WHO Recommends New Gates-Funded Polio Vaccine to Address Vaccine-Derived Polio Outbreak in U.K.
By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 27, 2022
Health officials in the U.K. this month identified the country’s first polio outbreak in 40 years, and believe the outbreak was caused by a strain of polio found in the oral polio vaccine.
Health officials in Britain warned parents on June 22 to ensure their children have been vaccinated against polio after multiple closely related versions of the virus that cause the disease were found in sewage water at the London Beckton Sewage Treatment Works — the largest water treatment plant in the U.K.
“The Global Polio Laboratory Network has confirmed the isolation of type 2 vaccine-derived poliovirus (VDPV2) from environmental samples in London, United Kingdom, which were detected as part of ongoing disease surveillance,” the World Health Organization (WHO) states on its website.
The U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA) said it believes the virus was “vaccine-derived,” meaning it came from someone who received the live polio vaccine. That person then passed the virus to individuals in London, who shed the virus into their feces.
The viruses’ genetic sequences suggest “there has been some spread between closely linked individuals in north and east London,” the UKHSA said.
The virus was isolated from environmental samples collected between February and May, and no related cases of paralysis have been detected, the WHO said. “Additional sewage samples collected upstream from the main waste-water treatment plant’s inlet are being analyzed.”
People vaccinated with the live oral polio vaccine (OPV) shed traces of the virus in their stool — which eventually end up in sewage wastewater, NPR reported. Scientists believe a person brought the virus into London and then spread it to others who were unvaccinated.
“We are urgently investigating to better understand the extent of this transmission,” Vanessa Saliba, an epidemiologist who consults for the UKHSA, said in the statement.
The risk to the general public is thought to be “extremely low” but the agency encourages anyone not fully vaccinated to receive a polio vaccine.
WHO approves Gates’ oral polio vaccine for emergency use
The WHO on Nov. 13, 2020, granted Emergency Use Listing (EUL) to a new novel oral polio vaccine called nOPV2, designed to treat the type of polio outbreak occurring in the U.K.
Based on the WHO’s review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates’ nOPV2 become the “vaccine of choice” for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation provided 100% of the funding for the development and clinical trials of the vaccine.
The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) states on its website:
“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has funded all development and clinical trials of nOPV2 to date, working closely with GPEI partners throughout the process to ensure resources are going toward a tool that could prove critical to helping end all forms of polio.
“Based on promising data from clinical trials, and the public health emergency that cVDPV2 [vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2] constitutes, the Foundation is funding at-risk production of 160 million doses of nOPV2 to ensure it can be deployed immediately following the issuance of WHO’s interim Emergency Use Listing (EUL) recommendation for use.”
“The emergency use listing, or EUL, is the first of its kind for a vaccine” designed to “pave the way for potential listing of COVID-19 vaccines,” the WHO said on its website.
On December 31, 2020, the WHO issued its first EUL listing for a COVID-19 vaccine. According to the WHO, the agency granted the listing for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine.
The EUL is a regulatory pathway that allows the WHO — whose second-largest financial donor is the Gates Foundation — to distribute an unlicensed product for a “Public Health Emergency of International Concern,” which the organization claims polio has been since 2014.
The EUL allows vaccines and medicines to be made available more quickly to address health emergencies, without long-term phase 3 data, and is the same mechanism used for distribution of Zika, Ebola and COVID-19 vaccines.
According to the WHO, in “very rare cases,” the administration of OPV results in vaccine-associated paralytic polio associated with a “reversion of the vaccine strains to the more neurovirulent profile of wild poliovirus.”
In addition to causing vaccine-associated paralytic polio, vaccine strains have the capacity to cause disease of the nervous system and to transmit from person to person resulting in infectious poliomyelitis.
Based on the WHO’s review of data and research available on nOPV2, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) recommended Gates’ nOPV2 become the “vaccine of choice” for responding to type 2 polio outbreaks caused by OPV.
According to the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), the nOPV2 was developed to address vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 outbreaks, which “can emerge when the weakened strain of the vaccine virus circulates in under-immunized populations and, with time, can genetically revert into a form that causes paralysis.”
In other words, “under-immunized” populations — not the OPV — are to blame for the vaccine-related polio strains.
In an email to The Defender, Dr. Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., Children’s Health Defense chief scientific officer and professor of biology at Simpson University said:
“Once again, Big Pharma, fueled by the Gates Foundation, has created a huge problem that only they can solve. The introduction of the new OPV in the U.K. has predictably led to polio virus in the sewage (i.e., where poliovirus propagates) and now the “only solution” is to inject U.K. citizens with the nPOV2 to prevent the spread of OPV-induced polio. If this isn’t a scam, I don’t know what is!”
The U.K.’s Medicines and Regulatory Health Products Agency (MHRA) on June 17 said in a tweet: “An exciting new global study, co-authored by our lead scientist Javier Martin, shows that new polio vaccine nOPV2 is an effective tool in reducing the risk of Vaccine-Derived Polio Viruses.“
The tweet linked to a study published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advocating for the use of Gates’ nOPV2 vaccine.
Between the launch of nOPV2 in March 2021 and late May 2022, more than 350 million doses had been administered across 18 countries.
