Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

What’s Really Happening with Mpox

The Mpox Emergency

By David Bell | Brownstone Institute | August 18, 2024

The World Health Organization (WHO) acted as expected this week and declared Mpox a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). So, a problem in a small number of African countries that has killed about the same number of people this year as die every four hours from tuberculosis has come to dominate international headlines. This is raising a lot of angst from some circles against the WHO.

While angst is warranted, it is mostly misdirected. The WHO and the IHR emergency committee they convened had little real power – they are simply following a script written by their sponsors. The African CDC, which declared an emergency a day earlier, is in a similar position. Mpox is a real disease and needs local and proportionate solutions. But the problem it is highlighting is much bigger than Mpox or the WHO, and understanding this is essential if we are to fix it.

Mpox, previously called Monkeypox, is caused by a virus thought to normally infect African rodents such as rats and squirrels. It fairly frequently passes to, and between, humans. In humans, its effects range from very mild illness to fever and muscle pains to severe illness with its characteristic skin rash, and sometimes death. Different variants, called ‘clades,’ produce slightly different symptoms. It is passed by close body contact including sexual activity, and the WHO declared a PHEIC two years ago for a clade that was mostly passed by men having sex with men.

The current outbreaks involve sexual transmission but also other close contact such as within households, expanding its potential for harm. Children are affected and suffer the most severe outcomes, perhaps due to issues of lower prior immunity and the effects of malnutrition and other illnesses.

Reality in DRC

The current PHEIC was mainly precipitated by the ongoing outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), though there are known outbreaks in nearby countries covering a number of clades. About 500 people have died from Mpox in DRC this year, over 80% of them under 15 years of age. In that same period, about 40,000 people in DRC, mostly children under 5 years, died from malaria. The malaria deaths were mainly due to lack of access to very basic commodities like diagnostic tests, antimalarial drugs, and insecticidal bed nets, as malaria control is chronically underfunded globally. Malaria is nearly always preventable or treatable if sufficiently resourced.

During this same period in which 500 people died from Mpox in DRC, hundreds of thousands also died in DRC and surrounding African countries from tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and the impacts of malnutrition and unsafe water. Tuberculosis alone kills about 1.3 million people globally each year, which is a rate about 1,500 times higher than Mpox in 2024.

The population of DRC is also facing increasing instability characterized by mass rape and massacres, in part due to a scramble by warlords to service the appetite of richer countries for the components of batteries. These in turn are needed to support the Green Agenda of Europe and North America. This is the context in which the people of DRC and nearby populations, which obviously should be the primary decision-makers regarding the Mpox outbreak, currently live.

An Industry Produces What It Is Paid for

For the WHO and the international public health industry, Mpox presents a very different picture. They now work for a pandemic industrial complex, built by private and political interests on the ashes of international public health. Forty years ago, Mpox would have been viewed in context, proportional to the diseases that are shortening overall life expectancy and the poverty and civil disorder that allows them to continue. The media would barely have mentioned the disease, as they were basing much of their coverage on impact and attempting to offer independent analysis.

Now the public health industry is dependent on emergencies. They have spent the past 20 years building agencies such as CEPI, inaugurated at the 2017 World Economic Forum meeting and solely focused on developing vaccines for pandemic, and on expanding capacity to detect and distinguish ever more viruses and variants. This is supported by the recently passed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

While improving nutrition, sanitation, and living conditions provided the path to longer lifespans in Western countries, such measures sit poorly with a colonial approach to world affairs in which the wealth and dominance of some countries are seen as being dependent on the continued poverty of others. This requires a paradigm in which decision-making is in the hands of distant bureaucratic and corporate masters. Public health has an unfortunate history of supporting this, with restriction of local decision-making and the pushing of commodities as key interventions.

Thus, we now have thousands of public health functionaries, from the WHO to research institutes to non-government organizations, commercial companies, and private foundations, primarily dedicated to finding targets for Pharma, purloining public funding, and then developing and selling the cure. The entire newly minted pandemic agenda, demonstrated successfully through the Covid-19 response, is based on this approach. Justification for the salaries involved requires detection of outbreaks, an exaggeration of their likely impact, and the institution of a commodity-heavy and usually vaccine-based response.

The sponsors of this entire process – countries with large Pharma industries, Pharma investors, and Pharma companies themselves – have established power through media and political sponsorship to ensure the approach works. Evidence of the intent of the model and the harms it is wreaking can be effectively hidden from public view by a subservient media and publishing industry. But in DRC, people who have long suffered the exploitation of war and the mineral extractors, who replaced a particularly brutal colonial regime, must now also deal with the wealth extractors of Pharma.

Dealing with the Cause

While Mpox is concentrated in Africa, the effects of corrupted public health are global. Bird flu will likely follow the same course as Mpox in the near future. The army of researchers paid to find more outbreaks will do so. While the risk from pandemics is not significantly different than decades ago, there is an industry dependent on making you think otherwise.

As the Covid-19 playbook showed, this is about money and power on a scale only matched by similar fascist regimes of the past. Current efforts across Western countries to denigrate the concept of free speech, to criminalize dissent, and to institute health passports to control movement are not new and are in no way disconnected from the inevitability of the WHO declaring the Mpox PHEIC. We are not in the world we knew twenty years ago.

Poverty and the external forces that benefit from war, and the diseases these enable, will continue to hammer the people of DRC. If a mass vaccination campaign is instituted, which is highly likely, financial and human resources will be diverted from far greater threats. This is why decision-making must now be centralized far from the communities affected. Local priorities will never match those that expansion of the pandemic industry depends on.

In the West, we must move on from blaming the WHO and address the reality unfolding around us. Censorship is being promoted by journalists, courts are serving political agendas, and the very concept of nationhood, on which democracy depends, is being demonized. A fascist agenda is openly promoted by corporate clubs such as the World Economic Forum and echoed by the international institutions set up after the Second World War specifically to oppose it. If we cannot see this and if we do not refuse to participate, then we will have only ourselves to blame. We are voting for these governments and accepting obvious fraud, and we can choose not to do so.

For the people of DRC, children will continue to tragically die from Mpox, from malaria, and from all the diseases that ensure return on investment for distant companies making pharmaceuticals and batteries. They can ignore the pleading of the servants of the White Men of Davos who will wish to inject them, but they cannot ignore their poverty or the disinterest in their opinions. As with Covid-19, they will now become poorer because Google, the Guardian, and the WHO were bought a long time back, and now serve others.

The one real hope is that we ignore lies and empty pronouncements, refusing to bow to unfounded fear. In public health and in society, censorship protects falsehoods and dictates reflect greed for power. Once we refuse to accept either, we can begin to address the problems at the WHO and the inequity it is promoting. Until that time, we will live in this increasingly vicious circus.

David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA.

August 18, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

The Academic Whistleblower

A Human Sacrifice Worth Making?

By Lisa Hutchinson | Health Advisory & Recovery Team | August 14, 2024

Recently, I listened to an interview with Dr Carl Elliott based on his published book released in June 2024 titled “The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No”. Dr Elliott is a bioethicist at the University of Minnesota who was trained in medicine as well as philosophy. For years, he fought for an independent inquiry into a case of corruption at a psychiatric research study at his own university in which sadly an especially vulnerable patient lost his life. Carl experienced first hand what it is like to be an academic whistleblower, and endured a terrible experience. His own efforts resulted in him being shunned by his friends and colleagues and impeded by his own university, who denied any wrongdoing, until an independent state investigation finally vindicated his claims after a 7-year-long battle.

Carl posits that As mentioned, his foray into this is very sad and disturbing. He detailed the extraordinary case of a mentally vulnerable man, Dan Markingson, who was admitted to a psychiatric unit after experiencing a series of psychotic episodes. Despite being a danger to himself and others, he was enrolled on a clinical trial of a new multi-drug regimen. Dan was coerced into following the treatment decisions of his psychiatrist, but against the strong objections of his concerned mother, he entered the study because he gave his “consent”. Worried for his safety, Dan’s mother spent several months trying to get him out of the study, after his behaviour dramatically worsened. She wrote to the study centre and study coordinator to ask to remove her son from the study. Despite her justified concerns, she was ignored. Tragically, several months later in the Spring of 2004, Dan killed himself in extreme circumstances.

Carl discussed several stories of how participants of medical research can be deceived into taking part in experimental programmes they do not understand, even in circumstances when the mortality risks are high. Many patients are coerced into studies with blatant financial conflicts of interest or industry funding. When Carl learned of Dan’s case and raised concerns he could not get anyone to take him seriously, so he decided to do his own research and publish a book. By bringing this issue to a broader audience, Carl hoped it would prompt the university into doing something, but this failed spectacularly, and he became a despised figure in his own academic centre.

After learning of Dan’s case in 2008, Carl spent 7 years trying to get Dan’s death investigated. His efforts included creating petitions, writing to the University Alumni, writing to the FDA and federal government. Eventually, he got a state investigation, and although the ruling was positive and vindicated everything he and other critics raised, the follow up was non-existent. His efforts accomplished very little – there was no apology from the academic university, no compensation to victims, no reform, or sanctions for the wrongdoers or efforts to learn from the devastating situation. This was a demoralising ending after such a long struggle.

Ethical standards and integrity have been gradually compromised for several decades. It is unclear why there is pressure to violate ethical rules in the medical research domain. Some of the reasons are financial, but perhaps a bigger issue is the pursuit of glory for some academic clinicians. In psychiatry, balancing the interests of individual participants in trials versus the pursuit of scientific answers is compromised. In 90% of the scandals Carl teaches about at the University of Minnesota, trial participants are mentally ill, disabled, have low socioeconomic status, are vulnerable, and cannot look out for themselves – collective traits that are exploited. As he describes it, the ‘honour code’ in medicine should safeguard and offer protections for such patient groups.

Many whistle-blower stories in the 1970s and 1980s predate the rise of the Big Pharma trials of today. Among clinicians and academics there is a race for glory, status, academic promotion, awards, and prizes. In the 1990s, the financial status changed unrecognisably with recent scandals having huge money stakes, absent from earlier corruption cases. In the past 20-30 years, academic research is less about patient care and more about research funding, which is a toxic situation. Sectors outside medicine have a regulatory system, which is absent in medical research. Instead, an ‘honour’ system exists in which professionals are trusted to behave honestly. Ultimately, there is a quasi regulatory responsibility by industry for overseeing integrity in its multi-billion dollar sector. Coupled with medical arrogance, bioethics within academic centres is now funded by the same industry players funding the studies. Thus, bioethics has been absorbed into academic health centres, relocating ethics to the belly of the beast!

There is a huge difficulty in maintaining independence and not being ‘captured’ by academic medicine. When research funding for academic salaries or tenure is through government-led institutions combined with the pressure to publish findings in high-profile medical journals, this creates a dangerous authoritarian culture. Such an environment has sometimes led to the dehumanisation of the patient, and maintaining ethical standards is a challenge. In a fee-for-service culture where high financial incentives exist, dismissing adverse effects of experimental treatments and lowering the inclusion criteria threshold are all too pervasive. There are of course well-intentioned medical professionals, but corporate overlords, dependence on practice guidelines coupled with the tremendous academic workload, stymies patient safeguarding and forges academic burnout.

What do whistleblowers have in common? They are motivated by honour, integrity, and moral concerns. They have no expectation for financial gain and they do not derive any personal advantages for themselves; in fact, they usually have everything to lose, such as financial stability and reputational damage, yet they still speak out. The reason many whistleblowers persisted in what they felt was a near futile struggle for years or even decades before resolution, was they were tenacious and refused to give up. Notably, cases known to the public are only examples in which a ‘resolution’ was achieved, even though the whistleblowers had reputational damage and no apology or financial compensation for victims was provided. So the situation is likely worse in terms of the treacherous path travelled by many whistleblowers, as we only hear of the most ‘successful’ cases.

Whistleblowers who worked for the public health sector often got nowhere. All whistleblowers had a common metaphor – if they were to look in the mirror, could they live with themselves if they did not do something? Many experience a form of PTSD and none experience improved lives following their exposure. Does disillusionment occur prior to whistleblowing, or when attempts or reports are ignored? Sadly, it seems there is a slow descent into nihilism. Most whistleblowers believe that if the outside world knew what they knew, this would encourage people to defend or change the corruption – notably this never happens. They also hope that close friends or relatives will stand by them, but in its absence, an existential break occurs.

Some whistleblowers feel a sense of guilt because of their complicity in their own industry. Others feel guilt out of a sense of disloyalty to their peers or not wanting to expose an entire institution into disrepute. The notion that whistleblowers are heroic victorious figures that embark on a ‘David versus Goliath’ image is a falsehood! Perhaps the whistleblower is a rare breed; many who are concerned might be more realistic or disillusioned to begin with, so have a lower expectation in terms of likely justice. Possible reasons there are not more whistleblowers is because they know their action would be futile, they could get disciplined, they did not want to snitch on friends or colleagues, or they had a (misplaced) loyalty to their institution. Indeed, a recent BMA survey reported that 61% of doctors polled about patient safety concerns would not raise concerns because of fears that they or their colleagues might be “unfairly blamed or suffer adverse consequences”.

Organisational loyalty is puzzling because an institution intrinsically seems to instil loyalty, but fighting something that undermines it, ironically goes against those who expose it. One way to address this would be to establish independent organisations to investigate such cases. Although many are aware bad behaviour exists, those in senior leadership positions do not ask, so the corruption remains under the radar. One example was at the Karolinska Institute over lethal synthetic trachea transplants, in which a surgeon had falsified results and misled the hospital about the health of those who received the transplants. While the surgeon involved, Paolo Macchiarini, received a prison conviction, the Swedish legal authorities and Karolinska Institute did not apologise to whistleblowers or compensate the victims. This high-profile case did not tarnish the institute’s reputation; in fact, it is rare for institutions to suffer in medical corruption cases. Leaders at academic institutions worry that if problems are exposed, it will deleteriously impact them, so silence or internal handling is considered the best policy.

One would think it would be better to come clean so that things can be remedied, and the error not repeated, in the hope wrongdoers are punished and institutions reformed. However, in his research and experience, Carl has never come across an institution that took positive resolution steps. Academic organisations still attack anyone who threatens their reputation. Often the senior figures in such scandals, such as Deans, Presidents or Directors, have left by the time a scandal is exposed, which one might think would help reduce any reputational damage. Although no one currently employed would be implicated in such scandals if the culprits have departed, the corrupt behaviour remains unchanged, so it is hard to offer an explanation.

The general public has a high opinion of doctors, believing medical professionals have strong ethics and want to help people and save lives. While this is true for many doctors, modern medicine has become big business financially. Patients are nowadays consumers, which is an inevitable slide into corruption. The marketing of medical devices and drugs has become more covert, such as  bribes given to doctors. The scandals involved to preserve the illusion of integrity internally and externally are egregious. Carl is sceptical that a greater awareness of Big Pharma and how their marketing efforts operate would result in a more-positive outcome.

Ultimately, drug representatives are salesmen: they try to get doctors to prescribe their drugs. For many years, the vast majority of marketing was aimed at doctors not patients, although direct-to-consumer advertising is now ubiquitous. Huge financial sums are at stake, and most doctors do not like to imagine their prescription decisions are influenced by Big Pharma. Drug representatives have developed relationships with doctors – they are mercenaries. In the blockbuster drug era, especially in the USA, it is possible to make billion dollar drug sales for chronic illnesses, and doctors can be exploited to earn millions. Other than consultancy, doctors can receive lavish gifts, such as expensive dinners or premium tickets to expensive events. In the 1990s, the development of script tracking enabled the ability to measure in real time how marketing efforts affected doctors script sales. All drug representatives have access to the same data, so they compete for doctors with highest prescriber practices.

Ultimately, all the systems follow the same money trail. People who run the hospitals are worse, and according to Carl, those getting most from industry have the largest bribes. This farce is omnipresent; alarmingly, many bioethicists are not averse to taking industry money, highlighting that we are falling off the bioethics cliff. It is striking how universal and commonplace the language of medicine has become to describe the human experience. People define themselves on the basis of a medical diagnosis, illustrating how marketing has infiltrated our lives. For instance, people describe medical interventions as the person they are inside and how this fulfils their authentic self. It is an illusion that an intervention helps you become who you really are on the inside. Carl suggests pressure exists either to fit in or to stand out, which are two sides of the same coin.

Does bioethics have a rescue philosophy? In general, bioethics is a huge disappointment, with the status quo unchanged since the 1980s. Bioethics has taken up residence in academic health centres and is controlled by the same corrupt forces. It is sobering that not a single medical research scandal exists, whether patient care, sexual abuse, or research misconduct, in which a bioethicist has criticized their own institution. They know how unwelcome it would be, so they keep quiet! The conclusions of Carl’s book and interview are disheartening: being a whistleblower is not worth the hassle or personal devastation involved for the noble individuals who speak out. Since the Covid era, whistleblowers have become more prolific as many no longer accept the associated injustice. Let’s hope this seeds change and a much-needed new cultural shift to inspire and support future academic whistleblowers rather than deter them. The brave but solitary path of the academic whistleblower must be a human sacrifice worth taking!

August 15, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Corruption, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

White House Suppressed Docs Showing Hunter Sought State Dept Help for Burisma

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | August 14, 2024

Newly released documents show that Hunter Biden sought to inappropriately benefit the Ukrainian energy company Burisma while his father was vice president. The records were suppressed by the White House.

The files, obtained by the New York Times and reported on Tuesday, show Hunter sent a letter to the US ambassador in Italy in 2016 requesting assistance for Burisma. At the time, Hunter was making tens of thousands of dollars per month as a board member of the Ukrainian energy company, a position he was handed in 2014.

The diplomatic staff in Italy felt the request was not appropriate. “I want to be careful about promising too much,” an official based at the US Embassy in Rome wrote. “This is a Ukrainian company and, purely to protect ourselves, [the US government] should not be actively advocating with the government of Italy without the company going through the [Department of Commerce] Advocacy Center.”

While the Times received records from the State Department, the outlet was not provided with the full text of the letter. The paper suggested the State Department may have more records related to Hunter Biden that it is withholding, also noting the documents it obtained were only released “after President Biden dropped his re-election bid.”

Abbe Lowell, a lawyer for Hunter, claimed nothing untoward took place, maintaining he merely “asked various people” to arrange a meeting with the governor of Italy’s Tuscany region, where Burisma was “pursuing a geothermal project.” The White House claims President Biden was “not aware” of Hunter’s outreach to the embassy in Italy at the time, according to the Times.

As Joe Biden campaigned for the White House in 2020, questions arose about his son’s ties to Burisma – a major gas firm founded by Ukrainian oligarch and ex-environment minister Mykola Zlochevsky. At the time, Hunter sat on the company’s board and raked in between $50,000 and $83,000 each month, despite having no prior experience in the energy sector or in Ukraine more broadly. Then VP under the Obama administration, the elder Biden was directing US policy in Ukraine when Hunter got the job. The country was in a state of instability and civil war following a US-backed coup in 2014.

The Biden campaign and White House have attempted to dismiss charges that Hunter acted inappropriately and exploited his father’s political influence, deeming the claims Russian disinformation.

August 14, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Georgia lays blame for 2008 war with Russia

RT | August 14, 2024

Former Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili was responsible for the country’s conflict with Russia in 2008, and acted on instructions from external forces, the ruling party in the former Soviet state has said.

The five-day war erupted on the night of August 8, 2008, when US-backed Saakashvili sent troops into Georgia’s breakaway region of South Ossetia, shelling a base used by Russian peacekeepers who had been in the republic since the 1990s.

Then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ordered a “peace enforcement” operation in response, which led to the defeat of Tbilisi’s forces. On August 26, Moscow recognized the independence of South Ossetia and another breakaway region, Abkhazia.

The political council of the ruling Georgian Dream party said in a statement on Tuesday that a public legal process was necessary to establish “who committed a treacherous crime against our country and people [in 2008].” This was required in the interests of long-term peace and stability, the party stated.

“The majority of Georgian society rightly doubts Saakashvili’s adequacy. However, the fact is that Saakashvili’s reckless actions in August 2008 were not a result of his mental instability, but a result of the instructions from the outside and a well-planned betrayal,” the statement read.

Georgian Dream did not identify the external forces that it claims directed the actions of the Georgian president 16 years ago.

Last week, Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze said the government would address the Prosecutor’s Office, the Constitutional Court, or set up a parliamentary commission to look into the events of 2008. According to Kobakhidze, Saakashvili, who is serving a six-year prison sentence, could face additional charges of treason over his role in the conflict with Russia. Such an offense carries a maximum punishment of life in prison.

Saakashvili was voted out of office in 2013 and fled to the US. He also has a Ukrainian passport, which he obtained during a brief stint as governor of the country’s Odessa Region in 2015-16.

The former president was detained in October 2021 after secretly returning to Georgia during an election in the country. The authorities in Tbilisi accused Saakashvili of abuse of power, organizing attacks on political opponents, embezzlement, and other offenses during his time in office between 2004 and 2013.

The 56-year-old has remained in hospital in the Georgian capital since March 2022 due to deteriorating health. Saakashvili insists that the prosecution is politically motivated. His lawyers claim that the politician, who has lost a significant amount of weight in custody, is not receiving adequate medical care.

August 14, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | | Leave a comment

‘They Have to Be Stopped’: Woman Says COVID Hospital Protocols Caused Husband’s Death

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | August 8, 2024

In June 2021, 61-year-old Jeffrey R. Smith was healthy, active and enjoying his 42nd year of marriage to Sharon Smith. That same month, they both came down with COVID-19, but their symptoms were mild and there was little cause for concern.

When Jeffrey’s symptoms lingered just a bit longer than those of his wife, he visited an urgent care center.

That visit marked the beginning of a 39-day ordeal that resulted in his hospitalization, a loss of 47 pounds, and, ultimately, his death, on Aug. 11, 2021, at Mease Countryside Hospital in Safety Harbor, Florida.

Jeffrey’s cause of death was officially listed as COVID-19. But when Sharon examined his approximately 6,000 pages of medical records, she discovered he had sustained kidney damage, likely due to repeated doses of medications including remdesivir, a drug known to stop kidney function in patients.

Sharon also discovered that doctors at the hospital did not treat her husband’s pulmonary embolism — or blood clot — which he developed during his hospitalization. Instead, she alleges doctors insisted she allow him to be placed on a ventilator and that she sign a do not resuscitate (DNR) order for him.

In an interview with The Defender, Sharon said the treatment her husband received at the hospital was incentivized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) COVID-19 hospital protocols — and by the fact that neither she nor her husband had received a COVID-19 vaccine.

Sharon shared extensive documentation with The Defender to corroborate her story.

‘He didn’t give his consent to anything’

On July 4, 2021, Sharon said she “just didn’t think my husband was breathing as deep as I was.” Out of concern, she recommended they visit a local urgent care center for a chest X-ray.

“When we went to urgent care and they checked his blood pressure, everything was normal,” Sharon said. However, the couple was sent to Mease Countryside Hospital for X-rays.

Sharon recalled that she could not stay at the hospital due to COVID-19 restrictions, but was told she could return in two hours to pick up her husband. However, about 30 minutes later, her husband called and said the hospital was going to keep him overnight.

“I said, why?” Sharon recalled. “He wasn’t struggling to breathe. … Blood pressure was good, temperature was good.” Despite this, Sharon was told that her husband was going to be kept “on a little oxygen.”

“What we didn’t know at the time was that they had given him two doses of remdesivir, and he didn’t give his consent to anything,” Sharon said. Doctors administered the two doses within three hours of admitting Jeffrey to the hospital.

He had a D-dimer test for pulmonary embolisms, and it was normal, Sharon said. “Everything was normal. He was so healthy going in. He took no medications, had no health issues at all. He walked three to six miles a week. We just had our checkup at the doctor. So, there was nothing there.”

Later that evening, Sharon said someone from the hospital called “in a panic, in the middle of the night … that they had to move Jeff up to the COVID ICU [intensive care unit] to just observe him a little bit more.”

The following day, Sharon said a doctor told Jeffrey that he was “probably going to have to go on the ventilator.” According to Sharon, when he asked why he had to be ventilated when he had come to the hospital for a chest X-ray — and mentioned that his wife would not agree to this — he was told “Well, your wife is going to have to like this or you’re going to die.”

“I said, ‘Oh my goodness, you’re not going to die.’ First of all, because we trusted the doctors, we trusted the hospital. We never in our wildest imaginations thought that you would go in for anything and they would try to harm you, but that’s exactly what they did,” Sharon told The Defender.

As time went on, the doctors gave him more and more oxygen, and more and more drugs, Sharon said, although she wasn’t informed about it. She only learned about the medications when she reviewed Jeffrey’s medical records after his death.

“The drugs that they were giving him … Precedex, propofol, fentanyl, midazolam … these are the drugs that they use to euthanize people,” Sharon said.

‘They stopped feeding him, giving him any kind of water, cleaning him’

Sharon said there were other examples of the hospital mistreating her husband.

“They stopped feeding him, giving him any kind of water, cleaning him,” she said, recalling that during a FaceTime conversation, he looked “awful.”

“I said, ‘Have you had a shower? Have they washed?’ He goes, ‘No, they haven’t.’ He looks awful. His hair’s a mess. He’s unshaven and he hasn’t had his bedding changed in a week. He hasn’t got any different clothes on,” Sharon recalled.

Her husband urged her not to make an issue of it, according to Sharon.

“When I would say something to the nurses, Jeff would say, ‘Sharon, don’t make waves, because they’re taking it out on me.’ And at the time, I didn’t understand. I didn’t think they were doing bad things, purposely doing bad things to him. I thought they were just being neglectful,” she said.

Sharon said it was difficult to speak to a doctor or to get authorization to visit Jeffrey.

“Every day I would say, I want the doctor to call me. The doctor would call me. Sometimes they were rude to me, sometimes they were short with me, some were OK.” She had to “plead” with a hospital administrator in one instance to be allowed a 15-minute visit.

“I got up there to see Jeff, and he was just a mess. I mean, they weren’t getting him out of the bed. He was just deteriorating in front of my eyes,” Sharon recalled.

On another occasion, Sharon said she was allowed a visit for “17 minutes, exactly” and was told she would soon be permitted daily visits. Later that day, Sharon called to check on Jeffrey and was told he was “relaxed and had some ice cream.”

A half-hour later, “I get a call from the hospital and it’s a panic … they said, ‘We’re going to put Jeff on the ventilator right now. He had a panic attack and his oxygen level dropped and he can’t get it back up, so we have to put him on the ventilator.’”

Sharon said she was offered the opportunity to speak with Jeffrey via FaceTime. “I got 20 seconds to see my husband’s face, and when I think back now, he wasn’t gasping for air or anything like that. He just looked scared.”

According to Sharon, she was told Jeffrey would be ventilated for three days “just to give his lungs a break.” Yet, “he was on the ventilator for 20 days after that” — until the day he died.

‘They yelled and screamed at me’

According to Sharon, the doctors repeatedly told her that as long as his kidneys weren’t involved, he would be OK. Yet, “as soon as he got on the ventilator, that’s when they said, ‘Oh, his kidneys are struggling.’ And that’s what remdesivir does.”

Jeffrey was placed on CRRT (continuous renal replacement therapy), a slow dialysis machine. This continued until Aug. 11, 2021, when Sharon remembered a doctor called her and said Jeffrey was “tolerating the CRRT really well” and that he would “try a couple different things” and call back.

“He called me back a couple hours later and said, ‘Jeff’s going to code out today,’” Sharon recalled. “I’m like, ‘a couple hours ago he was doing OK.’”

Sharon says she insisted on visiting her husband, but the doctor “fought” her on it, before relenting. When she did visit, hospital staff told her to “look through the glass” at her husband, before finally being allowed into the room “for two minutes.”

“When I came out, they started to pressure me to put a DNR on him, and I said, ‘I’m not putting a DNR on him.’ They kept pressuring me. I said, ‘my son and I are going to talk about it. We’ll call you back.’ We called them back and I said, ‘we’ve decided that we are not going to do that because if we do it then there is no hope,’” she said.

“They yelled and screamed at me on the phone, but I stuck to my guns,” Sharon recalled. “And a couple hours later, they called and said that Jeff had died.”

Blood clot, kidney troubles began after remdesivir administered

Sharon observed several abnormalities during her husband’s hospitalization and also when she reviewed his medical records.

“What I know now is that his D-dimer levels — and I have all the records to back this up — the evidence is that everything was in the normal range.”

She added:

“After the two doses of remdesivir in the hospital in the ER [emergency room], within three hours of being in the ER, that’s when he developed the blood clot. And they noted it. They were aware of it a couple of times. They noted it, but they didn’t do anything about it.

“The day after he had two doses of remdesivir … doctors noted that his D-dimer is now very elevated, which means you have a pulmonary embolism.”

“They did not treat it for two weeks, and they tested five times within that two-week period,” Sharon said, noting that Jeffrey “ended up having six doses of remdesivir.”

Sharon said Jeffrey was also administered a monoclonal antibody, “one dose to the tune of $27,000,” even though “it was already too late for that — you need to have that in the beginning. This was already 10 days in.”

Ultimately though, for Sharon, her husband’s fate rested on the lack of treatment for his blood clot.

“That’s where it started,” she said. “If they would have treated that blood clot on day one — because people have blood clots all the time — it’s something that you can fix … and send him home. But they didn’t choose to do that. It was like they had him and he was a cash cow for them,” she said, referring to the COVID-19 hospital protocols.

The protocols, prescribed by the CDC, are the subject of a white paper, “Follow the Money: Blood Money in U.S. Healthcare,” which found that the U.S. government incentivized hospitals under the CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act) to administer treatments such as remdesivir to COVID-19 patients.

According to the report, the average per-person incentive in the U.S. for a “complex COVID inpatient” is $292,566. Hospitals received money for each COVID-19 admission, for the use of remdesivir and for placing patients on ventilators.

‘They were making an example’ of the unvaccinated

Sharon said she believes that Jeffrey’s treatment at the hospital was connected to his unvaccinated status.

“The first day that Jeff was there … the doctor called me and the first question she asked [was], ‘Why weren’t you guys vaccinated?’” Sharon recalled. “I said, ‘Well, because we chose not to be. We are healthy. And this vaccine came out awful fast and we didn’t have a good feeling about it.’”

“That is noted in Jeff’s records over and over and over, that he was not vaccinated or I wasn’t. And at the time that he was in the hospital, it was really when the vaccine was really being pushed out. Basically, they were making an example of the people that came in there that were not vaccinated,” Sharon said.

Sharon also noted that, at Mease Countryside Hospital, patients were being admitted with either an “unvaccinated” or “unknown” vaccination status, perhaps to conceal the number of COVID-19 cases among the vaccinated.

“I know that from a number of nurses that are whistleblowers, that have come out and said that there wasn’t a place to put if you were vaccinated,” Sharon said.

Sharon has since become involved with activist groups who have spoken out on behalf of hospital protocol victims, including the FormerFedsGroup Freedom Foundation and the COVID-19 Humanity Betrayal Memory Project (CHBMP), which developed a list of the 25 commonalities shared by most hospital protocol victims.

According to Sharon, “Of those 25, I think there’s two that didn’t happen” to Jeffrey, noting that her requests that ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and vitamin D were refused, while vitamin C was administered only on the day of Jeffrey’s death.

“When you look through the drug list, you’ll see that that increased intensely as we got right to the end. He didn’t have a fighting chance,” Sharon said.

Sharon encouraged others who have lost a loved one at a hospital to a COVID-19 diagnosis to carefully check their medical records.

“People need to look at the death certificate. If it says ‘COVID,’ you need to get your medical records and have a doctor, have somebody that’s qualified to look at those records and go through them, just like I did. And they’re going to find that it’s probably not what they think. It’s much worse,” Sharon said.

She also encouraged victims and their families to speak out, noting that even a mere conversation with others can make a difference.

“There’s been many people that once you start to talk about it, then they go, ‘wait a minute.’ So, they start to connect the dots that this could have happened to their person,” Sharon said.

She added:

“There’s a couple of reasons why I fight this so much. One, because they took my husband away from me, and he wasn’t sick and he should never have died. But I’m thinking ahead for my children and my grandchildren. If we don’t stand up and fight for this right now and stop this, it’s going to continue, and we can’t have that. They have to be stopped.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

August 10, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

Hunter Biden Received ‘Millions’ of Dollars From Romania to Influence US Government – Court

Sputnik – 08.08.2024

Hunter Biden, the son of US President Joe Biden, has received millions of dollars from a Romanian entrepreneur in order to influence the US government during his father’s vice presidency, court filings have revealed.

US Department of Justice Special Counsel David Weiss’s office found that Biden received “substantial” sums of money from foreign firms and individuals in exchange for acting as a lobbyist, consultant, or legal adviser.

“With respect to his first topic, ‘allegations that Mr. Biden (1) acted on behalf of a foreign principal to influence U.S. policy and public opinion,’ the defendant did receive compensation from a foreign principal to attempt to influence U.S. policy and public opinion, as alleged in the indictment, and this evidence is relevant and not unfairly prejudicial,” the Wednesday filing read.

Hunter Biden worked for Romanian businessman Gabriel Popoviciu (referred to as G.P. in the document) to help him escape bribery charges in Romania, Weiss’s office also revealed.

“The evidence of what the defendant agreed to do and did do for G.P. demonstrates the defendant’s state of mind and intent during the relevant tax years charged in the indictment. It is also evidence that the defendants actions do not reflect someone with a diminished capacity, given that he agreed to attempt to influence U.S. public policy and receive millions of dollars,” the document said.

In November 2023, House Republicans subpoenaed the president’s brother James Biden and Hunter Biden to appear for a deposition before lawmakers. In May, Smith said that Hunter Biden had repeatedly lied to Congress in his February deposition to distance his involvement in what should be considered a “clear scheme to enrich the Biden family.”

The House of Representatives is investigating the Biden family for alleged criminal activity, including foreign influence peddling and bribery.

August 8, 2024 Posted by | Corruption | , | Leave a comment

Political and Media Elites ‘Turned UK Into Tinderbox’

Sputnik – 06.08.2024

Britain’s cities have been engulfed in riots triggered by a deadly stabbing attack which killed three children and injured ten others in the seaside town of Southport, England. British political analyst and former MEP Nick Griffin told Sputnik what role government policy, and the US Deep State, played in setting the stage for the explosion.

Hundreds of people have been arrested and dozens injured in the ongoing riots across England, Wales and Northern Ireland in the wake of the July 29 stabbing rampage in Southport.

British authorities and media have cast the riots as a misinformation-fueled act of far-right subversion and violence. But while high profile right-wing figures “confrontational” social media posts and messaging have certainly played a role in sparking the disorder, its cause is related to decades of ignoring the will and wishes of ordinary Britons by the country’s political and media class, former MEP Nick Griffin told Sputnik.

“The British people have been extremely patient with successive governments which have imposed a swamping tide of mass immigration on the country, without the slightest democratic mandate or any good or properly explained reason,” Griffin said.

“17.4 million people – the largest democratic mandate in UK electoral history – voted for Brexit, which was a very clear instruction to the political elite to get a grip on our borders and to halt the uninvited transformation of the country into a foreign place,” Griffin said.

“If the political class had listened to that warning and accepted the verdict of the people, the killings in Southport either would not have happened at all (because the killer and his family would have been sent back to now entirely peaceful and safe Rwanda) or would have been seen as a terrible crime which the police and courts alone should deal with,” the ex-lawmaker believes.

“But the political and media elite refused to accept the vote, failed to deliver the secured borders and only increased the contempt they showed for ordinary Brits – especially the white working class. It is this, together with an endless litany of two-tier policing and criminal justice, which make indigenous Brits, and especially the English, feel like second-class citizens in their own country. Frustration and anger over this had turned large parts of the country into a tinderbox, just waiting for a spark,” Griffin said.

The observer, who is the former leader and MEP lawmaker from the right-wing British National Party, says he doesn’t rule out the presence of foreign money and influence in the unrest overwhelming the UK, recalling how in 2008, he was approached by a man “with very good connections in the UK broadcasting media and press” who offered the party “limitless support” if it attacked Islam but dropped its opposition to neocon warmongering overseas, and the BNP’s “hostile position to the international banking cartel.”

“The money offer was repeated a few years ago, with literally a blank check available if the Christian nationalist social media network with which I became involved after leaving the BNP dropped any criticism of Zionism and Israel, stopped criticizing the banking cartel, abortion and the LGBTQ agenda, and concentrated on condemning Muslims and Islam,” Griffin said, emphasizing that that both offers were refused.

The observer believes the offers came from “very wealthy members of the pro-Likud Zionist lobby in America,” and estimates “that the US Deep State finds the highly motivated Zionist lobby to be very useful front for moves which fit its own agenda.”

“It’s similar,” Griffin said, “to the way that George Soros for so long funded all sorts of radical [liberal] leftist causes, leading many critics to focus on his far-left sympathies and even his Jewish heritage. This provided camouflage for the fact that his Open Society Foundation worked extremely closely with the National Endowment for Democracy, which is of course a CIA front. People have been so busy (rightly) condemning Soros that they missed the Deep State involvement altogether.”

In the wake of the mass migration crisis affecting many European countries, Griffin believes the US Deep State may have deliberately helped to create the crisis, “and is now stoking it,” to destabilize its “supposed allies,” just as the US sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline network ostensibly targeted Russia, but really struck the German economy and the euro, damage to which set back the looming end to the dollar’s hegemony.

“Likewise, destabilizing Britain and EU states with artificially imported and provoked racial conflict is a typical US Deep State trick. It’s using the same CIA playbook as was applied to destroy the former Yugoslavia. As with their coups and other interference, they never care about how many innocent people get hurt,” Griffin summed up.

August 6, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | 1 Comment

AIPAC, the leading Israeli lobby group, and its role in subversion of US democracy

By David Miller | Press TV | July 23, 2024

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is the most famous and equally notorious Israeli lobby group in the world. But how important is it really?

Some argue that its influence has been exaggerated and it can at best influence American policies at the margins, while others say it wields considerable clout in US power corridors.

Many of these arguments come from the political left like the one published in Mother Jones, the US leftist magazine, or the one from the former stalwart of the Palestinian cause, Christopher Hitchens, or even the one by Novara Media, a British “leftist” website.

In it, David Wearing presents his argument in these words:

AIPAC may best be seen as performing a disciplinary function within US politics. One can certainly argue that US support for Israel is made somewhat firmer given AIPAC’s role, and these marginal factors matter. But they are still marginal.

Certainly, the Zionist movement is keen to downplay its influence. A report in the Tablet: “How Influential Is AIPAC? Less Than Beer Sellers, Public Accountants, and Toyota” states:

The way AIPAC is talked about, you’d think they’d be a lobbying juggernaut, surely one of the largest in the nation’s capital. Wrong…:

Between 1998 and 2018, AIPAC didn’t make a dent in the Center for Responsive Politics list of the top-spending lobbying groups. In 2018, total pro-Israel lobbying spending was around $5 million, of which AIPAC accounted for $3.5 million.

In contrast, Native American casinos spent around $22 million that year. By Tablet’s count, AIPAC was the 147th highest-ranked entity in terms of lobbying spending in 2018.

This is an attempt to pretend that the influence of the Zionist movement is much less than suggested by observers.

However, based on our findings, we can present these facts:

  • Taking the figure disclosed to the lobbying regulator as if that was all AIPAC spends on lobbying is profoundly mistaken. Though it disclosed only $2.7 million lobby expenditure in 2022, its actual total expenditure was £79.1 million.
  • In addition, AIPAC controls another nonprofit, the American Israel Education Foundation. It discloses nothing to the regulator, yet had a 2022 expenditure of a further $44.6 million.
  • When we add campaign contributions the figures rise significantly. Donations by AIPAC’s Political Action Committee (PAC for short) and its new Super PAC, the United Democracy Project, in the most recent period (2024) total $17.4 million and  $31.5 million respectively.  It’s worth noting that none of this was donated by AIPAC itself. This adds to donations it has raised from others. The United Democracy Project is the third largest Superpac in the US in terms of 2024 expenditure, according to Open Secrets, the US lobby watchdog. This easily outstrips all corporate-related Superpacs.
  • Looking more widely at the Israel lobby in general declared lobbying expenditure by the lobby in 2018 was $7 million not “around $5 million” as stated by the Tablet. The figure for 2022 was $5.4 million, with the following groups making significant declarations: Anti-Defamation League ($340,000), Christians United for Israel ($240,000), Foundation for Defense of Democracies ($180,000), J Street ($640,000), Jewish Federations of North America ($893,000), Republican Jewish Coalition ($320,000), Zionist Organisation of America ($160,000).  But of course, their actual budget/expenditure is much higher than the narrow specific lobbying disclosure data.

However, taking figures the lobby narrowly conceives are woefully inadequate as it does not include money spent by Israeli firms or by foreign agents registered with the US Federal government’s Foreign Agents Registration Act office.

  • $6.3 million was spent in 2022 by Israeli firms including arms firms Elbit ($770,000), Rafael ($680,000), Israel Aerospace Industries ($446,000), and phone hacking firm Cellebrite ($440,000).
  • $16 million in the same year was spent by registered foreign agents of Israel including the regime itself, the World Zionist Organisation ($4.2 million), the Jewish Agency ($9.5 million), and the phone hacking firm NSO Group ($1.5 million).

But even that pales in comparison to data compiled by the Israellobby.org website.

It collates data on Zionist groups providing subsidies to the Zionist entity (including illegal settlements and the occupation forces) and lobbying and education.

It shows a total annual budget of £3.6 billion as long ago as 2012, rising to an estimated £6.3 billion in 2020. These figures do not include the data above on Israeli firms or foreign agents.

However extensive this data is (the best available source on the extent of the economic basis of the Zionist movement), it does not include the following:

There is hardly any research on the depth and extent of the Zionist penetration of US society which is cognizant of this data.

It’s time to dig deeper and reveal the actual spending power and reach of the lobby.

Turning back to AIPAC, it has a deserved reputation as the most powerful Israeli lobby group in the US.  However, a key Zionist talking point is the claim that it is not so powerful.

AIPAC was created by Isiah Kenen a contractor for the Zionist regime in 1963.  It was initially called the American Zionist Council. Two months after the American Zionist Council was ordered to register as a foreign agent, Kenen incorporated AIPAC which did not register as a foreign agent, though it is.

One element of AIPAC activities not well understood is its role in spending millions every year ferrying Israeli settlers for eight-day junkets.

The trips are organized through a cutout called the American Israel Education Fund, a charitable organization founded by AIPAC, from which it borrows its offices, board members, and even part of its logo. Like other tax-exempt nonprofits, AIEF must file a Form 990 every year with the Internal Revenue Service, but donors are redacted from the public version.

Recently, an unredacted tax filing for 2019 was obtained by The Intercept. It revealed that the financiers are a clutch of large foundations and nonprofits, some of which are family-run, which also offer funds to other genocidal Zionist groups.

They include foundations associated with the following families, Koret, Swartz, Schusterman and Singer.

The role of AIPAC in campaign contributions is also poorly understood. In November 2023, it was reported that AIPAC was “airing attack ads and beginning to back primary opponents to challenge Congress members who are not voting for or supporting Israel’s war on Gaza.”

According to the report in the Guardian :

Although AIPAC’s roots trace back to the 1950s, the group spent decades focusing most of its attention on lobbying members of Congress – only getting directly involved in races in the past few years. In late 2021, AIPAC announced the formation of a political action committee, known as AIPAC Pac, and a Super Pac, the United Democracy Project, to get more directly involved in congressional campaigns.

The groups hit the ground running in the 2022 midterms, spending nearly $50m across the election cycle. Aipac Pac boasts that it supported 365 pro-Israel candidates from both parties in 2022, while critics condemned the group’s endorsement of dozens of Republicans who voted against certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The Guardian reported that A group of Super Pacs and dark-money non-profits – most notably groups such as the United Democracy Project ($31,679,020) and the Democratic Majority for Israel ($35,000) – as well as other PACs (AIPAC PAC ($1,491,025) tied to Israeli interests contributed about significantly to US campaigns during the last cycle, according to Open Secrets, a campaign finance watchdog.

Open Secrets data show that this amounts to some $58.4 million in the past year.

In the spring of this year, it was revealed that AIPAC had a $100 million war chest for the upcoming election cycle.

AIPAC’s Super Pac is amusingly named the United Democracy Project. It spends targeted funds on lawmakers who challenge any pro-Israel policy including the mildly critical Squad of Democrat representatives and also Libertarian Republicans such as Thomas Massie who has voted against military aid to Israel.

It was Massie who revealed in an interview with Tucker Carlson that AIPAC appoints handlers for each Congress person.

Here is his description: ”It’s like your babysitter. Your AIPAC babysitter who is always talking to you for AIPAC. They’re probably a constituent in your district, but they are, you know, firmly embedded in AIPAC.

In November 2022, AIPAC claimed that “more than 95% of AIPAC-backed candidates won their election last night! Being pro-Israel is good policy and good politics!”

In July 2024, AIPAC claimed “So far this cycle, all 90 AIPAC-endorsed Democrats have won their primary election”

When all of this data and activity is considered we can see that AIPAC is much more of a player than is admitted in those views from the right and left who minimize its importance.

AIPAC is part of a complex network of lobby groups which collectively can be described as the “Israel lobby”.  Further, the lobby is itself only a smallish part of the much larger Zionist movement.  It is this which needs to be assessed in all its complexity.

When we do that a more rounded and complex account emerges.  The role of AIPAC cannot be considered outside its role in the wonder movement because its activities including raising funds and deploying them through other groups and organizations are a core element of its strategy.

Reducing AIPAC to its lobbying disclosure expenditure or its total budget cannot capture its significance in the movement, let alone the significance of the Zionist movement in total.

Hence, AIPAC, and the rest of the Zionist movement, must be stopped.

David Miller is the producer and co-host of Press TV’s weekly Palestine Declassified show. He was sacked from Bristol University in October 2021 over his Palestine advocacy. 

July 23, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , , , , | 1 Comment

EU Commission Hid Vaccine Contract Details From Public, Court Rules

By John-Michael Dumais | The Defender | July 17, 2024

The European Union‘s (EU) top court today ruled that the European Commission’s decision to heavily redact key portions of COVID-19 vaccine contracts with pharmaceutical companies during the pandemic violated the commission’s transparency obligations.

The European Court of Justice found that the commission failed to provide sufficient public access to COVID-19 vaccine purchase agreements, in a ruling that could deal a blow to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on the eve of her re-election bid, according to The Associated Press (AP).

The ruling came in response to legal challenges brought by EU lawmakers and private citizens seeking fuller disclosure of the multibillion-euro vaccine deals.

It highlights ongoing concerns about the secrecy surrounding the EU’s vaccine procurement process, a contentious issue since the early days of the pandemic.

“The Commission did not give the public wide enough access to the contracts for the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines,” the court said in its judgment, pointing to several areas where the executive body fell short in being sufficiently transparent.

In response to the ruling, the commission wrote, “The Commission needed to strike a difficult balance between the right of the public, including MEPs [Members of the European Parliament], to information, and the legal requirements emanating from the COVID-19 contracts themselves, which could result in claims for damages at the cost of taxpayers’ money.”

Green MEP Tilly Metz, one of the deputies who submitted the original request, said, “This ruling is significant for the future, as the EU Commission is expected to undertake more joint procurements in areas like health and potentially defence,” Euractiv reported.

“The new European Commission will have to adapt their handling of access to documents requests to be in line with today’s ruling,” Metz said.

However, Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst told The Defender that the court ruling is not the victory it seems. She argued that the EU court has given the commission a “giant loophole” to keep parts of the contracts secret “to protect ‘business interests.’”

“It is not possible to both protect public health and full transparency and at the same time protect the business interests of the supplier,” Terhorst said. “We, the public, will not get the access to the information we need. The cat and mouse play continues.”

The commission, which has two months to appeal the decision, said it would “carefully study the Court’s judgments and their implications” and that it “reserves its legal options.”

Scale and speed of purchases unprecedented

In 2020 and 2021, von der Leyen negotiated purchase agreements for COVID-19 vaccines with several pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca, according to the AP.

EU member states mandated the European Commission organize the joint procurement of vaccines and lead negotiations with manufacturers.

The scale and speed of these purchases were unprecedented. According to the court, approximately 2.7 billion euros ($2.95 billion) was quickly mobilized to place firm orders for more than 1 billion doses of vaccines. This joint procurement approach allowed for the rapid acquisition of vaccines for all 27 EU member states.

Initially, von der Leyen received praise for her leadership during the COVID-19 crisis, particularly for her role in securing collective vaccine access for EU citizens. However, the spotlight quickly shifted to concerns about the negotiations’ lack of transparency.

In 2021, several members of the European Parliament requested full details of the agreements. The commission, citing confidentiality reasons, agreed to provide only partial access to certain contracts and documents, which were placed online in redacted versions.

The commission also refused to disclose how much it paid for the billions of doses it secured.

Concerns over secret deals with Pfizer

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla twice in 2022 refused to testify before the European Parliament’s special committee on COVID-19. Bourla was expected to face tough questions about secretive vaccine deals and negotiations between Pfizer and the European Commission.

Of particular interest were text messages between Bourla and von der Leyen that preceded a multibillion-euro vaccine contract. In January 2023, The New York Times sued the European Commission over its failure to release the messages.

That suit followed a January 2022 inquiry by the EU ombudsman charging the commission with maladministration over its handling of a previous request for the messages.

In June, a Belgian court took up the issue of the secret negotiations between Bourla and von der Leyen, with a former lobbyist for the EU Parliament claiming “destruction of public documents” and alleging von der Leyen violated the commission’s code of conduct.

Commission officials argued the messages didn’t contain any important information and have thus far refused to provide them, according to the AP.

European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in 2022 opened an investigation into the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines in the EU during the pandemic. This investigation stems from a criminal complaint filed by an individual, with the governments of Hungary and Poland later joining the lawsuit, euronews reported. EPPO adjourned the case until December.

Implications for the European Commission and von der Leyen

The court’s ruling comes at a critical time for von der Leyen, just one day before the European Parliament is set to vote on her reappointment as commission president.

Von der Leyen had previously won backing from a majority of EU leaders in June. To secure her position, she now needs to garner support from at least 361 MEPs in the 720-seat European Parliament, WIONews reported.

This ruling presents a dilemma for the Greens, who initiated the legal challenge against the commission’s redactions. In recent days, von der Leyen has been courting the Greens to shore up support for her nomination ahead of the vote.

During a press conference in Strasbourg on Wednesday, Manon Aubry, a French MEP from the Left group, expressed strong concerns about the European Commission’s “lack of transparency.”

On the heels of the EU court ruling, German MEP Christine Anderson today said she would call for the removal of von der Leyen and the continuation of the criminal investigation of her actions.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

July 17, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

US Senator Menendez convicted in corruption trial

RT | July 16, 2024

US Senator Bob Menendez has been convicted of bribery, fraud, and of acting as a foreign agent, in a ruling that will see the New Jersey Democrat potentially serve decades behind bars.

A jury in New York on Tuesday found Menendez guilty on all 16 counts of bribery, wire fraud, extortion, acting as a foreign agent, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy. Two New Jersey businessmen – Wael Hana and Fred Daibes –were also convicted on multiple charges, while a third – Jose Uribe – already pleaded guilty and testified against the Senator during the trial.

Menendez’ wife, Nadine Menendez, was indicted alongside her husband last year, and will be tried once she finishes breast cancer treatment.

Prosecutors accused Menendez and his wife of accepting “hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes in exchange for using Menendez’s power and influence as Senator to serve the interests of a foreign state actor (Egypt) from at least 2018 to 2022.” In a deal brokered by the New Jersey businessmen, the couple received envelopes of cash, gold bars, a Mercedes-Benz convertible, and a no-show job for Nadine.

In exchange, Menendez used his position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to end a “hold” on US military aid to Egypt, to pass sensitive government information to Daibes, and to pressure prosecutors into investigating several of Hana’s competitors in the Halal meat business.

“It wasn’t enough for him to be one of the most powerful people in Washington,” federal prosecutor Paul Monteleoni said during his closing argument earlier this month. “Robert Menendez wanted all that power and he also wanted to use it to pile up riches for himself and his wife.”

Menendez did not testify in his own defense. His lawyers argued that the government could not prove that the Senator aided Egypt as a direct result of receiving the cash, gold, and gifts, and that he was acting in the interests of his constituents by aiding Hana and Daibes.

Menendez is the first sitting member of Congress to be charged with acting as a foreign agent. After his verdict was read out, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called on his fellow Democrat to “do what is right for his constituents, the Senate, and our country, and resign.”

Menendez has represented New Jersey since 2006, and is up for reelection this November. However, he announced in June that he would not seek the Democratic Party’s support, and would run as an independent.

His political future hinges on the outcome of a sentencing hearing in October. Menendez faces a potential prison term of 20 years for each charge of extortion and wire fraud, and a total of 222 years in the unlikely event that the maximum sentence for all 16 counts is applied consecutively.

July 16, 2024 Posted by | Corruption | | Leave a comment

EU suspends accession process of ex-Soviet republic

RT | July 8, 2024

The European Union has suspended the process of Georgia’s accession to the bloc, the EU’s ambassador to the former Soviet republic, Pavel Gerchinsky, told the Russian media on Tuesday. A €30 million ($32.5 million) payment allocated to the Georgian Defense Ministry has also reportedly been frozen.

The envoy cited Tbilisi’s controversial ‘foreign agent’ law as the reason behind the move. After the legislation was adopted last month, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell warned Georgia that its potential accession to the bloc was in jeopardy.

Formally titled the Transparency of Foreign Influence Act, the new law requires NGOs, media outlets, and individuals who receive more than 20% of their funding from abroad to register as entities “promoting the interests of a foreign power” and to disclose their donors. Those who fail to comply will face fines of up to $9,500. The bill came into force despite opposition protests and a veto by Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili.

“The intentions of the current Georgian government are unclear to EU leaders. The Transparency of Foreign Influence Act is clearly a step backwards. […] Also, the anti-Western, anti-European rhetoric is completely incompatible with the declared goal of joining the European Union. Unfortunately, as of now Georgia’s accession to the European Union has been suspended,” Gerchinsky said, as quoted by RIA Novosti.

While opponents of the law have described it as at attack on democracy and “Russian” because Moscow has similar legislation, its supporters have noted it is similar to what numerous Western nations, including the US, have in place.

Borrell said last month that Georgia will not progress with its EU accession unless its government changes its policies.

Georgia will hold parliamentary elections in October, and Gerchinsky expressed hope that a new government in Tbilisi, “whatever it may be,” will again “begin serious work” toward EU integration.

The former Soviet republic applied for EU membership in March 2022, shortly after the start of the Ukraine conflict. In May of last year, the European Council agreed to allocate €30 million to boost Georgia’s defense sector. The European Council granted Tbilisi candidate status last December.

July 9, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

US Provides $2 Billion Military Aid Package to Warsaw

By Connor Freeman | The Libertarian Institute | July 8, 2024

Washington is providing its NATO ally Poland with a second $2 billion foreign military financing (FMF) package in less than a year, Breaking Defense reports. In recent weeks, Warsaw has given Kiev a green light to use Polish-provided weapons to strike the Russian mainland as well as signed a bilateral military pact with Ukraine, agreeing to shoot down some Russian missiles.

A State Department official boasted to the outlet of how the two FMF loans are benefiting the US arms industry as well as strengthening the Washington-led bloc embroiled in its Ukraine proxy war with Moscow. “It’s impressive that it hasn’t even been a year and they [Poland] are moving out pretty quickly… We’re happy with the process. We see it as a success. We’re happy that they’ve been able to move out quickly — not only does it help NATO, it helps the US defense industry as well, the US economy. So, we’re definitely happy with the process.”

As with typical FMF loans, the funds furnished by the State Department to a foreign government must be spent on American-made weaponry and equipment. What makes this loan unique, however, is instead of a grant to purchase arms, this loan includes interest which Warsaw must repay. The US is putting up $60 million to guarantee the loan and cover initial fees. The official said details regarding how the funds will be spent, on what kinds of weapons, will not be shared during this week’s NATO summit. Instead, he insisted the Poles “[have] a list of things they want to achieve” and said to expect future announcements.

The official noted the previous FMF loan, issued last September, has either been totally spent or is earmarked for purchases including four aerostat-based early warning systems which accounts for approximately half the first loan. The unusual loan-based structure allows “the interagency to get FMF funding to foreign allies without needing to wait on the appropriations process,” the outlet notes, adding Congress extended the authority to issue these loans through the end of the 2025 fiscal year.

Asked if other countries will receive such loans, the official answered “We are looking at it, and there are other countries that remain competitive… The reason you’re seeing Poland is, of course, the situation with the ongoing war in Ukraine. They’re ready to move out.” The official emphasized that talks with multiple countries are ongoing, while repeatedly praising Warsaw’s high military spending and deeming Poland “the tip of the spear on this for us right now.”

The State Department stated “Poland is a leader in NATO, currently spending four percent of GDP on defense, the highest in the Alliance. Poland hosts thousands of U.S. and Allied forces, including U.S. V Corps Headquarters (Forward) in Poznan.” The US has roughly 10,000 troops stationed in Poland. Since Russian forces invaded Ukraine, Warsaw has announced plans to buy a myriad of American arms including Abrams tanks, Black Hawk and Apache helicopters, HIMARS rocket launchers. Poland is seeking more Patriot air defense batteries as well.

This latest financial and military infusion comes after Ukraine and Poland signed a bilateral military pact this week which includes a mechanism for Warsaw to shoot down Russian missiles and drones. This provision entails the potential to provoke a NATO-Russia war, something Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has long sought.

During a joint presser with Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on Monday, Zelensky declared “We are especially grateful for the special arrangements, and this is reflected in the security agreement. It provides for the development of a mechanism to shoot down [by Poland] Russian missiles and drones fired in the airspace of Ukraine in the direction of Poland.”

In November 2022, after a Ukrainian air defense missile killed two people in Poland, Zelensky and his top advisors said it was a Russian strike and demanded NATO take action. “Hitting NATO territory with missiles. … This is a Russian missile attack on collective security! This is a really significant escalation. Action is needed,” Zelensky railed in a video address.

This assessment was completely at odds with those made by the US, Poland, and NATO which determined the Polish casualties were not the result of a Russian missile strike. At the time, a diplomat from a NATO member state told Financial Times “The Ukrainians are destroying [our] confidence in them. Nobody is blaming Ukraine and they are openly lying. This is more destructive than the missile.”

July 9, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | 3 Comments

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »