Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Researchers bamboozling journalists with mythical comparison of vaccinated and unvaccinated

Where are the numbers? by Norman Fenton and Martin Neil | January 31, 2023

From: XXXXXX
Sent: 30 January 2023 12:33
To: Norman Fenton
Subject: Hart Group

Dear Professor Fenton,

Apologies for any intrusion, but I’m contacting you directly since the Hart Group (which I understand you to be a member of), have not replied to my earlier emails – all very busy people, I do understand.

As a small group of individuals who between us have some journalistic and medical-science history, we are working on a presentation (with a further view to establishing a website), which aims to offer a wider range of information concerning Covid policies and treatment than, it appears, is usually available through current mainstream and social media.

Given that our aim is a balanced juxtaposition and presentation of arguments, hopefully allowing better-informed opinions to be arrived at, we do have a range of “issues” we’d love to understand better in order to present them fairly.

You are (I imagine) well-placed to comment on one specific matter, and I would be enormously grateful if you would spare a minute to advise, assuming this enquiry doesn’t create any conflict of interest or other problems for you:

The Times and other media recently reported on a QMUL study* which indicates that unvaccinated individuals with certain medical conditions are more likely to suffer “serious outcomes” than vaccinated individuals. I believe presenting this this demands careful attention to context and contrasting with other possible perspectives. 

Dr Aseem Malhotra in a Twitter-hosted video makes reference to de-bunking claims about how this story has been reported, but makes no reference I can find to where such a de-bunking can be found; and sadly, he too seems unavailable to comment!

Probably, Dr Malhotra’s position is not an issue you are required in any way to comment on. However, in general, I do think that those who would like to see “better”, more balanced reporting on Covid should find time to speak to others, like us, who are trying to support exactly that cause – presumably it’s in everyone’s interest. But that’s just a peripheral observation on my part!

It would be truly helpful if you can find a moment to provide some pointers to help us present a balanced picture of the study referred to above.

Many thanks, and best wishes.

Your’s faithfully,

XXXXX

* Also reported on the QMUL website:  https://www.qmul.ac.uk/media/news/2022/smd/unvaccinated-individuals-with-heart-problems-up-to-9-times-more-likely-to-die-or-suffer-serious-complications-from-covid-19.html

 

 

The study referred to is this one.

Here is my self-explanatory response:

Dear XXXXX

I should make it clear that, although I just briefly discussed this with one or two members of HART, my response below should certainty not be construed as ‘the HART response’.

The most important point to note about the QMUL study is that it certainly does not claim anything like what either you or The Times seem to think it claims, i.e it certainly does not show that “unvaccinated individuals with certain medical conditions are more likely to suffer serious outcomes than vaccinated individuals.”  In fact, no comparison with a vaccinated cohort was undertaken.

All the study actually did was look at the outcomes for covid patients with pre-existing conditions like myocarditis. This is something very different to the later studies (such as those Aseem Malhotra referred to) which compared incidence of myocarditis occurring post-vaccination with the base rates for unvaccinated. So, all the study actually shows is that “that individuals with certain pre-existing medical conditions who get covid are more likely to suffer serious outcomes than those without such medical conditions who get covid.”  That is hardly novel, since this has been widely known since March 2020.

In fact, the authors of the study are demonstrating a very clear bias by referring to the people in the study as ‘unvaccinated’. Of course, they were unvaccinated – it was a meta-analysis of 110 published studies between 1st Dec 2019 and 16th July 2020. There was, of course, no vaccinations anywhere during that period so referring to these people as ‘unvaccinated’ must have been done to fit a particular mischievous agenda. I am actually pleased you brought this study to my attention since it needs to be exposed for leading people like the Times and yourself to believe it was showing something that it wasn’t.

One major conclusion in the paper seems sensible – that having diabetes or hypertension or ischaemic heart disease predicts for poorer outcomes (although the same could be said for many other conditions so there is hardly anything novel in this). But the first part of the conclusion seems entirely wrong. Just because you see covid hospitalising a lot of people who had pre-existing cardiac comorbidity certainly does not mean that covid caused their comorbidity.  It seems that this part of the conclusion may have been influenced by possible conflicts of interests (see below).

There are a number of other specific concerns about the study:

  • They included studies published from 1st Dec 2019 – but that was before covid was formally accepted to exist, so how could any study published in Dec2019/Jan2020 have patients with suspected covid? Any study published pre-mid Jan 2020 should be excluded by default, since even the flawed confirmatory PCR test was not available until then. There would be no way of knowing if ‘is covid’ results was a mix of ‘not covid’, ‘possibly covid’ and ‘probably covid’.
  • How is ‘suspected’ the same as ‘confirmed’? When the symptoms used for Covid marry to any number of other conditions that are common (and even endemic) then how can you say that suspected covid is even ‘a thing’?
  • Someone hospitalised with exacerbation of an existing condition is NOT the same thing as someone who gets a new diagnosis OF that condition after vaccination.
  • Including so many Chinese studies clearly biases the work – and using China and USA to predict for LMIC (in the Introduction) is strange to say the least.

A colleague also noted the link between Prof Gupta (the senior author) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other potential conflicts of interest:

  • In this report Gupta is acknowledged as having provided the statistical support for a report that seeks to help the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation find new ways to support medical/health research in the UK. There are also a number of links between Gupta before he came to QMUL and functions (like some project called D3140 for the Rotary Club funded by BMGF in Mumbai, and research out of Imperial College) supported by the Gates Foundation. He is also heavily involved in Wellcome Trust AND the WHO – and is listed on the minutes of meetings between the two.
  • Gupta and the lead author (Sher May Ng) are both on this study that was in part funded by the NIH (Grumbach acknowledges an NIH grant while at the UCal Nursing School. My colleague managed to find that she also has an NIH.GOV email address).
  • Co-Author Kenneth Rice has worked on studies like this with staff from BMGF.
  • Kenneth Rice and Gupta are two of the over 200 doctors who are part of a research collaborative called TOPMed – funded by the NIH with a combination of US Gov and BMGF money.


I hope this helps you.

Yours

Norman Fenton

 

For clarification of the potential conflict of interest with BMGF, Scott McLachlan has provided the following information:

Bill Gates is the world’s largest single shareholder of Covid-19 vaccine manufacturer stocks and therefore every time Pfizer, Moderna, Lilly (Eli), GSK, CureVac or even AstraZeneca (he had something like 8% in AstraZeneca shares at one point) sell a vaccine, that’s money back in his pocket. (see here)

And while fact checkers claimed Gates would not profit from Gilead (Remdesivir), he actually purchased a significant chunk of Gilead and 27,000 shares in Merck in 2018 in preparation. (Merck are one of the manufacturers who licensed to manufacture Remdesivir in their plants)

The thing that journalists get confused on is the idea that he, through his foundations, made ‘grants’ to Moderna et al. These were not ‘grants’ in the way we get grants from EPSRC or UKRI – they are grant investments. Various companies in control of the BMGF are shareholders in Pfizer and Moderna. In return for sinking $50mil+ into Moderna, Gates’s foundation took a large slice of Moderna’s shares.