The GPEI confirmed, as of May 30, 16 other countries are “ready to use nOPV2” and an additional 17 are in the midst of preparations.
WHO, GPEI and other organizations pushing Gates-funded vaccine
According to UNICEF, the GPEI is a public-private partnership led by national governments with six core partners: Rotary International, the WHO, the CDC, UNICEF, the Gates Foundation and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
The Gates Foundation, in addition to funding the nPOV2 vaccine, GPEI and the WHO, also funds Rotary International, UNICEF, Gavi and the CDC Foundation.
The entity in charge of monitoring vaccine adverse events following administraton of nPOV2 is the WHO’s own Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS).
“The GACVS Sub-Committee on nOPV2 Safety will advise WHO and its Member States on safety outcomes following the use of initially pre-licensed type 2 novel oral poliovirus vaccine, during the EUL period, prior to the availability of Phase III clinical trial results,” according to GPEI.
In essence, the Gates Foundation funded the creation, development and clinical trials for the new nPOV2 polio vaccine, funds the organizations that administered millions of doses to be given under EUL without any long-term data, funds the organizations implementing its roll-out and surveillance and funds the entity monitoring adverse events associated with nPOV2’s use.
The Gates Foundation is also a funder of NPR and NPR’s blog, which have published numerous articles on VDPV2 and paved the way for Gates’ nPOV2 vaccine as the solution.
Oral polio v. inactivated polio vaccines
According to the WHO, the original OPV uses a mixture of “live attenuated poliovirus strains of each of the three serotypes,” selected for their ability to mimic the immune system’s response following infection with wild polioviruses, but with a reduced chance of spreading to the central nervous system.
To achieve the desired immune response, three or more doses of OPV are required spaced out over a period of time.
The U.S. and some western countries use an inactivated (killed) polio vaccine (IPV) developed by Dr. Jonas Salk and first used in 1955.
Scientists claim the inactivated virus poses no risk of spread, although the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system shows two reported cases of poliomyelitis reported following vaccination with IPV.
The U.S. stopped using OPV in 2000 because it caused paralytic polio.
According to NPR, countries in Africa, the Middle East and parts of Asia are experiencing a rise in cases of vaccine-derived polio. These countries mostly use the OPV developed by Albert Sabin and first used in 1961.
Gates’ nOPV2 vaccine is a modified version of Sabin’s existing OPV vaccine.
“The spread of vaccine-derived polio virus from OPV vaccine in multiple countries throughout Africa and Asia resulted in 1,612 cases of paralytic polio from 2017 through 2020,” Dr. Liz Mumper, pediatrician and former medical director of the Autism Research Institute told The Defender.
“Since these polio virus samples are in wastewater in a developed country, those who have access to clean water should not be at risk,” Mumper said. “However, the media is raising alarms. This is a setback for the Global Polio Eradication Initiative.”
According to the CDC, three cases of paralytic polio caused by the OPV vaccine have been reported in the U.S. since the vaccine was discontinued in 2000.
The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS, shows 66 reports of polio following administration of the OPV.
VAERS also shows 14 reported cases of poliomyelitis following vaccination with IPV. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.
Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Why is the government getting into bed with Moderna?
By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | June 27, 2022
WITH all eyes on the dramatic ‘return of polio’ headlines of last Wednesday and Thursday, a far more significant piece of news was slipped out. It was announced that the Government was partnering with Moderna to open a large research and manufacturing centre in Britain which ‘will develop cutting-edge mRNA vaccines for a wide range of respiratory diseases, including Covid-19 vaccines that can protect against multiple variants, helping to future-proof the UK against potential emerging health threats’.
Lucky NHS patients are to have access to the ‘next generation’ of mRNA vaccines and treatments. ‘The centre will be able to scale up production rapidly in the event of a health emergency, significantly boosting the UK’s ability to respond to future pandemics.’
This worrying press release requires careful reading. It reveals an astonishing gung-ho and uncritical approach to mRNA Covid vaccines in view of their now proven limited or even zero efficacy, and the high rate of recorded adverse events, injuries and deaths associated with them and in particular with the Moderna brand.
It does not tell us how much the Government is investing in this planned ‘mRNA Innovation and Technology Centre’ or where all the money is coming from. From the Centre for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovation (CEPI), the organisation which put up the money for Moderna’s fast-tracked Covid vaccine, that the UK already pays into? Or will some of the billions Moderna has made on the back of their ‘gene therapy’ covid vaccines be invested?
Something was to be gleaned from an interview with the Health Secretary on Wednesday’s BBC Radio 4 PM programme. Evan Davis asked Sajid Javid what Moderna would get in return for their billion-pound investment. ‘Well,’ said Javid, ‘the government’s agreed to buy Moderna’s vaccines, the mRNA ones, for the next decade’. (My italics)
Why on earth would the Government think it right to make such a commitment for new-technology vaccines as yet untested, that we may not need, to a get-rich-quick company that has serious questions to answer about exactly how it created its Covid vaccine so rapidly.
Why, as already touched on, would the government be making such a huge commitment to the producer of the vaccine that gets by far the highest Yellow Card adverse reaction reporting rate in the UK? (The official figures are: Pfizer – 1 in 157 people impacted, AstraZeneca – 1 in 101 people impacted, Moderna – 1 in 43 people impacted.) These represent the immediate risks recipients are exposed to but the technology is so new that there remains a complete absence of understanding of any long-term risks, and apparently no follow-up mechanism to study them.
In this interview we also learnt that it was, in Javid’s words, ‘a huge deal’, and that yes, what Moderna got out of it was a captive and secure market for pretty much whatever vaccines they choose to produce.
‘We all saw during the pandemic the power of vaccines, the difference that they can make. And in particular, with this new technology called mRNA, this platform, we saw how it has literally saved millions of lives during the pandemic. And this technology is transformational. And under this deal, what will be happening is that Moderna will be opening both a global R&D centre here in the UK, carrying out lots of the clinical trials. But also they’ll be building a manufacturing facility here in the UK for vaccines, that will be their largest outside of the United States. So it’s over a . . . well over a billion pounds of investment. It’s a huge vote of confidence in our life sciences industry. But how it matters most of all to me as the Health Secretary is that it will mean that we in the UK, NHS patients, will have guaranteed access to future vaccines and treatments from this exciting mRNA platform. And what that means, it’s more than just Covid or flu, it means that the future sort of health needs in terms of cancer and dementia, cardiovascular disease, you know, these are all things that hold huge potential from this investment’.
When Davis pressed: ‘I’m interested in what they get out of it, because you say obviously our regulators would have to approve any vaccine that we buy from them . . . but we have guaranteed purchases, haven’t we?’ Javid agreed: ‘Yeah, let me explain that. So what we will do is we’ll sign a contract with them which will say, basically, that if you create drugs that our regulator approves and that we actually want for our health system, then we will buy those drugs. And in return what we get in the UK is, is this huge investment and guaranteed access.’
His economic sense appeared to have gone quite astray at this point. What favour Moderna would be doing us if they are to be provided with a promised captive market? Of course we will have ‘guaranteed access’! And why the UK when Europe represents a much bigger market and we no longer have access to the EU single market?
Unfortunately Davis did not ask to whom the £395 million government investment mentioned in the press release ‘to secure and scale up the UK’s vaccine manufacturing capabilities’ has gone to or goes to. To Moderna?
Looking at the updates to Moderna’s confidentiality agreements released to Axios, they appear to be trying to diversify into the existing market for childhood vaccines and are gearing up to roll out mRNA vaccines for measles and mumps and perhaps now polio and other viruses.
The very real fear is that the MHRA will follow the US Food and Drug Administration’s approach of rapid rubberstamping for new products deemed to be ‘biosimilar’ to existing products authorised on that ‘platform’. Thus minimal testing will be required, the products will get MHRA approval more easily than traditional vaccines, and our children risk being guinea pigs again. The regulatory safeguards for these products that industry sees as ‘red tape’ have been built up over decades to protect users but are now being set aside. Additionally US pharmaceutical companies have absolute protection under US law for liability for defectively designed children’s vaccines. Will the UK now give them the same indemnities?
Mr Johnson’s and Mr Javid’s shared enthusiasm for this novel technology is in direct conflict with the precautionary principle. Either they have not caught up with or are in denial about the extent of the health issues surrounding mRNA vaccination.
If Johnson’s and Javid’s naivete can be excused, Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, must know better. Yet here he is in the press release cheering on the project: ‘The establishment of the Moderna mRNA Innovation and Technology Centre is great news for the UK’s research and development activities and future capabilities. Rapid cutting-edge vaccines were vital in the response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Developing the next generation of mRNA vaccines will be crucial in boosting our ability to prevent and respond to a wide range of diseases in the future.’
Not so fast, Sir Patrick and Mr Javid. This is not what the latest mRNA vaccine research evidence suggests at all. A study which summarises the current literature on mRNA and its effects published this month concludes that ‘the many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defences and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein’ causing innate immune suppression. The research paper presents evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signalling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health and says: ‘We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines questions them as positive contributors to public health.’
The cynic might say that what the next generation of mRNA vaccines will be crucial in is weakening our natural immunity, compromising our ability to combat disease ourselves while subjecting us and the next generation of children with reckless indifference to unknown health risks.
Al Gore stuffed millions into his lockbox while saving the world
By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | June 24, 2022
Since climate change has once again risen to the top of the charts, as an issue of “deep concern,” I’m reposting my piece about Al Gore from several years ago:
Freeman Dyson, physicist and mathematician, professor emeritus at Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, Fellow of the Royal Society, winner of the Lorentz Medal, the Max Planck Medal, the Fermi Award: “What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies [in climate change models] between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger. It’s clear now the models are wrong, but it wasn’t so clear 10 years ago… I’m 100 per cent Democrat myself, and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on this [climate change] issue, and the Republicans took the right side…” (The Register, October 11, 2015)
Dr. Ivar Giaever, Nobel-prize winner in Physics (1973), reported by Climate Depot, July 8, 2015: “Global warming is a non-problem… I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong.”
Green Guru James Lovelock, who once predicted imminent destruction of the planet via global warming: “The computer models just weren’t reliable. In fact, I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy, this climate change.” (The Guardian, September 30, 2016)
And these are but a tiny fraction of the statements made by dissident scientists who reject manmade global warming.
The science is only settled in government circles where leaders have climbed on board the Globalist plan to undermine economies all over the world by grossly lowering energy production, as a way to “reduce warming.”
One of the major warming hustlers is, of course, Al Gore.
Consider facts laid out in an uncritical Washington Post story (October 10, 2012, “Al Gore has thrived as a green-tech investor”):
In 2001, Al was worth less than $2 million. By 2012, it was estimated he’d locked up a nice neat $100 million.
How did he do it? Well, he invested in 14 green companies, who inhaled — via loans, grants and tax relief — somewhere in the neighborhood of $2.5 billion from the Federal government to go greener.
Therefore, Gore’s investments paid off, because the Federal government was providing massive cash backup to those companies. It’s nice to have Federal friends in high places.
For example, Gore’s investment firm at one point held 4.2 million shares of an outfit called Iberdrola Renovables, which was building 20 wind farms across the United States.
Iberdrola was blessed with $1.5 billion from the Federal government for the work which, by its own admission, saved its corporate financial bacon. Every little bit helps.
Then there was a company called Johnson Controls. It made batteries, including those for electric cars. Gore’s investment company, Generation Investment Management (GIM), doubled its holdings in Johnson Controls in 2008, when shares cost as little $9 a share. GIM sold when shares cost $21 to $26.
Note: Johnson Controls had been bolstered by $299 million dropped at its doorstep by the administration of President Barack Obama.
On the side, Gore had been giving speeches on the end of life as we know it on planet Earth, for as much as $175,000 a pop. (It wasn’t really on the side. Gore was constantly on the move from conference to conference, spewing jet fumes in his wake.) Those lecture fees can add up.
So Gore, as of 2012, had $100 million.
The man has worked every angle to parlay fear of global-warming catastrophes into a humdinger of a personal fortune. And he didn’t achieve his new status in the free market. The Federal government has been helping out with major, major bucks.
This wasn’t an entrepreneur relying exclusively on his own smarts and hard work. Far from it.
— How many scientists and other PhDs have been just saying no to the theory of manmade global warming?
A letter to The Wall Street Journal signed by 16 scientists just said no. Among the luminaries: William Happer, professor of physics at Princeton University; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.
And then there was the Global Warming Petition Project, or the Oregon Petition, that just said no. According to Petitionproject.org, the petition has the signatures of “31,487 American scientists,” of which 9,029 stated they had Ph.D.s.
Global warming is one of the Rockefeller Globalists’ chief issues. Manipulating it entails convincing populations that a massive intervention is necessary to stave off the imminent collapse of all life on Earth. Therefore, sovereign nations must be eradicated. Political power and decision-making must flow from above, from “those who are wiser.”
Al Gore is one of their front men.
He jets here and he jets there, carrying their messages. He’s their delivery kid.
And for his work, he is paid $100 million — a drop in the bucket.
Globalists want all national governments on the planet to commit to lowering energy production by a significant and destructive percentage in the next 15 years—“to save us from a horrible fate.”
Their real agenda is clear: The only solution to climate change is a global energy-management network. Globalist leaders are in the best position to manage such a system. They’ll mandate FAR LOWER energy-use levels throughout planet Earth, region by region, nation by nation, and eventually, citizen by citizen.
Yes, citizen by citizen.
This is the long-term goal. This is the Globalists’ Holy Grail.
Slavery imposed through energy.
State Department ‘Illegally Obstructing’ Afghanistan Probes, Watchdog Says
By Kyle Anzalone and Will Porter | The Libertarian Institute | June 23, 2022
The US government’s top oversight official for Afghanistan has accused the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) of stonewalling ongoing investigations, saying they have refused interviews with staff and even failed to provide “basic information” to assist the probes.
In a letter obtained by Politico this week, Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko outlined a series of complaints against State and USAID, claiming the agencies are obstructing audits looking into the final months of the war in Afghanistan, the fall of the US-built Afghan government and the transfer of billions in aid.
“The coordinated efforts by State and USAID officials to deny SIGAR access to information and assistance are unprecedented,” Sopko wrote in the letter, which was addressed to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and USAID chief Samantha Power.
He demanded the two officials “cease their illegal obstruction of SIGAR’s oversight work,” insisting that “The billions of US taxpayer dollars that have been spent and continue to be spent in support of the Afghan government and the Afghan people warrant independent oversight, and the law requires it.”
Though Sopko said the two agencies have “historically… supported SIGAR’s mission” and worked with his office willingly, “inexplicably, this long track record of cooperation seems to have abruptly ended. Agency officials now appear to have adopted a premeditated position of obstruction.”
The IG described several examples of obstruction, including the State Department’s refusal to make staffers available for interviews to discuss Afghan refugees and the conditions they endured after fleeing their home country. Most concerning for Sopko, however, was the agencies’ reluctance to provide even “basic information” on American aid programs meant to support Afghans, as SIGAR is conducting an audit to ensure tax dollars aren’t flowing to the Taliban – which now rules Afghanistan – or other militant groups.
The two agencies have pushed back on Sopko’s allegations, arguing that they have cooperated with SIGAR’s probes, though suggested the IG has acted outside the jurisdiction of his office in some cases.
“State and USAID are committed to assisting SIGAR with its important auditing and oversight role,” a department spokesperson said in a separate letter obtained by Politico, adding “We have had concerns about how some of SIGAR’s requests for information relate to their statutory jurisdiction.”
However, while the officials claimed humanitarian aid programs “do not pertain to reconstruction” and therefore fall beyond the scope of SIGAR’s mandate, Sopko said his office has audited such programs for more than a decade without any objections from the government.
“State and USAID legal counsels’ claim that SIGAR’s jurisdiction does not include such matters is not only contrary to the law, but a gross deviation from over 14 years of precedent set by three prior administrations,” the IG wrote.
Met Police Invokes “National Security” about Epstein Meeting with US Senators in the UK
BY WHITNEY WEBB |
UNLIMITED HANGOUT| JUNE 13, 2022
A Freedom of Information request filed by UH in connection with Whitney Webb’s upcoming book was blocked by UK Metropolitan police on “national security” grounds. The request sought information on the two sitting US Senators who met with Jeffrey Epstein at a Wexner-owned residence in the UK, a meeting where Met Police officers had provided security.
In connection with Whitney Webb’s upcoming book on the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, One Nation Under Blackmail, Unlimited Hangout filed a Freedom of Information request asking UK law enforcement and the Ministry of Defence the identity of two sitting US senators who were present at Foxcote House in North Warwickshire, UK on September 1, 2002. UH contributor Johnny Vedmore had previously obtained information from eyewitnesses of that meeting that, not only were two US Senators present at that location that day, but that Metropolitan Police officers had supplied security for the meeting. The FOI request was filed to Metropolitan Police, the UK Ministry of Defence and North Warwickshire Police and only a response from the Metropolitan Police was received.
The motive for UH’s FOI request is as follows. It is known that Jeffrey Epstein, as attested to by Epstein’s flight logs, was present in this part of the UK during this same period (from August 31, 2002 to September 2, 2002) and eyewitnesses saw him attend this specific meeting at this location with two attractive and glamorously dressed women on each arm. One of these women was Nicole Junkermann, a former model and apparent intelligence asset as revealed in Vedmore’s previous investigative work. The other woman was described by eyewitnesses as a tall brunette. Per those eyewitness accounts, Epstein personally escorted the two women into the room where the two senators were waiting.
Notably the house where this meeting took place, Foxcote House, has been owned by the family of Leslie Wexner, specifically his wife Abigail Wexner, since 1999. Wexner’s role in financing much of Jeffrey Epstein’s activities, legal and illegal, is a major focus of Webb’s upcoming book and Wexner has encountered considerable difficulty in explaining away his relationship with Epstein, despite the largely servile posture of mainstream media in this regard.
Given the circumstances, it seems highly likely that this meeting was a high-profile instance of Jeffrey Epstein engaging in the sexual blackmail of sitting American politicians. However, due to the well-known scandal around Jeffrey Epstein, his name was not used in our FOI request in order to avoid potentially “spiking” the response.
Despite the omission of Epstein’s name, Metropolitan Police responded to the request stating that they can “neither confirm nor deny whether it holds” the requested information. Their response goes on to state that confirming or denying “whether any United States of America (USA) senators were afforded protection could undermine the safeguarding of national security.” It also notes that it blocked providing the requested information on four other grounds aside from “national security” (five in total), including “international relations”, “law enforcement”, “health and safety”, and “personal information.” It also states that providing the requested information could place “those who are afforded protection, protection officers and members of the public at risk.”
Screenshot of the response from Met Police
UH has since re-filed a new, related FOI request asking why Metropolitan Police officers were providing protection to a meeting where Jeffrey Epstein was present, since his criminal activities are undeniable.
Google tells Congress the proposed antitrust bill would hinder its censorship efforts
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | June 9, 2022
Google continues to lobby and campaign against legislative efforts aimed at curbing its monopolistic power, this time openly, in a blog post.
Google claims that antitrust legislation – whose goal is to loosen the stranglehold it has on the market and competitors – would prevent it from censoring “disinformation.”
In the past months, the tech giant has used other avenues as well, from (🛡 fake) grassroots support that it purports to have, to spending millions on professional lobbyists in Washington DC.
In all this, Google has gone for all sorts of “targeted” arguments in an effort to make sure the bipartisan bills never become law. Lawmakers and voters had the chance to hear that if Google is not allowed to run its business unimpeded, exactly as it’s doing now, anything from innovation to national security would suffer.
And now, no doubt addressing that part of its audience that is particularly concerned with the specter of arbitrarily, if at all, defined “disinformation” as internet’s “greatest ill” – this time in the context of geopolitics – Google claims that the bills under consideration in Congress, would, if passed, prevent it from censoring disinformation.
VP of Google’s Privacy, Safety and Security Royal Hansen, claims that the legislation is a risk for US security, for that of its users, while it doesn’t address problems that “Americans care the most about.”
Despite the context of the writeup, Hansen for some reason mentions “privacy, child safety, and inflation.” This Google exec packs a lot of FUD into just a few sentences, to also warn users that some of their favorite products like Search and Maps will get broken – if Google is made to abide by possible future antitrust laws.
Among many other usual talking points that supposedly outweigh the need to regulate Big Tech’s business models Hansen talks about the danger of “rolling back” Google’s “war on disinformation” – that is, the unprecedented levels of censorship visible particularly on YouTube.
These last years, the topics were mostly Covid and US elections, but those are getting a little old; and so Hansen brings the war in Ukraine into the mix – as another reason why the digital market should not be a fair and level playing field for startups and other competitors.
“By prohibiting us from ‘discriminating’ against competitors, the bill would prevent us from taking action against purveyors of malicious content,” writes the Google exec. “Since Russia invaded Ukraine, we have been able to move quickly to limit Russian propaganda and disinformation, even as that content has migrated to new channels. The proposed legislation could undermine this work.”
Fauci’s COVID origins coverup spook has resurfaced to misdirect us about the origin of money pox
By Meryl Nass, MD | June 7, 2022
Andrew Rambaut (pronounced Rambo—and like Rambo, he is still in the ring, fighting for the globalists, when he should have taken his toys and slunk away long ago—after being beaten up as one of the stooges who produced the fake Nature Medicine paper on COVID’s origins) has long been associated with a group of virology spooks in Tony Fauci and Jeremy Farrar’s network. The field of evolutionary biology is supposed to tell you where new viruses have come from. But of course, it has been kidnapped to provide specious explanations when the biowarriors need to try and explain their concoctions as having natural origins.
Rambaut was also used to dispute the origins of HIV (as described in my friend Ed Hooper’s book The River ) while teamed up with Eddie Holmes, another Fauci flunkie, more than 20 years ago.
Republican members of Congress want to know what Fauci and his henchmen were up to when they concocted a fake natural origin for COVID, as revealed in the Fauci emails.
Rambaut was one of the 5 authors of that paper, and the paper was highly effective for a bit over one year at keeping a lid on COVID’s lab origin. As the members of Congress wrote:
Andersen and three other doctors on this teleconference [including Rambaut] later published a paper titled “the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 in Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020. This paper was highly influential in shaping our nation’s response to the pandemic. In the paper, the doctors concluded that “…we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.”[11]
… The Andersen paper led the narrative away from COVID-19’s potential lab origins. As Americans, we are deeply concerned by the appearance of discrepancies that largely influenced our understanding and approach to this virus. As Representatives of the American people, we owe it to them to seek and expose the truth about this virus’ origins wherever those efforts may lead.
Now Rambaut has popped up again, like a jack-in-the-box, to explain how the unexplainable 50 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP mutations) could have happened naturally. He has another bold theory! There was an evolutionary jump!
And Rambaut proffered yet another theory: the virus has been spreading in humans for years; we just didn’t notice it.
Below is a paper published by Portuguese researchers discusing the newly discovered mutations in money pox. They mention Rambaut’s theory, and Rambaut himself provides the first comment below the paper.
Spooks like Dr. Rambaut don’t do this dirty work for nothing. Just last month, he was made a fellow of the Royal Society.
From Wikipedia:
Science reported on 11 January 2020 that Rambaut was the first to publish the genome of the COVID-19 coronavirus after it was sent to him by Edward C. Holmes.[11][12] Holmes has said that it “took 52 minutes from receiving the code [from his Chinese colleague Professor Yong-Zhen Zhang] to publishing” on Virological.[13][14] The BBC Horizon episode The Vaccine stated: “When Chinese scientists published the genetic sequence of a mystery new virus on January 10th 2020, vaccine scientists around the world immediately sprang into action”.[15]
Rambaut was one of the authors of the scientific paper The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,[16] which concluded that “SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus”.
Rambaut is an attendee of the UK’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE).[17]
Perhaps someone else can look up his recent research grants. Were they from NIH or Wellcome? Being rewarded royally with other peoples’ money is another characteristic of the virology spook group.
On the Darknet: Ukrainians flood Europe with NATO arms shipments
Free West Media | June 6, 2022
Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, the US and other NATO countries have been sending state-of-the-art heavy weapons to Kiev. But many of the weapons systems do not end up at the front – but on the internet.
The Darknet is becoming an online wholesaler for war materiel. And the customers are also based in Europe.
Anti-tank missiles, automatic weapons, ammunition, drones or even mines – the warehouses of Darknet dealers are full. Thousands of weapons systems sent by Western allies to Ukraine can be found for sale on the internet.
Europe soon threatened by rocket launchers?
“It is surprising to say the least that after the fall of Mariupol, the United States was willing to send an additional 40 billion dollars to Ukraine where it had already lost another 14 billion dollars. In reality, two-thirds never reached their destination,” Thierry de Meyssan pointed out.
The FGM-148 Javelin is a man-portable anti-tank guided missile (ATGM). The US developed this weapon system to be able to combat heavily armoured vehicles such as main battle tanks and lighter military vehicles. It is hard to imagine what terrorists with weapons like these could do in a European city centre. Austrian daily eXXpress reported on this serious threat.
How many of these systems are already in Europe – presumably in the hands of criminals or terrorists? Police could eventually face massive problems with armed terrorists. It is easy to see how this could become a major security risk for large cities in Europe.
Darknet sales
It has never been easier to get hold of various NATO shipments – directly from Ukraine – to anywhere in the world to anyone with money. The assortment from Kiev includes rifles, grenades, pistols, body armour. Just one of the listed sellers already had 32 successful transactions to his name.
Already during the Balkan War, authorities witnessed how thousands of handguns had simply disappeared – and were then sold on the black market to criminal organisations or even to terrorists.
High-tech armament and an assortment of automatic weapons can now be ordered from the comfort of a screen. Grenades, incidentally, have been on special offer. If criminals moreover get hold of bullet-proof vests it would make it difficult for the police to stop them in the future.
Executive Director of Europol Catherine De Bolle stated in an interview with Welt am Sonntag recently that her agency was bracing for an influx of illegal weapons into Europe originally shipped to Ukraine by Western countries, including Greece, Sweden, Spain and Germany. She noted that the “weapons from [Kosovo] are still being used by criminal groups today”.
Jihadists and other radicals are already in the war zone, according to the database of the SIS (Schengen Information System).
Weapons outlive conflicts
“It would be prudent to consider the immediate and long-term security implications of arms transfer decisions and apply lessons hard-learned from past armed conflicts,” the US-based think-tank Stimson Center said about this development back in March.
“The United States and its partners may be doing a disservice to the very people they aim to protect without considering the potential risks of the infusion of weapons to the country. While there have been noteworthy pledges of additional military assistance, the lifecycle of an arms transfer is often quite long. Arms promised today may not be available for months or even years to come, at which point the situation on the ground will have evolved. Though these pledges have symbolic value they may have little real effect on the battlefield.”
The think tank furthermore warned: “From Afghanistan to Iraq to Colombia, well-intentioned transfers have a habit of outliving their political contexts, and risk fueling new conflicts, being captured by illicit groups, or contributing to enduring ecosystems of insecurity.”
The authors warned that the strategic risks of transferring arms to an area of active hostilities include exacerbating the conflict, extending the duration thereof, increasing its lethality, and contributing to civilian harm. “Moreover, arms have a long shelf life, and will still be around long after the guns inevitably fall silent,” they concluded.
Grading the uses of the Defense Production Act during COVID Mania
By Jordan Schachtel | June 6, 2022
With President Biden beginning this week by invoking the Defense Production Act (this time, to build solar panels) we figured it’s time to take a look at what happened to the DPA during COVID Mania, and explore how it has been used (abused) since March of 2020.
For starters:
The Defense Production Act is a federal law that was enacted in 1950 after the commencement of the Korean War.
The explanation of the bill, via Congress, goes as follows:
“To establish a system of priorities and allocations for materials and facilities, authorize the requisitioning thereof, provide financial assistance for expansion of productive capacity and supply, provide for price and wage stabilization, provide for the settlement of labor disputes, strengthen controls over credit, and by these measures facilitate the production of goods and services necessary for the national security, and for other purposes.”
In short, these are emergency powers granted to the executive with a precedent for being enacted during an actual war. These powers allow the president to compel private companies to work with the government on developing material goods that are supposed to be used for national security purposes.
During COVID Mania, the DPA has been routinely abused for our manufactured national emergency.
Let’s take a look at how the DPA has been utilized to “fight the virus.”
- March 27, 2020: President Trump defines ventilators and PPE as “essential to the national defense,” and orders GM to start producing ventilators. The move came with bipartisan insistence. We later discovered that ventilators were possibly killing COVID patients.
Grade: F - April 2, 2020: President Trump invokes the DPA to compel several American companies to produce N95 masks. Masks don’t work, though.
Grade: Hysteria Sells - April 28, 2020: President Trump issues an executive order via the DPA to combat food insecurity and “to ensure a continued supply of protein to Americans.”
Grade: Shrug Emoji - January 21, 2021: President Biden invokes the DPA to pursue a “sustainable public health supply chain.”
Grade: Total Scam - March 2, 2021: Biden uses the DPA to give money to Merck so that they can produce more Johnson & Johnson COVID injections
Grade: Facepalm Emoji - September 2021: Biden invokes the DPA to supply fire hose materials to California, citing the climate hoax, because Gavin Newsom’s regime did not effectively manage California’s forests.
Grade: Avoidable Crisis - May 18, 2022: Biden uses the DPA to import baby formula from overseas because American supply became catastrophically short.
Grade: Cringeworthy - June 6, 2022: Biden issues DPA to advance the climate hoax narrative and give government funds to solar panel companies that otherwise would go bankrupt due to the unproductive nature of their businesses.
Grade: Boondoggle
Iraqi Kurdistan rejects federal ruling over oil delivery to Baghdad amid dealings with Israel
Press TV – June 5, 2022
The judicial council of Iraq’s Kurdistan has vehemently opposed a ruling from the Iraqi federal court to hand over the region’s crude supplies to the central government in Baghdad amid secret dealings with Israel.
In February, Iraq’s federal court deemed an oil and gas law regulating the oil industry in Iraqi Kurdistan unconstitutional and demanded that Kurdish authorities hand over their crude supplies.
Kurdistan’s judicial council said in a statement on Saturday that the region’s oil law would remain in force and will not change.
“The actions of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in relation to oil and gas operations are in accordance with the Iraqi constitution of 2005. The provisions of the oil and gas law issued by the parliament of the Kurdistan region in 2007 do not violate those of the Iraqi Constitution,” the statement said.
The statement said Article 112 of the Iraqi constitution, announced in August 2005, granted the Iraqi government supervision over Kurdistan’s oil and gas fields operating at that time, but the fields that started commercial production after that date did not apply to this article.
The judicial council of Iraq’s Kurdistan also claimed that the entire oil and gas fields currently operating in the region had started commercial production after August 2005.
The KRG, which has been developing oil and gas resources independently of the federal government, enacted in 2007 its own law establishing the directives by which the region would administer those resources.
The ruling from Iraq’s federal court in February also stated that the country’s oil ministry must be allowed to audit all agreements concluded by the KRG with international oil and gas companies.
Kurdish leader Masoud Barzani criticized the ruling at the time as a “purely political” decision aimed to antagonize the KRG.
The Iraqi government and the KRG have been in a long-standing dispute over Baghdad’s share of Kurdish petrol, with the Iraqi government demanding full control of the region’s crude for years.
Under a deal between the two sides, the Kurdish region delivers 250,000 of its more than 400,000 barrels of daily oil output to Baghdad, in return for its share of the federal budget.
Over the past years, multiple reports have revealed that Iraqi Kurdistan is secretly selling oil to Israel at heavily discounted prices and that more than two-thirds of the occupying regime’s oil has been imported from the Kurdistan Regional Government.
London-based Al-Araby Al-Jadeed newspaper said in a report in March 2019 that Israel was buying significant amounts of Iraqi oil from certain parties and “mafias” in the Kurdistan region for prices as low as $16 or $17 dollars.
British daily the Financial Times had earlier reported that Israel had obtained 75 percent of its oil supplies from Iraqi Kurdistan.
Kurdistan’s secret dealings with Israel, which also include the region’s reported cooperation with the Israeli spy agency Mossad, come as Iraq’s parliament has recently passed a law making it illegal for the country to ever normalize its relations with the Tel Aviv regime.
The passage of the law cemented the Arab country’s invariable and age-old policy of refusing to recognize the occupying regime.
Moreover, forces from the regional Kurdish government are involved in the seizure of oil wells in northern Iraq, with state-run North Oil Company reporting in May that Peshmerga forces had occupied some oil fields in Kirkuk region.
Kirkuk’s oilfields had been under Kurdish control since 2014, when the Iraqi army collapsed in the face of Daesh. Iraqi forces took back control of the fields in 2017 following a referendum on Kurdish secession.
Featured Video
Iran Walks Out On Peace Deal Due To Trump’s Threats
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
As Hillary Clinton kisses up to Henry Kissinger, RT looks at 4 of his most heinous acts
RT | September 3, 2016
… While Clinton retains the ultimate warmongering seal, RT examines some of Kissinger’s most memorable acts… Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- IRAN WALKS OUT ON PEACE DEAL DUE TO TRUMP’S THREATS – w/ Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi
- Moderna’s mRNA Flu Vaccine Gets Unanimous Thumbs-Up Despite Risks, Low Efficacy
- UK Speech Regulator’s Telegram Questions Point Toward Private Chats
- Cuban FM blasts Rubio for ‘chronically lying’ about US fuel blockade
- Al-Jazeera demands punishment for Israeli officials following latest assassination of cameraman
- Iran opens hundreds of legal cases over US, Israeli aggression: Prosecutor general
- Iran delegation protests Trump’s threat at Switzerland talks, weighs ‘proper’ response: Source
- Terms of US capitulation to Iran presage new era for the region
- Strategic Oil Reserve Nears Collapse… US Must Choose: Guns or Butter
- The Story the Media — and the Government — Don’t Want You to Hear
- If Americans Knew
- JNS Policy Summit to kick off in Israel
- Fatalities From Israel’s Vast Gaza Genocide Deliberately Undercounted
- ‘Reproductive genocide’ in Gaza; death toll in Lebanon tops 4,000 (during a ceasefire) – Daily Update
- Israelis Invaded Lebanon And Then Cried Victim When Their Soldiers Got Killed
- FARA Docs: Israel is Spying On Millions Of Christian Americans In Their Churches
- Why US presidents from both parties end up cursing Benjamin Netanyahu
- Israel Asked Facebook to Censor Iran War Content, Internal Documents Show
- Deaths in Gaza undercounted, possibly by 100s of thousands; “Psychopath” Ben-Gvir talks trash – Daily Update
- UNICEF: “Trauma is woven into the very fabric of childhood in Gaza”
- 15 articles a day: The extent of the Israeli army’s media interference
- No Tricks Zone
- THE TRANSCEIVER PARADOX: Why Organoid Intelligence (OI) Could Become Our Ultimate Alien Predator
- German Wind Turbines Face Regulatory Shutdown Due To Excessive Noise
- New Study: Chile’s Relative Sea Level Was 3.2 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Beyond The Pitch: Why FIFA’s World Cup Is One Of Humanity’s Best Investments
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
Aletho News 