” the announcement reads.
“He is a Member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the former Chairman of the Board of the Woodrow Wilson Center appointed by President Obama. Nides received his B.A. degree from the University of Minnesota. He is the recipient of the Secretary of State’s Distinguished Service Award,” it adds.
Born in 1961 to a Jewish family in Duluth, Minnesota, his father, Arnold Nides, was the president of Temple Israel and the Duluth Jewish Federation.
As deputy secretary of state, Nides built effective working relationships with several Israeli officials and played a key role in the Obama administration’s approval of an extension on loan guarantees for Israel worth billions of dollars in military aid, including funding for the Iron Dome missile defence system.
In 2012, Nides articulated the Obama administration’s opposition to an effort to redefine Palestinian refugees as only people who were forced to leave Palestine in and around 1948 – excluding their descendants.
“United States policy has been consistent for decades, in both Republican and Democratic administrations – final status issues can and must only be resolved between Israelis and Palestinians in direct negotiations,” Nides said in a letter to congressional leaders at the time.
“The Department of State cannot support legislation which would force the United States to make a public judgment on the number and status of Palestinian refugees.”
His appointment now needs to be confirmed by the Senate, but no opposition is expected.
FBI Operatives Likely ‘Unindicted Co-Conspirators’, Organizers Of Capitol Riot: Report
By Tyler Durden – Zero Hedge – June 16, 2021
Tucker Carlson dropped several bombshells on his show Tuesday night, chief among them was from a Revolver News report that the FBI was likely involved in organizing the Jan. 6 Capitol ‘insurrection,’ and were similarly involved in the kidnapping plot against Michigan Governor Gretchin Whitmer.
“Why are there so many factual matters that we don’t understand about that day?” asked Carlson.
Why is the Biden administration preventing us from knowing? Why is the administration still hiding more than 10,000 hours of surveillance tape from the US capitol on January 6th? What could possibly be the reason for that – even as they call for more openness… they could release those tapes today, but they’re not. Why?”
Carlson notes that Revolver News has dissected court filings surrounding the Capitol riot, suggests that unindicted co-conspirators in the case are likely to have been federal operatives.
We at Revolver News have noticed a pattern from our now months-long investigation into 1/6 — and in particular from our meticulous study of the charging documents related to those indicted. In many cases the unindicted co-conspirators appear to be much more aggressive and egregious participants in the very so-called “conspiracy” serving as the basis for charging those indicted.
The question immediately arises as to why this is the case, and forces us to consider whether certain individuals are being protected from indictment because they were involved in 1/6 as undercover operatives or confidential informants for a federal agency.
Key segment from Tucker:
“We know that the government is hiding the identity of many law enforcement officers that were present at the Capitol on January 6th, not just the one that killed Ashli Babbitt. According to the government’s own court filing, those law enforcement officers participated in the riot – sometimes in violent ways. We know that because without fail, the government has thrown the book at most people who were present at the Capitol on Jan. 6. There was a nationwide dragnet to find them – and many are still in solitary confinement tonight. But strangely, some of the key people who participated on Jan. 6 have not been charged.”
Look at the documents, the government calls those people ‘unindicted co-conspirators.’ What does that mean? Well it means that in potentially every case they were FBI operatives… in the Capitol, on January 6th.”
“For example, one of those unindicted co-conspirators is someone government documents identify only as “person two.” According to those documents, person two stayed in the same hotel room as a man called Thomas Caldwell – an ‘insurrectionist.’ A man alleged to be a member of the group “The Oathkeepers.” Person two also “stormed the barricades” at the Capitol on January 6th alongside Thomas Caldwell. The government’s indictments further indicate that Caldwell – who by the way is a 65-year-old man… was led to believe there would be a “quick reaction force” also participating on January 6th. That quick reaction force Caldwell was told, would be led by someone called “Person 3,” who had a hotel room and an accomplice with them. But wait. Here’s the interesting thing. Person 2 and person 3 were organizers of the riot. The government knows who they are, but the government has not charged them. Why is that? You know why. They were almost certainly working for the FBI. So FBI operatives were organizing the attack on the Capitol on January 6th according to government documents. And those two are not alone. In all, Revolver news reported there are “upwards of 20 unindicted co-conspirators in the Oath Keeper indictments, all playing various roles in the conspiracy, who have not been charged for virtually the exact same activities and in some cases much, much more severe activities – as those named alongside them in the indictments.”
Watch:
Revolver, meanwhile, has important questions about January 6th
- In the year leading up to 1/6 and during 1/6 itself, to what extent were the three primary militia groups (the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and the Three Percenters) that the FBI, DOJ, Pentagon and network news have labeled most responsible for planning and executing a Capitol attack on 1/6 infiltrated by agencies of the federal government, or informants of said agencies?
- Exactly how many federal undercover agents or confidential informants were present at the Capitol or in the Capitol during the infamous “siege” and what roles did they play (merely passive informants or active instigators)?
- Finally, of all of the unindicted co-conspirators referenced in the charging documents of those indicted for crimes on 1/6, how many worked as a confidential informant or as an undercover operative for the federal government (FBI, Army Counterintelligence, etc.)?
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) has demanded an explanation from FBI Director Christopher Wray:
More:
- Revolver News: “Unindicted Co-Conspirators in 1/6 Cases Raise Disturbing Questions of Federal Foreknowledge“
- Tucker Carlson op-ed: “Government agents may have helped organize the Jan. 6 Capitol riot“
We recommend you read the entire Revolver piece, which includes the fact that at least five individuals involved in the “Whitmer Kidnapping Plot” were undercover agents and federal informants.
Letter to Canadian Transport Minister: Israeli Apartheid Not Welcome in Canadian Ports #BlocktheBoat

Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network | June 15, 2021
The following letter was sent today to Canada’s Transport Minister Omar Alghabra and called on “the Canadian government to stop legitimizing the crimes of apartheid…and suspend all instances of Zim-operated ships docking and unloading in Canadian ports.” This action is part of the growing demand that Canada must hold Israel accountable, through economic sanctions and a bilateral arms embargo.
June 15, 2021
Minister of Transport Omar Alghabra
Ottawa, OntarioIn recent weeks, people of conscience in Canada watched in horror as the Israeli regime ruthlessly targeted Palestinians from all regions of historic Palestine. What started as a popular movement to #SaveSheikhJarrah residents from further ethnic cleansing expanded into a broad unity of Palestinians from Jerusalem to Gaza to Haifa to Toronto and Vancouver all sending the same message. Palestinians will no longer accept the status quo of Israeli apartheid.
As part of this burgeoning movement, Palestinian-Canadians and their supporters have actively participated in rallies, pickets and #BlockTheBoat actions. The latter refers to the efforts to stop Zim-operated ships from either docking in, or unloading, at U.S., Canadian and other international ports.
Zim Integrated Shipping Services Ltd is Israel’s largest and oldest cargo shipping company, dealing in Israeli manufactured military technology, armaments and logistics equipment, as well as consumer goods.
The Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU) and a large coalition of all major Palestinian workers unions and professional associations have called on fellow trade unions and workers worldwide to boycott Israel and businesses that are complicit with its apartheid regime. They specifically urge “refus[ing] to handle Israeli goods” and “supporting [union] members refusing to build Israeli weapons.”
Last month, and in response to the above appeal from Palestinian trade unions, South African trade unions refused handling cargo from an Israeli ship in Durban. Dockworkers in Italy have also successfully blocked a recent shipment of munitions and armaments destined for Israel.
At Canada’s largest port in Vancouver, there was a successful community picket on June 8 that tied up both the Port entrance and a busy intersection; activists from a diverse range of groups stated clearly – “Israeli Apartheid Not Welcome in Vancouver Ports”. (The same message was also delivered on June 14 at the Prince Rupert Port.)
Port Authorities in Canada fall under the Ministry of Transport. As such, Mr. Alghabra, allowing and enabling such Israeli apartheid profiteering makes both the ports and the Canadian government further complicit in the ongoing dispossession of the Palestinians. Both B’tselem and Human Rights Watch have been clear in exposing the system of Israeli governance as apartheid. We, the undersigned organizations, expect the Canadian government to stop legitimizing the crimes of apartheid, and to refuse to give economic incentives to such abhorrent behaviour.
Your ministry is already mired in controversy for refusing to cancel a contract with Elbit Systems to purchase one of their drones. Who would have imagined that the Canadian Ministry of Transport would be so entangled with Israeli apartheid? We call on you to observe your government’s alleged respect for international law and human rights and suspend all instances of Zim-operated ships docking and unloading in Canadian ports.
Popular protest is not going to stop as long as Palestinians are not free.
c.c. PM of Canada, Justin Trudeau
Vancouver Fraser Port AuthoritySigned:
BDS Vancouver-Coast Salish Territories
Canada Palestine Association
Palestinian Youth Movement Vancouver
Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity NetworkEndorsed by:
Anti-Imperialist Alliance, Ottawa
BAYAN Canada
Canadian Peace Congress
Communist Party of Canada
Gabriela BC
Independent Jewish Voices Vancouver
Just Peace Advocates
Niagara Movement for Justice in Palestine Israel
OPRA – Oakville Palestinian Rights Association
Palestinian Canadian Community Centre – Palestine House
Poetic Justice Foundation
Regina Peace Council
Sulong UBC
West Coast Coalition Against Racism Society
Congress Moves to Censure Both Ilhan Omar and Marjorie Taylor Greene for Accidentally Offending Jews
By Eric Striker • National Justice • June 16, 2021
Members of Congress have put forth resolutions to censure Reps. Ilhan Omar and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
On the surface, the hijab-wearing Muslim progressive from Minnesota and the gun-toting Southern Evangelical Republican could not be more different. But the two women — portrayed in the press as extreme manifestations of their respective party’s ideologies — have accidentally crossed organized Jewry.
The act of censuring a member of the House of Representatives is less grave than a formal expulsion, but it is still considered to be a serious punishment. Only 24 members of Congress have been censured since 1832, the most recent cases were for engaging in brazen corruption or sexual assault.
In Rep. Omar’s case, Florida Republican Mark Waltz is leading the charge to shut her down for making a moral equivalence between the actions of the Israeli military and the Palestinian resistance group Hamas in a question posed to Secretary of State Anthony Blinken.
A wide range of Jewish organizations and over a dozen Democrats immediately began attacking Omar. At first, Reps. Omar attempted to call her attackers Islamophobes, but when appealing to identity politics did not work, Omar walked her comment back under pressure from House leader Nancy Pelosi, much to the dismay of pro-Palestine activists.
Rep. Greene is being targeted for comparing COVID restrictions to the “Holocaust.” Democrat Brad Schnieder, who has also led condemnations of Ilhan Omar, announced that he will be “shelving” Greene’s censure after she begged for forgiveness in front of a Holocaust museum on Monday.
While Schnieder appeared to be satisfied with her groveling, the American Jewish Congress (AJC) took the opportunity to attack her even harder.
“Marjorie Taylor Greene, your apology is NOT accepted” read an over the top bulletin on their website. AJC president Jack Rosen is demanding that Greene “find a different career” and went on to condemn her as an abnormal person who cultivates “anti-semites” and “white supremacists” in her base.
Reps. Omar and Greene both serve Jewish interests dutifully in different capacities. Omar has used her political platform to promote “domestic terrorist” and “white supremacist” hysteria, while Greene is an unflinching supporter of the Zionist project abroad.
But the work the two women invest in promoting different Jewish interests do not shield them from constant bad faith attacks from Jewish groups, who demand absolute allegiance on every one of their issues.
The EEOC Did NOT Say Federal Law Permits Requiring a COVID-19 Vaccine
Informed Consent Action Network | June 16, 2021
In the article, “Can employers require workers to get the COVID vaccine?”, Bailey Aldridge claims that, given the updated rules of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), “your employer can require you to get a COVID vaccine.” Aldridge even claims that “The EEOC says there are no federal laws that prevent an employer from requiring employees who are physically in the workplace to get the COVID-19 vaccine.”
The EEOC’s guidance, however, does not claim that an employer can legally require an emergency use COVID-19 vaccine. The EEOC guidance merely states that the “federal EEO [Equal Employment Opportunity] laws do not prevent an employer from requiring” an emergency authorized COVID-19 vaccine. That is not surprising because the EEO laws apply only to discrimination based on certain protected classes, such as race, religion and national origin.
Federal law is, of course, far broader than the narrow EEO laws. In recognizing that there are other federal laws that do prohibit an employer from requiring a COVID-19 vaccine, the EEOC’s guidance also states that, “These three vaccines were granted Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) by the FDA” and that, “It is beyond the EEOC’s jurisdiction to discuss the legal implications of EUA or the FDA approach.”
When one reviews the FDA’s EUA and its approved labeling, a.k.a. “fact sheets,” for each COVID-19 vaccine, they each clearly provide that: “It is [the vaccine recipient’s] choice to receive or not receive the COVID-19 Vaccine.” The reason each fact sheet includes this language is because the same section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that authorizes the FDA to grant an EUA also requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to “ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed … of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product.”
That same section of the Act also authorized the Secretary, and only the Secretary, to provide the “consequences” for refusing to receive an EUA product and the EUAs for each COVID-19 vaccine do not include permission to terminate an employee for refusing the vaccine.
ICAN hopes that the Department of Justice will do its job and enforce the federal law prohibiting mandating an EUA vaccine and will continue to push it to enforce this important law.
A glimpse inside the UK’s “quarantine hotels”
OffGuardian | June 16, 2021
A short video was recently brought to our attention on twitter. It shows a man and woman (off-camera) pulling up to a chainlink fence around a concrete yard and engaging in a brief conversation with a man on the other side.
The man is one of several dozen people walking in slow, counter-clockwise circuits around what appears to be an un-used car park. He’s polite to the strangers, discussing how tight security is, how many guards there are on each floor, and how often they’re allowed outside for this “exercise”.
At that point a security guard comes up and tells the man he’s not allowed to talk through the fence, and a brief argument ensues. The guard tells the people in the car that they cannot talk to anyone inside the facility without permission from “the office”. After moments of insisting the guard desists, likely to report the incident to his supervisor.
The couple in the car and the stranger behind the fence part on friendly terms, with the man remarking that he paid seventeen-hundred and fifty pounds to stay there.
Because this isn’t a prison or detention facility, it’s a “quarantine hotel”.
You can watch the video here:
[NOTE: This is a re-upload, with some discussion, from the channel Hugo Talks Some More. The original we have been unable to find, it was likely taken down. (If you’re aware of a copy of the original, or who filmed it, do let us know. We’d like to credit the people who did the filming.]
The quarantine hotels have been in the mainstream media before, with the reporting focusing on them being expensive, having terrible food and being dull. But this little clip offers something worse than that – a little glimpse of the dehumanising nature of detention. The mission-creep of arbitrary rules, enforced to the letter by people either too ignorant to know better or willingly malign, is an oft-repeated motif in human history. It never bodes well.
It’s telling to contrast (as Hugo does at the end of the video) the grey building – with its grey fence and grey yard full of people milling in grey circles – with the recent G7 summit in Cornwall.
Not the official photos of the G7, of course, because those are all neatly staged and social distanced, but the leaked photos of the G7 barbecue.
Quarantine “hotel”:

G7 barbecue:

Quarantine “hotel”:

G7 barbecue:

Notice the lack of social distancing. Observe the absence of masks (except for the lowly servants, naturally). And, of course, not one of them had to pay to be there at all. In fact, we literally paid them a salary to do it – and then paid for the catering, alcohol and accommodation too.
Do these “world leaders” look like people in the middle of a life-threatening pandemic to you? Do they look like people that honestly believe they have a chance of catching a terrible disease?

As one of our editors wrote last summer:
When the people giving us these orders do not follow them themselves, they are not showing themselves to be “hypocrites”. They are showing themselves to be liars. They are admitting they don’t really believe what they’re saying.
Clearly, the rules of the “new normal” only apply to ordinary people. And that’s as sure a sign as any that it’s not now – and never was – really about “protecting” anyone. It was always about control.
Hancock: “We Have No Duty Of Care At All To Vaccine Refuseniks!”
By Richie Allen | June 16, 2021
Speaking in the House of Commons this afternoon, Health Secretary Matt Hancock suggested that people who refuse a covid-19 jab, will be refused treatment on the NHS.
Hancock was responding to a question from Tory MP Liam Fox about the vaccine status of those currently receiving hospital treatment for the so-called Delta variant.
Hancock said:
“I think that there is a material difference between the states responsibility to offer the vaccine to all adults and the duty that we have when somebody has not been offered the vaccine is greater than the duty we have when we have offered a vaccine but somebody has chosen not to take it up. And there is a material difference between those two situations.”
Hancock’s colleague Andrea Leadsom interjected and said:
“Can I take (it) one step further? If I choose not to say, not to have a yellow fever jab when I am going to a place that suffers yellow fever, the government of the United Kingdom takes no interest whatsoever in my illness status. So when my right honourable friend says that he has less of a duty, surely what he means is that he has no duty at all. It is for people to take up the vaccine.”
Hancock replied:
“Up to a point and the point is should you take that as an absolute principle, then there is a challenge, should there be an overwhelming demand on the NHS that would impact on others. And of course with a communicable disease, there is an impact on others in terms of spreading the disease so we do have to have an eye to that.
That’s why I phrased it as I did. But in terms of the argument that my right honourable friend is putting, I think she and I concur in the broad thrust of the case being made.”
Nobody in the chamber batted an eyelid. The Secretary of State for Health said that those who refuse a covid-19 vaccine, might be left to die if they contract a respiratory infection and the NHS is otherwise engaged, presumably treating those with vaccine injuries. Welcome to dystopia.
Perspex Screens Installed to Stop COVID May Have Actually Increased Its Spread

Al Seib / Contributor via Getty Images
By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | June 16, 2021
A leaked Whitehall document seen by Politico suggests that perspex screens installed to stop the transmission of COVID-19 may actually have increased its spread.
Businesses and schools were told by the government to install the screens as a condition of re-opening after the first lockdown and they were widely used by ‘essential’ shops throughout the entire period.
Politico’s Alex Wickham writes that the perspex screens could be about to be scrapped given new information the government has received on their efficacy.
“Ministers are also being advised that those perspex screens that have appeared in some offices and restaurants are unlikely to have any benefit in terms of preventing transmission,” states the report.
“Problems include them not being positioned correctly, with the possibility that they actually increase the risk of transmission by blocking airflow. Therefore there is clear guidance to ministers that these perspex screens should be scrapped.”
Despite the report, government ministers say there is no plan to change advice on installing the screens in businesses.
What other COVID-19 measures put in place to fight the spread of the virus have been utterly useless or actually made it worse?
A study on the effectiveness of face masks involving 6,000 participants in Denmark found “there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19.”