Further, Gates sells access to “investment opportunities” through GAVI COVAX and AMC. The ‘investor’ (usually a rich western govt or pharma/healthcare company) gives money to GAVI in their rich country where they make profits and need a tax write-off… then, they get included in the contract with some LMIC govt to sell them vaccines. The whole model works by shifting where the pharma/healthcare company make their profits. Pharma companies ‘invest’ by subsidising vax initially and then, over time the contract shifts to the country’s govt paying extortionate rates for future vax.

As one of the links above says – as the world keeps getting sicker Gates keeps getting richer. He invested $555mil into COVID vax companies during 2019/20 and has made an estimated $4bil return. Nice work if you can get it.

February 1, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

FDA Adviser Inadvertently Confirms Pfizer is Doing Gain-of-Function Research

BY WILL JONES | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | FEBRUARY 1, 2023

They’re starting to come now – the ‘debunkings’ of the Pfizer undercover video sting, in which executive Jordon Trishton Walker, “Director of Research and Development – Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning”, tells his ‘date’ that Pfizer is looking to mutate the virus “so we could create preemptively developed new vaccines, right”.

Pfizer released a statement on Friday, which notably did not deny that Dr. Walker works for the company (a fact which has anyway been confirmed via internet searches). Now the latest ‘debunking’ effort comes from Medpage Today.

After making the odd claim that “it is currently unclear if the man in the video is actually an employee of Pfizer, and if that is his real name” (journalism isn’t what it used to be), writer Michael DePeau-Wilson notes that Pfizer’s statement “summarily debunk[ed] the claims made in the video”, as the company stated that it “has not conducted gain of function or directed evolution research” related to its “ongoing development of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine”.

While it is true that the statement does say this, it also says that “we have conducted research where the original SARS-CoV-2 virus has been used to express the spike protein from new variants of concern”. Furthermore, it admits that:

When a full virus does not contain any known gain of function mutations, such virus may be engineered to enable the assessment of antiviral activity in cells. In addition, in vitro resistance selection experiments are undertaken in cells incubated with SARS-CoV-2 and nirmatrelvir in our secure Biosafety level 3 (BSL3) laboratory to assess whether the main protease can mutate to yield resistant strains of the virus.

Despite the initial denial, then, what is being described here plainly is gain-of-function research – after all, the company is engineering the original virus to express the spike protein from new variants of concern, variants which are ‘of concern’ precisely because their spike protein has immune-evasive properties.

In case there is any doubt about this, FDA vaccine adviser Dr. Paul Offit inadvertently confirms it in the Medpage piece.

“Usually, when people talk about gaining function, they’re talking about making it so that the virus is either more deadly or more easily transmitted or that it now can jump species,” Dr. Offit says.

“[T]rying to make the virus more immune-evasive or more contagious… would be considered gain-of-function research,” he adds.

Right, so exactly what Pfizer has said it is doing – engineering “the original SARS-CoV-2 virus… to express the spike protein from new variants of concern”.

Offit tries to obfuscate, stressing that “Pfizer has been working with an mRNA platform that is coded for coronavirus spike proteins, not a whole virus”.

Yes, the vaccine does not use whole virus. But no one said it does. The matter at hand is what Pfizer is doing to the virus as part of its vaccine development research. And Pfizer is clear that it is engineering “the original SARS-CoV-2 virus… to express the spike protein from new variants of concern”. The whole virus, note.

Offit then implies that it isn’t gain-of-function research because the variant has already been created by “mother nature” and Pfizer is just reproducing what nature has already done.

If there was some evil hand back there that was trying to make the virus more immune-evasive or more contagious, that would be considered gain-of-function research, but it’s not happening. The evil hand is mother nature.

But even if the variant already exists in nature, that doesn’t mean it’s not gain-of-function research to engineer a virus to gain the immune-evasive mutation in the lab. Besides, how can you be sure you’re producing the exact same variant and not some subtly (or not-so-subtly) new and more immune-evasive variant?

Offit then appears to betray an ignorance of the process of making the vaccine, as he says the “remarkably effective” development involved sequencing SARS-CoV-2 in “a matter of months”. In fact, the virus was sequenced several times even in the last week of December 2019, and took a couple of days each time, not months.

Perhaps needing to restore his reputation with the politico-medical establishment after his criticism of the boosters last month (is this why he was given the job of defending Pfizer?), he is now effusive with praise for the mRNA vaccines. “This is the best medical achievement in my lifetime,” he says. “And my lifetime includes the development of the polio vaccine.”

Thus, despite the denials that what Pfizer is doing is gain-of-function research – denials which presumably take advantage of the fact that ‘gain-of-function’ is not rigorously defined – it’s clear that what Pfizer admits to doing falls squarely within the definition cited by Dr. Offit, namely the commonly accepted one, which includes making the virus more “immune-evasive”.

And they appear to tacitly acknowledge that, which is why they make their excuses. In Pfizer’s case, that it is “required by U.S. and global regulators for all antiviral products” and “carried out by many companies and academic institutions in the U.S. and around the world”. In Offit’s case that Pfizer was just copying “mother nature”.

In fact, though, as Dr. Robert Malone has pointed out, Pfizer has previously been upfront that it is doing this research, including in an August 2021 article in STAT News, and almost nothing in the undercover video is new. Why such a fuss was made about scrubbing it from the internet is therefore an interesting question – though this may be more linked to the sensation around it than the facts, which Pfizer’s response anyway did not deny. How could it, when those facts were already on public record?

Perhaps the main lesson, then, is that we all need to be paying more attention.

We also need to think hard about what kind of research should be allowed and what should be banned. The reaction to the Project Veritas video suggests a strong feeling that this kind of work should not be done – including when it is (supposedly) imitating what nature has already created. The fear in the public is real and justified, and relates to the folly of engineering viruses to make them worse. Can this ever be a good idea? My feeling is there’s no need to go beyond the viruses and variants nature already provides us with, and to stick to using real specimens, not engineered ones. But the current regulatory regime and scientific establishment clearly disagrees.

Whatever the right answer, we need to be able to talk about this properly. Not be subject to global, military grade censorship when someone tries to raise the topic as a matter of public concern, albeit in a sensational (and entertaining) way.

February 1, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

What is covered by the “pictures of the Russian train”?

By Konstantin Asmolov – New Eastern Outlook – 31.01.2023 

We recently wrote about the ways the United States’ allegations of North Korean munitions shipments to Russia had created a new standard of proof. However, it appears that the US side is not content with having hit rock bottom once again.

On January 20, 2023 National Security Council Strategic Communications Coordinator John Kirby raised new allegations against the Wagner PMC and Russia, claiming that the US had presented its intelligence findings to the relevant expert group of the UN Security Council (Committee 1718, which is in charge of sanctions against the DPRK). Although this was the first time ever any “evidence” had been presented, it was unfortunately a very peculiar type of proof.

The world was shown “rare, declassified photographs of Russian rail cars traveling between Russia and North Korea in November” and what Kirby described as the original delivery of North Korean weapons to the Russian PMC. According to the US statement, the photos were of a five-car train that ran between the Khasan (Russian Federation) and Tumangan stations on November 18 and 19, 2022, and those cars contained ammunition for Wagner.

“We obviously condemn North Korea’s actions and call on North Korea to immediately stop these shipments to Wagner,” Kirby said at the start of the daily White House press briefing. He then stated that “while we estimate that the amount of material delivered to Wagner has not changed the dynamics of the fight in Ukraine, we anticipate that it will continue to receive North Korean weapons systems” and therefore “will not preclude imposing additional sanctions if deemed appropriate at the UN”. As an aside, it was noted that North Korea continues to circumvent sanctions with the help of Russia and China.

On January 23, State Department spokesman Ned Price also stated that the United States and South Korea regularly discuss how to counter threats from North Korea, including “the supply of weapons and other military equipment from North Korea to Wagner units for use in Ukraine”.

Not coincidentally, not only Russian but also Western experts who deal with North Korea professionally have noted this reference with some surprise. Even those who dislike the North reacted in the style of “maybe the US has other evidence that has not been shown to us, but this is just a hint.”

Asked by RIA Novosti if it could be said with certainty that the pictures show weapons being transported from the DPRK to Russia, NK News director Chad O’Carroll said the photos do not show what is called hard evidence that would confirm US claims. The photos DO NOT show weapons or grenades being loaded and only include an image of Russian rail cars in North Korea – which, he adds, Russian media have also written about. That White House officials, according to O’Carroll, “show some level of specificity by releasing satellite images of a certain date showing rail cars and cargo” only means that Washington is very confident in its intelligence, but “anyone would be happy to see more detailed evidence”.

Another US expert noted that the pictures provided by Kirby show covered rail cars in which containers of ammunition would not fit, especially since they are loaded on platforms and not in boxcars. He also pointed out that “the versions voiced by Washington keep changing. In September, they claimed that North Korea was supplying Russia with millions of artillery shells and missiles. They claimed Pyongyang was trying to make it appear that the supplies were going to the Middle East and Africa, but in fact they were going to Russia. Now that version is forgotten – there is a new one. Meanwhile, one million shells is 50,000 tons, which is several large ships.”

The claim that the data were sent to the committee that investigated the sanctions is also not identical to the fact that the experts who examined them agreed with the American version.

In this context, the author will try to explain to the audience what more reasonable evidence of this kind would look like, using pictures of the train: Here is a picture of what looks like a military factory, and of containers of ammunition being loaded into wagons; here is a traceable route (because it is not particularly difficult to trace their path through the consignor system) by which a train from North Korea went directly into the front line area where it was unloaded, whereupon the shell shortage ended in that section of the front line. Such things can still be used as evidence, although indeed some questions remain.

The second thing that came to the author’s mind was a quote from a Russian cartoon, “This picture is useful: it covers a hole in the wall,” and he draws attention to two events that paralleled Kirby’s statement.

The first event is that on January 19, 2023, the day before Kirby’s statement, the Pentagon asked United States Forces Korea (USFK) to provide some of its equipment in support of Ukraine, stressing that its security operations on the Korean Peninsula would not be “affected in any way” by this move. USFK spokesman Col. Isaac Taylor said, “The Department of Defense continues to provide military assistance from its reserves in support of Ukraine. US forces in Korea have been asked to support this effort by providing some of their equipment… This does not affect our operations or our ability to fulfill our ironclad commitment to protect our ally, the Republic of Korea. There should be no doubt that we are ready to fight tonight as well”.

Taylor did not specify, however, what equipment, or in what quantity, would be delivered for use in Ukraine. The ROK Department of Defense also declined to comment on the issue.

The New York Times had previously reported that the US Department of Defense had drawn on US artillery stockpiles in South Korea and Israel because of Ukraine’s urgent need for munitions assistance.

USDOD deputy spokeswoman Sabrina Singh clarified this information, pointing out that the withdrawal of munitions and military equipment from US depots in South Korea and other countries in support of Ukraine had no impact on US defense capabilities and had little to do with reducing domestic stockpiles. It has also come to light that the US is in talks with Korean military contractors to replenish empty depots.

To the author, this information indicates two important things.

First, despite the loud declarations about the danger of the North Korean threat and the need to give money to counter it, it appears that the US does not in fact particularly believe that the North will attack the South in the relatively near future. Otherwise, they would not have moved an arsenal to Ukraine from a place where these munitions could be urgently needed.

Second, the fact that ammunition is being sent from Korea means that the arsenal of democracy is not bottomless and is slowly running out. Weapons and ammunition even need to be withdrawn from long-term storage. As we noted in one of our articles, it appears that their talk of Moscow’s “ammunition shortage” is masking their own ammunition scarcity, which is not so much affecting Russia as it is Ukraine and its allies.

Combined with a number of other news items, this suggests that the Europeans are growing weary of the conflict and increasingly reluctant to hand over new arms tranches to Kiev. This is a rather important sign, suggesting that in a certain situation Kiev will come to understand that for all the need to “defend democracy,” it has to do it alone.

The second event is a statement by Russian Foreign Intelligence that Ukrainian authorities are placing munitions from the West in nuclear power plants because they know that Moscow will not dare to bomb them. Foreign Intelligence Director Sergei Naryshkin said, “The Foreign Intelligence Service receives reliable information that Ukrainian forces are storing weapons and ammunition supplied by the West on the premises of nuclear power plants. This applies to the most expensive and scarce missiles for Haymar’s multiple rocket launchers and foreign air defense systems, as well as large-caliber artillery ammunition the AFU lacks most. Just in the last week of December 2022, several railroad cars with lethal cargo were delivered from abroad to the Rovno NPP via the Rafalovka station.”

Naryshkin’s statement does not contain exhaustive evidence, but the reasoning is somewhat more detailed than Kirby’s and contains some specifics. Apparently, it is precise data on where and how Ukrainian ammunition stocks move.

Mykhailo Podolyak, advisor to the head of the Ukrainian Presidential Office, then stated on social networks that “Ukraine has never stored weapons on the territory of the nuclear power plant” and noted that Ukraine is “always open” to inspection bodies, especially the IAEA.

In this context, the author once again reminds us that it is not unusual in war to attribute to the enemy acts committed by one’s own side in order to divert attention from oneself. So if you want to make the next lofty claims of DPRK intrigue, look at the holes in the wall this picture covers.

Konstantin Asmolov, PhD in History, is a leading research fellow at the Center for Korean Studies of the Institute of China and Modern Asia, the Russian Academy of Sciences.

January 31, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

The Real Disinformation Was The ‘Russia Disinformation’ Hoax

By Ron Paul | January 30, 2023

Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” we now know without a doubt that the entire “Russia disinformation” racket was a massive disinformation campaign to undermine US elections and perhaps even push “regime change” inside the United States after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016.

Here is some background. In November, 2016, just after the election, the Washington Post published an article titled, “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say.” The purpose of the article was to delegitimize the Trump presidency as a product of a Russian “disinformation” campaign.

“There is no way to know whether the Russian campaign proved decisive in electing Trump, but researchers portray it as part of a broadly effective strategy of sowing distrust in US democracy and its leaders,” wrote Craig Timberg. The implication was clear: a Russian operation elected Donald Trump, not the American people.

Among the “experts” it cited were an anonymous organization called “Prop Or Not,” which in its own words claimed to identify “more than 200 websites as peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans.”

The organization’s report was so preposterous that the Washington Post was later forced to issue a clarification, even though the Post provided a link to the report which falsely accused independent news outlets like Zero Hedge, Antiwar.com, and even my Ron Paul Institute as “Russian disinformation.”

The 2016 Washington Post article also featured “expert” Clint Watts, a former FBI counterintelligence officer who went on to found another outfit claiming to be hunting “Russian disinformation” in the US, the “Hamilton 68” project. That project was launched by the Alliance for Securing Democracy, a very well-funded organization containing a who’s who of top neocons like William Kristol, John Podesta, Michael McFaul, and many more.

Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” Matt Taibbi reveals that the Hamilton 68 project, which claimed to monitor 600 “Russian disinformation” Twitter accounts, was a total hoax. While they refused to reveal which accounts they monitored and would not reveal their methodology, Twitter was able to use reverse-engineering to determine the 600-odd “Russian-connected” accounts. Twitter found that despite Hamilton’s claims, the vast majority of these “Russian” accounts were English-speaking. Of the Russian registered accounts – numbering just 36 out of 644 – most were employees of the Russian news outlet RT.

It was all a lie and the latest Twitter Files release confirms that even the “woke” pre-Musk Twitter employees could smell a rat. But the hoax served an important purpose. Hiding behind anonymity, this neocon organization was able to generate hundreds of media stories slandering and libeling perfectly legitimate organizations and individuals as “Russian agents.” It provided a very convenient way to demonize anyone who did not go along with the approved neocon narrative.

Twitter’s new owner, who has given us a look behind the curtain, put it best in a Tweet over the weekend: “An American group made false claims about Russian election interference to interfere with American elections.”

The whole “Russia disinformation” hoax was a shocking return to the McCarthyism of the 1950s and in some ways even worse. Making lists of American individuals and non-profits to be targeted and “cancelled” as being in the pay of foreigners is despicable. Such fraudulent actions have caused real-life damages that need to be addressed.

Copyright © 2023 by RonPaul Institute

January 30, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

UK government asked Facebook to remove a post that was restricted to be seen by “Friends Only”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 30, 2023

The UK government managed to find and report to  a post that was restricted to be seen by “friends only,” asking Facebook the process to remove it.

This is one of the revelations coming out of a report dubbed, “Ministry of Truth: The secretive government units spying on your speech.”

“Ministry of Truth” is “Orwellian” for – “Ministry of Propaganda” – and the report compiled by the privacy and civil liberties group Big Brother Watch is pretty grim, focusing on how UK authorities choose to deal with controlling the pandemic narrative, and who exactly they enlisted to help.

Read the report here.

Noting at the beginning of the report that who controls the past controls the future, and in some ways even more dangerously, “who controls the present controls the past,” the report rests on army whistleblower testimony and freedom of information requests (FOIs).

One of those FOIs revealed that after Facebook was contacted by a government Rapid Response Unit (RRU), on behalf of the Department of Health and Social Care in April 2020, content that was meant to be seen by “friends only” was not only seen and by the government but also flagged for removal.

The case involved a courier whose route to Covid centers was shared in the post, but the government said this was – for some reason – putting those centers at risk. They even evoked the GDPR.

And somehow, Facebook’s “privacy settings” went out the window.

None of this, other than what some observers might see as near-totalitarian panic, makes sense: how the “private” post became owned by government snoops, the role of Facebook, and even how Covid centers would have been at risk if the post’s content became public knowledge (as it was clearly not meant to be). Not to mention that their location was public, anyway.

Facebook seemed keen to cooperate in this case, forwarding it for review – but then it turned out, according to Facebook’s communication with the Cabinet Office, that the courier himself opted to disable the account.

But perhaps, more importantly, that anything else about this case is the fact that there was “the hotline between Whitehall (UK government) and major social platforms,” and that this relationship was not strained at all: it was a cordial one, “between individuals with emails being sent on first-name terms,” the report’s documents reveal.

January 30, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Johnson lied about Putin missile ‘threat’ – Kremlin

RT | January 30, 2023

Allegations that Russian President Vladimir Putin threatened then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson with a missile strike are “a lie,” Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov said on Monday. Johnson’s accusations have emerged in a new BBC documentary about the crisis in Ukraine.

Recalling a telephone call with Putin on February 2, 2022, just over three weeks before tensions over Ukraine escalated into full military action, Johnson claimed the Russian leader “threatened me at one point.”

“He said, ‘Boris, I don’t want to hurt you but, with a missile, it would only take a minute’ or something like that… jolly,” the former PM told the British broadcaster.

“There were no missile threats,” Peskov told reporters on Monday. “When he explained challenges to the security of the Russian Federation, President Putin remarked that if Ukraine joins NATO, the potential deployment of NATO or American missiles at our borders would mean that any missile could reach Moscow in mere minutes.”

The Russian official wondered if Johnson had lied deliberately or “simply didn’t understand what President Putin was talking about.” If the latter is true, people should be concerned for Johnson, Peskov added.

Putin has publicly voiced Russian concerns over NATO infrastructure in Ukraine and other parts of Eastern Europe for decades. Russia began military operations against Ukraine after failing to get security guarantees from Washington, which would have rolled back the deployment of NATO assets in Eastern Europe and suspended its expansion in the region. The US dismissed Moscow’s concerns and claimed that Ukraine was free to seek membership as a sovereign nation.

January 30, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

The 77th Brigade Spied on Lockdown Sceptics, Including me

BY TOBY YOUNG | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 29, 2023

A shadowy unit of the British Army, as well as secretive ‘disinformation’ agencies within Whitehall, spied on British citizens who challenged the Government’s pandemic response, including Peter Hitchens and me. These revelations are contained in a report by Big Brother Watch due to be published tomorrow, which includes the results of subject access and freedom of information requests submitted by me and others. The Mail on Sunday has more.

A shadowy Army unit secretly spied on British citizens who criticised the Government’s Covid lockdown policies, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Military operatives in the UK’s ‘information warfare’ brigade were part of a sinister operation that targeted politicians and high-profile journalists who raised doubts about the official pandemic response.

They compiled dossiers on public figures such as ex-Minister David Davis, who questioned the modelling behind alarming death toll predictions, as well as journalists such as Peter Hitchens and Toby Young. Their dissenting views were then reported back to No. 10.

Documents obtained by the civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, and shared exclusively with this newspaper, exposed the work of Government cells such as the Counter Disinformation Unit, based in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, and the Rapid Response Unit in the Cabinet Office.

But the most secretive is the MoD’s 77th Brigade, which deploys ‘non-lethal engagement and legitimate non-military levers as a means to adapt behaviours of adversaries’.

According to a whistleblower who worked for the brigade during the lockdowns, the unit strayed far beyond its remit of targeting foreign powers.

They said that British citizens’ social media accounts were scrutinised – a sinister activity that the Ministry of Defence, in public, repeatedly denied doing.

Papers show the outfits were tasked with countering ‘disinformation’ and ‘harmful narratives… from purported experts’, with civil servants and artificial intelligence deployed to ‘scrape’ social media for keywords such as ‘ventilators’ that would have been of interest.

The information was then used to orchestrate Government responses to criticisms of policies such as the stay-at-home order, when police were given power to issue fines and break up gatherings.

It also allowed Ministers to push social media platforms to remove posts and promote Government-approved lines.

How did the Government manage to convince these supposedly independent state agencies, with powers to monitor the activities of British citizens, that critics of its barmy lockdown policy were enemies of the state? And does this mean James Delingpole has been right all along? We will discuss tomorrow on London Calling and I’m going to write about it for this week’s Spectator.

Worth reading in full.

January 29, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

Hamilton 68: Brief Addendum Comparing their response Friday to the site’s original mission statement

By Matt Taibbi | Racket | January 29, 2023

Hamilton 68 responded to a #TwitterFiles thread Friday with a series of claims, including that their site was always intended to be understood as “nuanced,” that they always maintained that “witting or unwitting” accounts could be on their list, and that “some accounts we track are automated bots, some are trolls, and some are real users.”

They could also have inserted the disclaimer added to the new Hamilton 2.0 page, which as a helpful reader noted this morning, includes in red font a blaring warning to all that it would INCORRECT to label anyone or anything that appears on their dashboard “as being connected to state-backed propaganda”:

Thank heaven for the Wayback Machine. Here’s what was written on the original Hamilton page:

These accounts were selected for their relationship to Russian-sponsored influence and disinformation campaigns, and not because of any domestic political content.

We have monitored these datasets for months in order to verify their relevance to Russian disinformation programs targeting the United States.

… this will provide a resource for journalists to appropriately identify Russian-sponsored information campaigns.

High on that original page, the Hamilton founders explained they monitored two types of accounts:

There are two components to the dashboard featured here.

The first section, “Overt Promotion of Content,” highlights trending content from Twitter accounts for media outlets known to be controlled by the Russian government.

The second section, “Content Tweeted by Bots and Trolls,” highlights themes being pushed by Twitter accounts linked to Russian influence campaigns.

The Hamilton list tracked overt Russian media on the one hand, and “bots and trolls” on the other. Note the difference between that language and the language Friday: “Some accounts we track are automated bots, some are trolls, and some are real users.” That Hamilton Friday was also trying to distance itself from headlines about “bots” is particularly grotesque, given that it was so overt in identifying the composition of its list this way at the start.

I encourage everyone to read language from the original site, then look at Friday’s ironically named “Fact sheet,” and compare for yourselves.

Finally I want to note a passage from the Friday “fact sheet” I somehow overlooked:

Individual accounts were algorithmically selected based on analytic techniques developed by J.M. Berger that were used to identify the most influential accounts within those networks. The Hamilton 68 team did not individually review or verify all accounts because the focus of the dashboard was to analyze behavior in aggregate networks, not specific accounts.

Translating: individual accounts were chosen through a method developed by J.M. Berger, a writer and think-tanker whose usual specialty is extremism (he’s written about ISIS and domestic white nationalism in the U.S.). Still, it wasn’t even Berger’s fault that ordinary Americans ended up in the list, since said people were chosen “algorithmically.” The Hamilton 68 team also “did not individually review or verify” all the names, because their “focus” was “aggregate networks,” not “specific accounts.”

So, nobody looked at the list.

The list that was “the fruit of more than three years of observation and monitoring.”’

Sounds solid.

Yes? No?

January 29, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Syria blasts ‘misleading’ OPCW report on alleged Douma attack

The Cradle | January 29, 2023

Syria made a statement on 28 January rejecting the report issued a day earlier by the Investigation and Identification Team of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), regarding the alleged use of chlorine by the Damascus government in Douma in 2018.

“Syria totally rejects the report released by the so-called ‘Investigation and Identification Team’ of the [OPCW] about the alleged chemical attack in Douma in April 2018, in addition to its conclusions,” the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates said.

“Those who prepared this report … insist to ignore all the objective information which was provided by some countries, parties, experts, academics, documented media reports, and former OPCW inspectors with knowledge and expertise … which confirmed beyond any doubt that the Douma incident was completely fabricated,” the ministry’s statement added.

The Syrian statement was a response to the new report released by the OPCW’s Investigation and Identification Team on 27 January, which after five years, has renewed the accusation against Damascus “that the Syrian Arab Air Force carried out the chemical weapons attack on Douma.”

In April of 2018, Damascus was accused of a chemical attack against civilians in the city of Douma, resulting in illegal US military strikes against Syrian government positions. This was despite the fact that Syria had welcomed an OPCW fact-finding mission to inspect the alleged site of the attack.

A year later, WikiLeaks revealed that the OPCW had suppressed the initial results of the fact-finding mission deployed to Syria, results which suggested that the incident was, in fact, staged. That same year, a MintPress News report revealed that several journalists from a number of mainstream agencies had come to the conclusion that the Douma attack was staged with the help of the White Helmets, a criminal organization posing as the Syrian Civil Defense. This was initially brought to light by a whistleblower from within the OPCW.

In 2021, during a visit to Douma, The Grayzone reporter Aaron Mate referred to the 2018 incident as “one of the biggest pro-war hoaxes since Iraq.”

Since 2013, armed groups in Syria have attempted to pin chemical attacks on the government in attempts to instigate internationally-led regime change operations against it. This comes in the form of staged attacks, or actual false-flag chemical attacks which leave many dead and are designed to implicate Damascus – as was the case in Ghouta in 2013 and in Khan Sheikhoun in 2017.

The latest OPCW report comes as Washington is desperately trying to obstruct the reconciliation process currently underway between the Syrian and Turkish governments.

January 29, 2023 Posted by | Deception | , | Leave a comment

Did Germany just declare war against Russia?

Free West Media | January 29, 2023

Is it a real declaration of war? Yes. On January 24, Baerbock gave a speech to the Council of Europe – not to be confused with an institution of the European Union. Although this speech contained borderline provocations, it was a scripted intervention. However, in the subsequent hearing, Baerbock had to answer questions without a prepared text.

She uttered a sentence in English that she obviously did not grasp: “We are fighting a war against Russia and not against each other.”

It was Baerbock’s response to a question from Norwegian MP Ingrid Schulerud, who wanted to know when Germany would decide to deliver Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine. Baerbock responded that criticism and comparisons of shipment volumes were not helpful to Ukraine’s proxy war effort.

How does a country formally declare war?

So that misunderstandings are ruled out and the spectre of war is not inadvertently released, international law provides for high formal hurdles for a legally valid declaration of war.

The self-proclaimed international law expert Baerbock overcame them all with the power of indescribable stupidity: Because at that moment when she spoke, 77 years after the end of the war, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Russian Federation were actually and truly officially at war with one another.

For a formally valid declaration of war, this must first be pronounced by an official representative of one state. As Federal Foreign Minister, Baerbock fulfilled this requirement. This declaration must take place in an official setting. A speech before the Council of Europe, which has the task of securing peace in Europe, also satisfied the second condition. Only the third condition is somewhat problematic. Because an official representative of the other state must be present to receive this declaration.

On March 15, however, Russia was expelled from the Council of Europe, a move which evidently was bad for peace, but at least this time it probably saved the world from Baerbock’s moronic grandstanding.

If an official representative of the Russian Federation had been among the spectators, that person would then – for better or for worse – have had to acknowledge the declaration of war. As it is, however, it is easy to argue that a public television broadcast is sufficient to officially inform the other state.

The Foreign Office quickly jumped in to cover for the statement of its erring chief. “During her meeting with members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on January 24, Foreign Minister Baerbock emphasized that Europe must stand together against this war.”

In view of the delivery of Leopard tanks to Ukraine, more and more people are concerned that Germany could become a direct party to the conflict. Last but not least, these concerns were fueled by the statement from Baerbock in the Council of Europe. Germany’s arms deliveries to Ukraine are undeniably now perceived as involvement in the conflict.

Russia’s cool response

According to Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, the statements by Baerbock as well as former Chancellor Angela Merkel suggest that the West planned a war against Russia from the outset. On Wednesday, on her Telegram channel, she quoted Baerbock’s other statements at the PACE meeting that more had to be done “to protect Ukraine”.

As is well known, Merkel said in an interview for the weekly newspaper Die Zeit in December last year that the German and French mediation efforts in the Minsk format were aimed at deceiving Russia in order to “strengthen Ukraine”. These words were echoed by former French President François Hollande, who noted that Ukraine had increased its military potential since 2014.

Director General of the Russian Foreign Affairs Council Andrei Kortunov recalled that Baerbock had always taken “radical” positions: “The conflict between the Greens and the Social Democrats was very serious from the start. Chancellor Olaf Scholz called for moderation and restraint, while Baerbock tended to be decisive and uncompromising. Far more than Scholz, she is in solidarity with the radical stance of the Baltic States, Poland and recently Finland’s too.”

He pointed out that while Baerbock was saying one thing, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on the same day said that the alliance was not directly involved in the Ukraine conflict. NATO and its member states want to position themselves as comfortably as possible: on the one hand to offer Ukraine increasingly intensive supplies, on the other hand to pretend to stay out of the conflict.

NATO has been pursuing this tactic since the beginning of the confrontation, with a “gradual escalation of engagement, while at the same time it is constantly emphasized that neither NATO nor its individual countries are directly involved in this conflict,” underlined the political scientist.

Maybe Baerbock just said the quiet part out loud…

January 29, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Pfizer admits it ‘engineered’ new Covid mutations

RT | January 29, 2023

US drugmaker Pfizer admitted on Friday that it “engineered” treatment-resistant variants of Covid-19 in order to test its antiviral medicine. The admission partially backs up earlier claims by an executive with the company who told an undercover reporter that Pfizer was deliberately “mutating” the virus to “preemptively develop new vaccines.”

In a statement posted on its website, Pfizer said that it “has not conducted gain of function or directed evolution research,” referring to the practice of amplifying a virus’ ability to infect humans and the process of selecting ‘desirable’ traits of a virus to reproduce, respectively.

However, the pharma giant said that it combined the spike proteins of new coronavirus variants with the original strain in order to test its vaccines, and that it created mutations of the virus to test Paxlovid, its antiviral drug.

“In a limited number of cases… such virus may be engineered to enable the assessment of antiviral activity in cells,” the company said, adding that this work was carried out in a secure laboratory. The work also sought to create “resistant strains of the virus,” it added, describing a process commonly understood as being ‘gain of function’ research.

Pfizer’s statement came two days after Jordon Trishton Walker, an executive involved in the firm’s mRNA division, told an undercover reporter that the company was “exploring” ways to “mutate [covid] ourselves so we could create, preemptively develop, new vaccines.” Walker said that scientists were considering infecting monkeys with the virus, who would then “keep infecting each other.”

“From what I’ve heard, they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it, but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious,” he explained. “Obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations.”

Pfizer’s statement makes no mention of the supposed plan to infect monkeys, instead explaining that any work on live viruses is carried out in vitro, meaning inside test tubes or other lab equipment.

Walker was told on camera that he was speaking to a journalist with Project Veritas, a conservative outlet known for its hidden-camera sting operations. After hearing this, Walker insisted that he was lying to impress his date, before attempting to steal an iPad from Project Veritas CEO James O’Keefe.

January 29, 2023 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

FDA corruption and the global biosecurity system

A past-present-future of how the medical establishment has been used as a tool to get us to where we are today

By Meryl Nass | January 28, 2023

Not sure I want to wade into the Jordon Trishtan Walker story. But he is a good starting point for me to collect my thoughts about everything that is happening today and what it means and where it came from and where it is going.

  1. Mr. Walker thought he was on a date and was trying to impress his date. He did not know actual details about what he was talking about. He seemed to lack a moral compass—but that sort of omission appears to be extremely common these days.
  2. Mr. Walker is the 2023 version of a Valley Girl, which means his success in society is an enigma to those of us who are older and befuddled/appalled by what passes for popular culture and competence these days. See #4 below.
  3. The Boston Consulting Group, one of the world’s largest business consulting corporations, where Senator Mitt Romney, the RINO from Utah or was it Massachusetts cut his teeth is not the type of place where morals fit well.
  4. Believe it or not, here is how the Boston Consulting Group advertises for employees:

    Beyond conventional culture

    A diverse workforce with a combination of unique backgrounds and cultures, we’re united by our common purpose and values, curious minds, keen intellect, and powerful motivation to make a difference. If you’re ready to use your instincts and imagination to drive meaningful action, then come unlock your potential and join our global community.

    Missing from the job description: knowledge and hard work. Mr. Jordon Walker was using his imagination while looking for action and he got it, but not the kind he was looking for. He will probably have to change his identity to ever get another job. I feel kind of sorry for him.

  5. We all know that Pfizer has paid the largest single Pharma fine in history, but practically every large pharma company has paid billions of dollars in civil and criminal penalties. This is proof that a moral compass does not lead to success and is probably a hindrance when working for big Pharma.
  6. Pharma can’t sell anything without FDA’s okay. Not a single lot of a drug or vaccine can be shipped out unless it has an FDA stamp of approval. Not a single human test can be started until FDA gives the go-ahead.
  7. However, FDA obeys its masters elsewhere in government. FDA has made countless decisions that make no scientific, legal or moral sense. Sometimes we can see the strings: meetings by FDA officials with Congressional bigwigs on the FDA appropriations committees to favor certain products (Sen. Menendez and an orthopedic device come to mind, but I don’t think FDA finally approved it). Then there is the problem of industry user fees, aka “pay to play.” 75% of the money FDA uses to regulate drugs comes from user fees. FDA approves a much higher percentage of drug candidates now, compared to the days before user fees were adopted in the 1990s.
  8. Sometimes a product gets approved or authorized that is made by a company that is owned by a large donor to the political party in power. For example, major donor Ron Perelman got the Obama administration to pay a huge markup for a drug for smallpox that may not work.
  9. Then the Biden administration got the drug (now renamed Tpoxx and licensed in 2018 for smallpox) approved by FDA on May 19, 2022 for i.v. use too, once the Biden administration decided moneypox was to be designated a big problem that required billions in purchases of drugs and vaccines.
  10. A phase 3 clinical trial of Tpoxx for monkeypox was launched in September 2022. This is a clever way to get the government to pay for the clinical trials needed for full approval of Mr. Perelman’s drug. Call an emergency. Just like with COVID.

    “We currently lack efficacy data that would help us understand how well this drug may mitigate painful monkeypox symptoms and prevent serious outcomes,” NIAID director Anthony Fauci, M.D., said in a release. “This clinical trial was designed to answer those important questions.”

    At the same time, FDA asked doctors to be judicious with its use, because

    “the rapidly evolving monkeypox virus is only one mutation away from rendering Tpoxx ineffective. Recent studies of monkeypox reveal that it has “several genetic pathways” to evade Typoxx, which has a “low barrier to viral resistance,” the CDC said.

  11. So we know that FDA is used to channel profits for political gain and does not always act in the public’s best interest. But was it also used to poison Americans on an industrial scale? Or was that Pfizer? Or was that DOD? Clearly we’ve been poisoned. But by whom and why?
  12. What is not entirely clear is the mechanics of how it was done. Katherine Watt and Sasha Latypova have the best bead on this. During the Obama administration a huge industry of global biosecurity was built—before then it was all about US biosecurity. Suddenly we needed global biosecurity, and we needed to build biosecurity networks with China and the rest of the world. This is why France helped China create its first Biosafety Level 4 lab. Whee! Now labs everywhere could collaborate on biodefense and creating bioweapons to be sure we could defend against them. Or at least that was the theory that EcoHealth Alliance put forward. And that was the theory DOD, NIH, NSF, USAID and others funded using your tax dollars.
  13. During the Obama administration a new contracting method was created: the Other Transactional Authority. This is the underpinning of how all the vaccines could be contracted and paid for outside the FDA regulatory system, using DOD logisticians and DOD contractors. (I am getting all this info from Watt and Latypova and have not dived into the documents myself, but it fits with what Whitney Webb and other have dug up and makes perfect sense given what I know of DOD and anthrax vaccine.)
  14. As long as the vaccines were mislabeled PROTOTYPES FDA did not need to worry its pretty head about them. Criminal Janet Woodcock, former head of CDER and former Acting FDA Director was put in place as the liaison between Operation Warp Speed/DOD and the FDA. As prototypes they were not real vaccines.
  15. Under the Emergency Use Authorization law 360-bbb-3, the shots (now identified as “covered countermeasures” with covered meaning no liability) did not need to meet any formal standard for safety or efficacy. FDA (in this case, the seasoned FDA criminal Janet Woodcock, MD [think oxycontin for only one example] and Stephen Hahn, MD, who was probably put in place as FDA Commissioner by Alex Azar because he lacked government experience and had no idea what was happening) simply needed to guess that their benefit would exceed their risk. As long as the proper lingo for an emergency had been declared by Secretaries Azar, later Becerra (both of whom were lawyers without medical or scientific training) the EUAs could roll out.
  16. The only problem for the evil mofos was that under EUA the vaccines had to be voluntary. So we saw lotteries, cheeseburgers, donuts, college tuition and various other bribes accompany them. In fact, you were a chump if you didn’t get a prize with your shot.
  17. By August 2021 there weren’t enough takers. But we (some of us) also knew by that time the vaccines did not prevent spread. Recall that Kathrin Jansen PhD, the top vaccine official for Pfizer, had admitted on December 10, 2020 to the VRBPAC that the vaccine had not prevented spread in primates. I provided the link for her admission in my blog a couple of years ago.
  18. How many takers did they need? Why did they want to get everyone vaccinated? Why did the US government, helmed by caricature Biden, need to take peoples’ jobs and educations if they were not vaccinated? Why did so many other countries carry out similar evil plans? The leaders may have been ignorantly following orders. But didn’t they have a responsibility to ask WHY?
  19. So, knowing that it was against the law to do so, Biden et al. imposed mandates. This was illegal because the vaccines were not licensed. So on August 23, 2021 the FDA complied/caved/happily acceded—I don’t know which—to killing Americans with a product that by then was known to be a killer. (FDA has databases on over 100. They issued Comirnaty a license, followed later by Moderna. Later FDA killed off the J and J vaccine. It isn’t clear if this was because it was actually worse or whether it was to clear the runway for the mRNA platform.
  20. I suspect that Marion Gruber and Philip Krause, top vaccine officials at FDA, were fired because they would not go along with this, while the feckless Peter Marks had no qualms about issuing a fake license. See the the article this past week in Epoch Times about FOIA’d emails of Peter Marks at that time, where he said he would handle Gruber and Krause.
  21. Fake you say? Yes, fake because after the license was issued, only EUA product was used. Because had licensed product been used, FDA could have gotten in trouble and so could Pfizer—because the vaccine had not met the standards for licensure, AND a licensed product had liability attached—it lost that magical liability waiver given to EUA products that were thought to be voluntary. The USG created a massive fraud on the public, making people believe they were getting a “safe and effective” licensed product when they were not.
  22. Not only that, but both the Trump administration and the Biden administration (as did the EU and other nations) contracted for about ten or more doses per person of these concoctions, including hundreds of millions of doses, maybe billions, for which they signed contracts after knowing they did not work and were killing people.
  23. I just read something by John Leake, who blogs with Peter McCullough, that I think puts the issue of who is responsible in a nutshell.

    [I]t seems to me that it’s of limited utility to draw sharp distinctions between the DoD and companies like Pfizer and Moderna. Like Krupp and I.G. Farben during the Third Reich, these companies are bound to U.S. government institutions like the DoD, DARPA, NIH, HHS, and BARDA in an arrangement that strongly resembles Fascist Corporatism.

  24. What we are dealing with is a criminal conspiracy that includes DOD, Department of Justice, DHS, DHHS (FDA, CDC,NIH and other subagencies), all the 17 intel agencies, the White House and selected corporations. They have been working together for decades. Pharma commits crimes, and DOJ gives them a plea bargain, no one goes to jail, and they get to do it again. Some of the fines go to DOJ’s favorite charities.
  25. Our whole federal government has become a Potemkin village, allegedly carrying out its duties, but in fact carrying out the plans of some higher entity. Tony Fauci is a brilliant example of this, channeling billions of dollars to favored products, companies, universities and scientists while killing their competitors.
  26. And the federal agencies use subcontractors to avoid transparency, provide more means to gain extraordinary wealth, and waste more of the peoples’ money.
  27. I think that the medical enterprise was hijacked as a means to take over the world, because someone realized it could be used this way. First, it sucks up 20% of GDP, so there is a great deal of money that might be siphoned off. Second, it was a means to gain a lot of surveillance material, with online medical records. Third, it and doctors were trusted. Americans were convinced they had the best healthcare in the world, and it is only in the past 5-10 years that they realized this was far from true. Fourth, vaccines had a shiny patina. People believed in them. And for the 25 years that I have been closely observing vaccines, the federal government, and industry, have put unbelievable effort into shoring up the elusive “vaccine confidence” and demonizing “vaccine hesitancy.” A few examples:https://vaccineconfident.pharmacist.com/

    All over the world, peoples’ beliefs about vaccination have been put under a microscope, in order to pitch the most effective messages to them. It’s about loving your child. Caring about your community. Not being stupid. Not being a redneck, a racist, a science denier, someone who deserves to be shunned by society, someone who deserves to be moved to a camp for the safety of the rest of us, someone who should be held down and vaccinated for the good of the tribe.

  28. See how they used propaganda so skillfully that much of society were convinced the unvaccinated should be treated like prisoners?
  29. Looking back, I do not think this happened by accident, nor do I think a couple hundred billion in Pharma profits with kickbacks to politicians explains it. I think this was all part of a strategic plan put in place decades ago. I remember when CDC was using the “Knowledge Attitudes Beliefs” model for investigating how to cope with anthrax vaccine refusals 25 years ago.
  30. I think the ability of the government to inject us with a liquid of their choice, one that cannot be fully identified by the end-user, is the best way to explain what has been happening. mRNA vaccines, because they degrade quickly, can never be fully characterized, and this leaves open the possibility that the mfr/govt or whoever is really in charge can include some mRNA in the vaccine that has a specific purpose without us knowing it. Without us ever being able to prove it. mRNA can have specific purposes, turning genes on and off, affecting our risk of cancer, possibly giving us cancer or other diseases. We don’t know, and with the RNA vaccine platform, we will never be able to know.
  31. Now the government, in cahoots with pharma, is developing flu and RSV mRNA vaccines. Maybe all of them will be made of mRNA. What can we trust right now? Why should we trust the FDA to do the right thing by us for any product it regulates?
  32. But vaccines are only a part of the problem. There is the vaccine passport—which is still a “thing” in much of Europe, even now that we know the darn things are worse than useless. The goal of ultimate control is still with us.
  33. As the governments begin to relinquish the COVID vaccines, they will try to regain our trust. Or alternatively they will double down on totalitarian control.
  34. They will create more bogeymen from which they promise to save us. They know how to turn up the dial on fear. How many will fall prey to it yet again?
  35. How many diseases do they have in the hopper, ready to release? There must be many, but most will be duds. You see, viruses mutate. Bacteria too. And what happens to them, once they are released, is not predictable. Until you see what a virus does in a population, even the best scientist cannot predict where and how it will mutate, because that is a function of the human-virus interaction.
  36. And they virtually always mutate to be less virulent, though perhaps more infectious. Most will mutate into duds.
  37. COVID showed us that we had more useful drugs in the pantry (repurposed drugs) than we expected. If there is no Fauci, Walensky and Woodcock to suppress them next time, it won’t be so scary.
  38. It won’t be just viruses. They have done a good job of threatening nuclear war. But historically, the US has been the reckless cop on the block, not Putin. They can destroy our ability to access oil and natural gas. They can reduce the food supply. The can despoil the air and water.
  39. We all need to get a grip, and protect ourselves from propaganda, and stop the destruction of what we need to survive. Everyone needs to learn how to distinguish fact from spin. Start practicing as you read a news article, or watch TV. Which part of the story is fact? Which is spin/opinion/designed to make you believe something?
  40. Once enough of us recognize what is going on, we can make a big enough stink and stop much of it. I think we can, if we are smart and work together. There are 8 billion of us, after all, and just some thousands of them. We need to educate their minions to come over to our side. Let’s create ourselves as the warriors we were put on this planet to be at this time in history.

January 28, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »