Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Multinational Agrichemical Corporations and the Great Food Transformation

By Birsen Filip | Mises Wire | November 5, 2022

In July 2022, the Canadian government announced its intention to reduce “emissions from the application of fertilizers by 30 percent from 2020 levels by 2030.” In the previous month, the government of the Netherlands publicly stated that it would implement measures designed to lower “nitrogen pollution some areas by up to 70 percent by 2030,” in order to meet the stipulations of the European “Green Deal,” which aims to “make the EU’s climate, energy, transport and taxation policies fit for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 percent by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.”

In response, Dutch “farm and agriculture organizations said the targets were not realistic and called for a protest,” which led farmers and their supporters to rise up across the country. The artificially designed Green Deal is one of the goals of Agenda 2030, which was adopted by 193 member states of the United Nations (UN) in 2015.

In addition to the UN, Agenda 2030 is also supported by a number of other international organizations and institutions, including the European Union, the World Economic Forum (WEF), and the Bretton Woods Institutions, which consist of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). It is also endorsed by some of the most powerful agrichemical multinational corporations in the world, such as BASF, Bayer, Dow Chemical, DuPont, and Syngenta, which, together, control more than 75 percent of the global market for farm inputs. In recent years, “the acquisition of Syngenta by ChemChina, and the merger of Bayer and Monsanto” have “reshaped the global seed industry.” Additionally, “DuPont de Nemours was formed by the merger of Dow Chemical and DuPont in 2017.” However, “within 18 months of the merger the company was split into three publicly traded companies with focuses on the following: agriculture with Corteva, materials science with Dow and specialty products with DuPont.”

In recent years, all of these corporations have issued statements suggesting that the agriculture sector will undergo major changes over the upcoming three decades, and that they are committed to doing their parts to accelerate the transition to so called green policies. Accordingly, they advocate for governments to redirect public finance away from conventional farming and toward regenerative agriculture and alternative protein sources, including insect farming and lab-grown meats.

Moreover, BASF, Syngenta and Bayer are members of “the European Carbon+ Farming Coalition,” which includes a number of “organizations and stakeholders along the food value chain,” such as “COPA-COGECA, Crop In, European Conservation Agriculture Federation (ECAF), European Institute of Innovation & Technology (EIT) Food, HERO, Planet Labs,” “Swiss Re, University of Glasgow, Yara, Zurich and the World Economic Forum.” Originally, this “coalition emerged as a partnership between the World Economic Forum’s 100 Million Farmers platform and its CEO Action Group for the European Green Deal.”

Its objective is to “decarbonise the European food system” by accelerating the transformation of farming and agricultural practices. More specifically, the European Carbon+ Farming Coalition seeks to attain “zero gross expansion in the area of land under cultivation for food production by 2025, reduction in total territories used for livestock of about one-third by 2030, and a consequent freeing up of nearly 500 million hectares of land for natural ecosystem restoration by the same date.” According to the WEF, in addition to benefitting the environment, such changes will also be economically advantageous, as “changing the way we produce and consume food could create USD 4.5 trillion a year in new business opportunities.”

In order to accelerate the transformation of farming over the coming decades, BASF calls for requiring “farmers to decrease their environmental impact” by reducing “CO2 emissions per ton of crop by 30 percent,” and applying “digital technologies to more than 400 million hectares of farmland.” BASF also supports the wide use of a number of new products, including “nitrogen management products,” herbicides, “new crop varieties,” “biological inoculants and innovative digital solutions,” so as to make farmers “more carbon efficient and resilient to volatile weather conditions.” It is estimated that such changes would “contribute significantly to the BASF Group target of €22 billion in sales by 2025.”

Meanwhile, Syngenta, the world’s second-largest agrochemical enterprise (after Bayer), which is owned by a Chinese state-owned company called ChemChina, focuses on “carbon neutral agriculture” under the pretense of “combatting climate change.” More precisely, it supports “providing technologies, services, and training to farmers,” as well as the further development of new gene-edited seeds that would lower the emission of CO2. According to Syngenta, “gene-edited crops” will be widely used and cultivated across the globe “by 2050.”

This company also promotes “a transformation toward regenerative agriculture,” which is claimed to “lead to more food grown on less land; reduced agricultural greenhouse gas emissions; increased biodiversity; and enhanced soil health,” though there is scant scientific evidence or long-term data to back up these assertions. Nonetheless, Syngenta argues that the world needs “governments and media … to encourage widespread adoption” of regenerative practices by as many farmers as possible.

Bayer also advocates for regenerative agriculture to help “farmers significantly reduce the amount of greenhouse gas their operations emit, while also removing carbon from the atmosphere.” It further claims that it is necessary “to shift to a regenerative approach and make crops more resilient to climate impacts.” Additionally, much like Syngenta, Bayer supports the development of “new gene editing technologies” in order to reduce “the environmental footprint of global agriculture.” Looking ahead, Bayer foresees that, “in agriculture, biotechnology will be a critical enabler” that will be used to “feed the 10 billion people that will be on the planet by 2050 while at the same time fighting the impact of climate change.”

Similar to Bayer, BASF, and Syngenta, DuPont also seeks to contribute to decreasing “dependence on fossil fuels, and protecting life and the environment.” Its response primarily focuses on facilitating the production and consumption of alternative protein sources that can reproduce “the texture and appearance of meat fibers, and can be used to extend or replace meat or fish.” DuPont pointed out that “in 2016, Americans consumed about 26 kg of beef per capita, at least half of which was eaten in the form of a hamburger. Replacing just half of America’s burger meat with SUPRO® MAX protein,” which has a carbon footprint that is up to eighty times lower than dairy and meat proteins, is equivalent to removing “more than 15 million mid-sized cars from the road.”

Some of the world’s most powerful multinational agrichemical corporations have benefitted immensely from international trade agreements that put their interests ahead of those of small – and medium – size farms, as well as the masses, when it comes to transforming the food and agriculture sectors. In particular, the World Trade Organization’s agreement on trade – related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS), which was adopted in 1994, played a major role in destroying the livelihoods of many farmers, while proving lucrative to agrichemical giants like BASF, Bayer, Dow Chemical, DuPont, and Syngenta. This is mainly because TRIPS has allowed for the patenting of seeds and plants.

As a result, native herbs and plants in a number of different countries, many of which had previously been farmed for generations, became the sole properties of powerful agrichemical multinational corporations. After plants and herbs have been patented, local farmers are forbidden from engaging in the traditional and longstanding practices of saving and replanting their own seeds. Instead, they are required to pay the patent holding corporations for the same seeds that they had previously produced, saved, replanted, and exchanged at no cost.

Powerful agrichemical multinational corporations have also furthered their own interests and agendas by exerting unprecedented influence over research and development in the food industry, while ignoring any findings demonstrating that their business practices were harmful to the natural environment. In particular, some of these major agrichemical corporations have focused their efforts and resources on studying “genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the creation of stronger pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, and defending the performance of these products.”

They have also supported the expansion of GMO crops with the knowledge that their cultivation involves “the application of larger quantities” of “synthetic fertilizers and pesticides,” which has led to large amounts of toxic chemicals contaminating soil and water sources. Basically, these agrichemical corporations have been largely responsible for creating many of same environmental problems that they now claim need to be urgently solved through Agenda 2030.

There is a real possibility that the radical and large-scale transformations of the entire food industry and human eating habits being pushed by the social engineers of Agenda 2030 are leading the masses toward a dramatic decrease in living standards. Lessons from the totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century revealed that it is very difficult to fix big mistakes attributed to the large-scale central planning of social engineers, because doing so often requires “major social transformation” or “remodelling the whole of society,” which can result in widespread unforeseen consequences or events, major destructive outcomes, and “inconvenience to many people,” in the words of Karl R. Popper.

The intense and coordinated international effort to facilitate an artificially designed transformation of the global food industry, based on Agenda 2030, is a testimony to the fact that we are witnessing the pendulum of civilization swinging back in many advanced societies, where striving to achieve a comfortable life could rapidly be replaced by a struggle for bare necessities in a lower level of existence, which is not supposed to occur in advanced societies.

The masses need to be made to realize that the social engineers of Agenda 2030 are “false prophets,” who are misguiding them to the point where they will be “haunted by the specter of death from starvation.” This may well lead to the emergence of “irreconcilable dissensions within society,” whereby food riots, conflicts, and violence could inevitably “result in a complete disintegration of all societal bonds,” as Ludwig von Mises put it.

Birsen Filip holds a PhD in philosophy and master’s degrees in economics and philosophy. She has published numerous articles and chapters on a range of topics, including political philosophy, geo-politics, and the history of economic thought, with a focus on the Austrian School of Economics and the German Historical School of Economics. She is the author of the upcoming book The Early History of Economics in the United States: The Influence of the German Historical School of Economics on Teaching and Theory (Routledge, 2022). She is also the author of The Rise of Neo-liberalism and the Decline of Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan, 2020).

December 4, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Economics, Progressive Hypocrite, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

BAD SCIENCE SETS ALZHEIMER’S RESEARCH BACK GENERATIONS

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 24, 2022

A new investigation has revealed apparent image tampering in research shaping drug development and a potential cause of Alzheimer’s disease. In the wake of this shocking discovery, the public and scientific community may now be open to environmental causes as the world goes back to the drawing board to find a cure.

December 4, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

Can You Catch Covid From Groceries?

By Dr Carl Heneghan and Dr Tom Jefferson | Trust the Evidence | December 3, 2022

The BBC’s pandemic coverage has strictly followed what is now known as official science. No questions asked; just report what you are told.

One of the most incredible features of the media coverage has been the ignorance of existing research on respiratory viruses. We use ignorance as a generic term as we are unsure whether the reporters were ignoring the large existing body of knowledge or were ignorant, i.e. did not know it existed.

Now we have the latest fantastic revelation: respiratory viruses, specifically SARS-CoV-2, “survive” for days on certain types of surfaces and foodstuffs, from pastries to canned products.

The news item is from a Food Standard Agency laboratory study carried out using credible methods: viral cultures.

Except that the final paragraph of the discussion hints that something is not quite right:

“The public may be interested in the finding that virus may persist in an infectious state, on foods and food packaging surfaces, for several days under certain common conditions. There is the possibility of transmission through contaminated food if the food is in direct contact with the mouth and mucus membranes. The potential implications for public health are unclear since inhalation of respiratory aerosols and droplets is considered to be the main route of SARS-CoV-2 transmission”.

Readers of our transmission riddles will know by now that such statements are hostages to fortune; the “main route” would need a lot more evidence than presently available to make it “main”, whereas fomites so far tick more boxes. So if we are to follow good evidence the reverse is the case. The sentence in the Discussion should read “how does such a high quality evidence from laboratory and human observations fit with certainty that inhalation of respiratory aerosols and droplets are the main route of SARS-CoV-2 transmission?”

Does the BBC piece put the study into the context of transmission: no. Does it refer to the available evidence for this and other respiratory viruses suggesting a more complicated transmission scenario: absolutely not. Do you go away with a feeling that if you touch a vegetable in a supermarket, you will end up in bed coughing?

About 15 years ago, Mike Broderick and colleagues followed the incidence of febrile acute respiratory infections (ARIs) caused by adenovirus in military units. They divided the units into “open” and “closed” according to whether they allowed potentially infectious convalescent soldiers to join or not. This was a proper study with viral cultures accompanied by PCR testing. The authors also went a bit further by sampling surface structures looking for viable adenovirus even in barracks which had been disused for some time. There was no difference in incidence between closed and open units. A result that mirrors our findings of hospital-acquired infection following viral circulation in the community (within a few days’ lag time), implying that measures such as distancing and barriers did not make any difference.

There’s more. Up to eight per cent of samples from surfaces in barracks which had not been used for a week turned up viable adenovirus, and the authors conclude that the source of the agent is environmental. Precisely what was found in several studies in daycare centres for young children in Denmark, where all types of respiratory and enteric viruses and bacteria populated soft toys, tables, and sofas.

To add to the body of pre-existing evidence, our review of SARS-CoV-2 found 23 studies that investigated fomite transmission and performed viral culture. Five studies demonstrated that replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 is present on fomites. Four of these were done in hospitals, and in the further study, two Chinese dock workers were found to have asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during routine screening; the two workers were infected after contact with contaminated outer packaging from a fish cluster pallet.

A noteworthy aspect of establishing transmission is determining the minimum dose of virus particles that can initiate infection – the “minimal infectious dose” Data from a recent human challenge trial showed an intranasal exposure to one million genome copies might be required to yield approximately 50% chance of infection. A positive SARS-CoV-2 culture from fomites is at least three times more likely when the cycle threshold value is less than 30 (i.e., the sample has a higher viral load), and a plausible chain of transmission is strengthened by the presence of studies demonstrating genomic sequencing.

Science is cumulative. The BBC reporting would be enhanced if it set the findings of new studies in the context of what is known. It doesn’t take much to systematically search for what is already known. If reporters did so, the public might better understand the evidence – as opposed to the opinions – for how viruses are transmitted.

December 3, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Fake and Defective

By Rob Slane | The Blog Mire | December 3, 2022 

The overriding phenomenon of our times is the pretense that stuff that is happening isn’t happening, and that stuff that isn’t happening is happening. That’s another way of saying that we live in the Land of Inverted Reality surrounded by the Ocean of Lies.

A president who clearly has — let’s put it politely — cognitive issues, doesn’t have cognitive issues. A country that has lost more than 100,000 soldiers and has its energy system wrecked with impunity, hasn’t actually lost over 100,000 soldiers and is winning the war. The country that is systematically grinding them down and launching waves of missile attacks to decapitate its energy grid, has been almost out of missiles since March and is losing the conflict. The hard biological differences between those with XY and those with XX chromosomes are not really hard biological differences at all. The massive inflation that was caused primarily by the injection of trillions of dollars into the world economy that had largely been shut down under false pretenses, is not really caused by the injection of trillions of dollars into the world economy that had largely been shut down under false pretenses. The virus which the UK Government admitted had a tiny Infection Mortality Rate of 0.096%, and which was associated with an average age of death above the normal average age of death, was actually potentially deadly to everyone.

But the most astonishing of all these phenomena, however, is the continued pretense that a medical product that has killed or injured millions across the globe, hasn’t killed or injured millions across the globe. It’s not happening, even though it is happening. Even though the catastrophic damage they are causing is evidenced by data from all over the world, they are officially Safe and Effective, despite being obviously Fake and Defective.

Once upon a time, when a medical product was shown to be, or even suspected to be, causing adverse events, it was withdrawn from public use immediately. The best-known example of this is Thalidomide, which was released in 1957 as a treatment for anxiety, sleeping problems, and crucially, morning sickness, but which was withdrawn just four years later amid concerns that it was responsible for a rise in birth defects. Some estimates now put the number of babies that suffered abnormalities attributed to the drug at around 10,000, with almost half these ending in death.

There are three very interesting things to note about the Thalidomide episode. Firstly, the “scientific consensus” before the realisation of what it was doing to babies was that drugs given to mothers could not cross the placental barrier. Secondly, the abnormalities it caused often differed from baby to baby, with numerous organs being affected. And thirdly, not all babies whose mothers took this drug were affected, but it was only discovered later that the adverse effects occurred if a mother took it between 20 and 37 days after conception. These three things partly explain why it took four years for the connection to be understood, yet the time between the first public statement connecting Thalidomide and abnormalities in babies – a letter published in the Lancet from an Australian doctor, William McBride in 1961 – to its withdrawal by the West German manufacturer, Chemie Grünenthal GmbH, was just days.

You see what they did? The previous assumption that medication could not cross the placental barrier was shown to be false, on the basis of new evidence. The fact that dots had not been previously drawn between the numerous different abnormalities that were being seen did not prevent the joining of dots once the claim was made. The fact that abnormalities were not being seen in all babies whose mothers had taken Thalidomide, was not used as smokescreen to hide those that were affected. Rather, true science and accumulating evidence caused assumptions to be revised, anomalies questioned, and an obviously unsafe product to be withdrawn almost immediately.

Imagine that they’d had the institutional corruption, government and media collusion, and vast influence of the Harmaceutical companies that we have now. Imagine that they’d had Twitter, Facebook, Fact Checkers and the Globalist Pravda media back then. Imagine the smearing of Anti-Thalidomiders and Thalidomide Conspiracy Theorists that would have occured. Imagine the cancelling and deriding of those asking questions or calling for investigations. Imagine the stripping of William McBride’s medical license and the smear campaign against him. And worst of all, imagine the cackling dismissal of those parents whose children had died or been born disabled.

Had the same vastly powerful Harmaceutical companies working in cahoots with government and Globalist Pravda been around back then, Thalidomide for pregnant women would not have been halted when the data and evidence was showing it to be harmful. Rather, the adverse effects would have been ignored or put down to whatever spurious nonsense governments and their Globalist Pravda stenographers chose to gaslight the people of the day with, and anyone questioning it held to be a vile conspiracy theorist.

In the case of the cytotoxic-gene-therapies-masquerading-as-vaccines, it has been known for two years that they do not stay in the injection site but get distributed around the body, including crossing the blood-brain barrier. Yet unlike Thalidomide, they have not been stopped. It has been known for two years from various government adverse event sites that they cause a plethora of different adverse events. Yet unlike Thalidomide, they have not been stopped. It has been known for two years that whilst these things do not harm everyone in the short-term at least, they have demonstrably harmed millions and continue to do so. Yet unlike Thalidomide, they have not been stopped.

How many more people — especially young people — does it take to “die suddenly”, “die unexpectedly” or come down with a sudden aggressive cancer or neurological issue before the obvious correlation between the toxic jabs and the toxic consequences is at least acknowledged? Sixty years ago, a single letter to the Lancet was enough to sound the alarm and get Thalidomide withdrawn. Sadly, in our current Fake and Defective society with its Fake and Defective institutions, any serious discussion of the Harmaceutical companies’ Fake and Defective medical products is forbidden. And so on it goes.

December 3, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

US federal government pays $5M for software to turn citizens into online “misinformation” responders

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | December 2, 2022

Journalism group Hacks/Hackers was awarded $5 million by the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop software that would encourage ordinary Americans to warn their friends and family about misinformation in their online speech. Users of the software would confront alleged misinformation by replying with text recommended by the software.

Hacks/Hackers has been tasked with developing the “Analysis and Response Toolkit for Trust (ARTT), a suite of expert-informed resources that are intended to provide guidance and encouragement to individuals and communities as they address contentious or difficult topics online,” the NSF group said in an October 24 article.

According to a video demonstration of the software, the tool will tell users if a social media post is “harmful” and, if it is, it “suggests relevant responses through tailored response examples or templates” that users can copy and paste as responses.

“Every day there are motivated citizens, like librarians, health communicators, and amateur volunteers, who engage with the misinformation that is posted by their peers and make efforts to share reliable information to empower their communities,” the video said.

Another video by ARTT claimed that social media efforts to fight misinformation are not as effective in influencing users’ views as efforts made by friends.

“That’s why we want to focus on these peer connections when it comes to having these conversations online … Instead of coming to you from the platform, it’s actually coming to you from a friend,” the video said.

The group led by Hacks/Hackers is also working on Wikipedia tools, which will determine those that are a “credible source” on Covid vaccines and prevent sources that are not credible from being cited on Wikipedia.

The list of credible sources has started to be organized, with outlets like the Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Guardian classified as “reliable,” and outlets like The Federalist and The Daily Wire classified as “unreliable” or “conspiracy.”

December 2, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Secret Service Has Hunter Biden Gun Docs They Denied Possessing

Samizdat – 02.12.2022

Hunter Biden, son of the incumbent US president, is infamous for his involvement in many scandals, including substance abuse, commercial sex, infidelity, tax fraud and, probably, corruption at the highest level. Yet he always got away. However, the “gun incident” may change this.

The Secret Service admitted the existence of documents connected to Hunter Biden’s alleged illegal ownership of a gun, even though they previously denied possessing the files.

According to media reports, representatives of the Secret Service approached a firearms shop owner where Hunter Biden had illegally bought a gun, and demanded the paperwork connected to this transaction. The gun shop owner refused to comply, suspecting that the Secret Service officers wanted to hide Hunter’s ownership of the firearm.

This incident did not go unnoticed. Conservative activist group Judicial Watch sued the government agency for all materials concerning Hunter Biden`s ownership of a gun. The government watchdog group also highlighted the oddity of the Secret Service changing its stance on the case several times.

Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch President, marks the fact that “The Secret Service’s changing story on records raises additional questions about its role in the Hunter Biden gun incident.”

The gun incident Tom Fitton is referring to occurred in year 2018. Hunter Biden’s former sister-in-law, who became his lover, took his gun from a cupboard and threw it in a garbage can. She claims that her lover was mentally unstable at that moment and she was afraid for her life. Later she tried to retrieve the gun, but it was already at the police disposal. Approximately at this time, Secret Service officers approached the gun shop owner with demands to dispose of the paperwork, framing Hunter Biden.

When law enforcement started to wonder about the origins of the gun, it was suspected that Hunter Biden had lied in order to buy it. He answered in the negative when asked about past substance abuse and substance addiction. But five years ago he was fired from the US Navy due to a positive test for cocaine and he admits in his memoires that he continued to abuse substances at least up to 2018.

Intentional misrepresentation of information while buying firearms is a criminal offense according to US law. Yet he was not charged.

In April 2021 the Secret Service responded to a watchdog request, promising to provide necessary documents on this case. However, a year later in October 2022 this governmental organization stated that the previous response was a mistake and that it doesn’t have any records relevant to the “Hunter Biden’s Gun Incident.”

Hunter Biden is currently in the crosshairs for being allegedly involved in many murky affairs but always gets away.

For instance, Hunter was connected to some companies that were accused of corruption. The most notorious case is his membership in the board of Ukraine’s Burisma Group. His father then-Vice-President Joe Biden pressured then-president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko to fire top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma activities.

However, the gun incident may reverse the momentum. According to results of the November midterms, Republicans received a majority in House of Representatives. They have already promised to launch a full-scale investigation on Hunter Biden’s activities. What is more important federal agents think that they have enough evidence to criminally charge Hunter Biden for illegal gun ownership.

December 2, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

Lavrov rubbishes ‘lies’ about Ukraine peace talks

RT | December 1, 2022

Allegations that Russia is seeking peace talks with Ukraine as a ploy for a military build-up are false, Russia’s foreign minister has said. Sergey Lavrov was responding to statements to that effect from top officials in Kiev, including President Vladimir Zelensky.

The accusations are “ridiculous and unpleasant, because [those who make them] blatantly lie,” the minister told journalists on Thursday during a press conference.

“We never asked for any negotiations. But we always stated that if somebody has an interest in a negotiated settlement, we are ready to listen,” he stressed.

In October, President Zelensky said during a virtual speech to the European Council that Russia was “manipulating the negotiations issue” due to Kiev’s battlefield successes. He went on to claim that Moscow was calling for dialogue, “which it rejected itself by starting a war against Ukraine and all of you, the entire Europe,” while rejecting “dozens of our proposals” for peace.

Lavrov noted that Ukraine and Russia were on the verge of striking a peace deal after talks in Istanbul in late March. At that time they inked a proposed agreement, which would have given Ukraine international security guarantees in exchange for neutral status.

Kiev pulled out of the talks soon afterwards, with Zelensky claiming that fresh evidence of war crimes allegedly committed by Russian troops had left him no other option. Moscow rejected the accusations, calling the evidence falsified.

“Not only did we listen, but we were prepared to make a deal on the terms that [the Ukrainians] proposed themselves,” Lavrov explained. “They were not allowed to do that because the war had not made enough profit for those who supervise and direct it.”

The Russian diplomat pointed to the US, and to a lesser degree the UK, as parties who are allegedly directing Ukraine’s actions. Washington pursues its goals of weakening Russia and benefiting from arms sales at the expense of the Ukrainian people, he said.

Lavrov added that the US and its allies have a pattern of rejecting ways to reduce tensions with Russia. Hostilities in Ukraine started after they refused to heed Russian warnings that the expansion of NATO was crossing a red line, he insisted. The military bloc brushed aside a proposed security deal, which in Russia’s view would have addressed the issue.

December 1, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

NEW ‘PARAQUAT PAPERS’ EXPOSE DEADLY SIDE EFFECT

The Highwire with Del Bigtree | November 24, 2022

The herbicide Paraquat has now been linked to increased risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease. Newly uncovered documents show that the manufacturers of Paraquat knew of these risks years ago. With the U.S. one of the few large countries still using this toxic chemical many are asking where is the EPA?

December 1, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Environmentalism, Timeless or most popular, Video | Leave a comment

College Graduates Are the New Favored Class of Democratic Largesse

By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | November 28, 2022

When Americans make lists of the persecuted, downtrodden groups in our society, college graduates rarely top the ranking. But President Joe Biden is offering one bribe after another to convert college graduates into perpetual dependents of the Democratic Party. Biden’s handouts helped prevent a “red wave” of Republican victories on Election Day and he appears hellbent on forcing taxpayers to pay any price to continue buying votes for his party.

Federal subsidies for higher education have been one of the least recognized boondoggles of recent decades. Federal-backed loans for higher education took off in the 1960s and have skyrocketed in this century. Almost $2 trillion in federal student loans are owed by 46 million people.

Federal aid spurred tuition increases that make it far more difficult for unsubsidized students to afford higher education. A student’s financial “need” is defined largely by tuition fees. Every tuition increase means an increase in federal aid for students—and thus an increase in the federal aid for the college. A 2012 study by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity concluded that financial aid “inevitably puts upward pressure on tuition. Higher tuition reduces college affordability, leading to calls for more financial aid, setting the vicious cycle in motion all over again.” A 2015 Federal Reserve analysis “found that for every new dollar made available in federally subsidized student loans, schools…rose their rates by 65 cents.”

Federal policies have helped turn young people into a debtor class perpetually clamoring for relief from its burdens. Rather than seeing the federal government as a potential peril to their rights and liberties, some debt-burdened young adults view it as the “Great Liberator”—presuming the right candidate is elected.

Rather than ending the perverse incentives embedded in federal aid, Biden “solved” the problem by canceling borrowers’ obligation to repay their subsidized loans. On August 24, Biden invoked an obscure provision of the post-9/11 Heroes Act to justify hundreds of billions of dollars of handouts to people who had taken out federal college loans. The Heroes Act permits the Education Department “to waive or modify student loan payments in times of national emergency.” Individuals earning less than $125,000 could have up to $20,000 in federal debt automatically erased; couples earning $250,000 could see a $40,000 forgiveness windfall.

Biden had previously admitted that the law would not justify blanket forgiveness of college loans, but he and his advisors decided to force Americans to pay any price for Democrat votes in the midterm congressional elections. The Department of Education justified Biden’s decree as “a program of categorical debt cancellation directed at addressing the financial harms caused by the COVID-19 pandemic,” including “cancellation for borrowers who have been financially harmed because of the COVID- 19 pandemic.” But college graduates were doing much better financially than other Americans who get stuck with the bill for their schooling. Their unemployment rate was less than two percent at that time.

Former Education Department lawyer Hans Bader estimates that the total cost of Biden’s student loan write-offs could exceed a trillion dollars. A Wall Street Journal editorial headlined “Biden’s Half-Trillion-Dollar Student-Loan Forgiveness Coup” derided his decision as “easily the worst domestic decision of his Presidency.” The Journal pointed out that Biden based the loan cancellation for more than 40 million borrowers “on no authority but his own” power as president. “This is a college graduate bailout paid for by plumbers and FedEx drivers,” the Journal noted. As former OMB director David Stockman observed, “Student debt is overwhelmingly an investment in professional credentialization that should never have been an obligation of the taxpayers in the first place.” ZeroHedge quipped on Twitter: “Have colleges raised tuition by $10,000 yet or are they waiting a few days first?”

There was no rationale for blanket cancellation of student debts that would not justify blanket cancellation of almost any debt citizens owed to the government. At the same time that Biden played Santa Claus with student loan forgiveness, his administration was hiring 87,000 new IRS agents and employees to squeeze more money out of working Americans.

The handouts helped buy Democrats their biggest boost among voters — a 28% advantage over Republicans in voters age 18 to 29 in the mid-term elections. Two days after the election, Biden tweeted, “I want to thank the young people of this nation” who voted for “student debt relief.” Jon Cooper, a former top Biden campaign operative, tweeted, “Young people: You saved our butts. THANK YOU.”

Two days after the election, federal judge Mark Pittman struck down the bailout as an unconstitutional decree: “In this country, we are not ruled by an all-powerful executive with a pen and a phone. Instead, we are ruled by a Constitution that provides for three distinct and independent branches of government.” Pittman rejected the “emergency” basis of the order in part because Biden had proclaimed in September on “60 Minutes” that “the pandemic is over.” The following week, a federal appeals court in St. Louis unanimously voted to impose a nationwide “injunction considering the irreversible impact the Secretary’s debt forgiveness action would have” on “Americans who pay taxes to finance the government.”

Some activists believe Biden intentionally swindled young voters with a bait-and-switch scheme. Briahna Joy Gray, who was the press secretary for Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign, asked, “Did Biden RIG student debt forgiveness to fail, just to help him in midterms?” She explained on Twitter: “They used the promise of student debt cancellation to induce young voter turn out—knowing it wasn’t going anywhere [because] they relied on faulty legal authority. Hard to convince me the Biden admin didn’t do this intentionally.” A student activist group called the Debt Collective is circulating a petition: “I refuse to pay a debt the President promised to cancel.”

Biden came up with a Solomonic solution—sawing taxpayers in half—to placate his enraged supporters. He announced on Twitter, “Republican special interests and elected officials sued to deny this relief even for their own constituents. It isn’t fair to ask tens of millions of borrowers eligible for relief to resume their student debt payments while the courts consider the lawsuit.” On November 22, Biden announced that he was extending the moratorium on repaying student debt until August 2023. That moratorium began in March 2020 during the first COVID lockdowns and has already cost taxpayers $155 billion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. When Biden announced his loan forgiveness decree in August, he promised, “The student-loan payment pause is gonna end. It is time for the payments to resume.” Biden betrayed that promise, apparently believing that no one should be obliged to fulfill their legal obligation as long as there was a snowball’s chance in hell that some judge would uphold his scheme. Extending the loan payment moratorium could give a crucial boost to Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock, locked in a tight December 6 run-off election.

What happens when the latest moratorium extension ends in August 2023? Biden may be formally kicking off his re-election campaign at that time. And what better way to buy support than by extending a handout to one of his most important constituencies? In the 2022 mid-term elections, “52 percent of voters with college degrees supported Democrats while 42 percent of voters without degrees did so,” The Washington Post reported.

Protecting former students from the federal debts they voluntarily accepted has become one of the great human rights issues of our times. Michael Pierce, chief of the Student Borrower Protection Center, is calling for Biden to “make it clear that the student loan system will remain shut off as long as these partisan legal challenges persist. Borrowers’ fate is in Biden’s hands.”

And this is the ultimate problem for democracy. Student loan bailouts have extended Biden’s power over a huge swath of American voters. Each new federal benefit program extends political control over both the recipients and anyone forced to finance the handouts. Speaking to an AFL-CIO convention earlier this year, Biden shouted, “I don’t want to hear anymore of these lies about reckless spending. We’re changing people’s lives!” “Changing” means controlling—but only for their own good, or at least for the re-election of their benefactors

French philosopher Bertrand de Jouvenal warned, “Redistribution is in effect far less a redistribution of free income from the richer to the poorer, than a redistribution of power form the individual to the state.” If Biden’s loan repayment moratorium is extended through 2024, “a typical medical student who graduated in 2019 would effectively have $107,000 forgiven and a law school graduate would have $65,000 forgiven… New doctors receive almost ten times the benefit of the average borrower and $107,000 more than someone who never attended college,” the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reported. Even The Washington Post editorial page slammed Biden’s student debt forgiveness decree as a “regressive, expensive mistake.”

But the inequity is irrelevant if the handouts enable Biden and his Democratic colleagues to perpetuate their grip on power. As legal fights over loan bailouts continue, Americans will continue to be assailed by claptrap about ex-students as a holy class of martyrs—or at least oppressed victims. But most of the self-proclaimed “best and brightest” are not smart enough to recognize how they have been converted into tools for Leviathan.

Jim Bovard is the author of Public Policy Hooligan (2012), Attention Deficit Democracy (2006), Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994), and 7 other books.

November 30, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Economics | | Leave a comment

Did YOU fall for the great Covid scam?

By John Ellwood | TCW Defending Freedom | November 28, 2022

Victims of a multi-billion-pound phishing scandal have told TCW Defending Freedom how their lives were devastated by fraudsters after apparently finding themselves on a ‘suckers list’ which caused them to agree to take part in an experimental drug trial.

The criminals trapped their victims by sending them messages made possible by a website called iNHSpoof. It seems the perpetrators sent multiple messages to millions of Britons telling them that they had an appointment for what was described as a ‘safe and effective vaccine’ which would protect them from a deadly new virus.

Little did the millions who fell for the scam know that the so-called ‘vaccine’ was, in fact, a gene therapy which had been cobbled together in a matter of days, and the virus it was supposed to protect them from was no more dangerous than a bad seasonal flu.

Incredible though it may seem, the victims were then told they needed to download an app which allowed the criminals to dictate their movements.

Susan Sunbeam of Ilford was typical of those who were duped. ‘It all seemed very convincing,’ she said. ‘I saw people on the BBC who I believed to be experts telling me that I would probably die if I did not keep my appointment. I have recently developed a tingling in my right arm but I’m sure it’s nothing.’

Another victim was Ivor Gumble from Birkenhead: ‘I suspected that it might be a scam but my boss said I would lose sick pay if I did not have the jab and became ill.’

Many of those who made money out of the scandal worked for the NHS. A doctor, who asked not to be named, said that he too felt like a victim despite earning thousands of pounds from injecting people with the barely tested concoction. ‘Yes, it’s true that my practice contacted our clients on multiple occasions. It is true that we did not properly investigate the product. I admit that we did not tell people of the possible adverse reactions and we did make shedloads of money from the scam, but everyone was doing it. If we hadn’t taken part somebody else would have jumped in. Unbelievably the people who fell for it the first time kept coming back for more, so what could we do?’

TCW has also discovered that the iNHSpoof scandal allowed the alleged criminal masterminds to channel billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to their friends by giving them contracts for useless ‘protective equipment’ and building so-called Testing Centres which offered visitors a fraudulent and potentially dangerous polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.

The iNHSpoof scam has ruined the economy and is expected ultimately to cost the British taxpayer trillions of pounds. Chief Inspector Hugh Tavistock (He/Him) of the Metropolitan Police said that they were aware of the fraud. However, the Met later issued a statement saying: ‘At this moment in time the Force is preoccupied by an increasing number of reports of Hate Crimes directed towards our friends in the Trans community. We must weigh our priorities and we feel the we cannot allow those who say hurtful words to go unpunished.’

November 28, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

The Australian Government Lied: Doctors are NOT covered by Government’s indemnity for Covid Injections

By Rhoda Wilson • The Exposé • November 27, 2022

Last week Elizabeth Hart wrote to Mark Butler, Australian Minister for Health and Aged Care, about the government misleading health practitioners who are administering Covid injections into believing they are covered by a government medical indemnity scheme. “It has now been confirmed by your department that health practitioners are not covered by a specific Covid-19 government medical indemnity scheme,” she wrote.

Elizabeth Hart is an independent researcher investigating the overuse of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy.

According to a response Hart received on 17 November from Nigel Murray – Assistant Secretary, MBS Policy and Specialist Services Branch – the government did not put in place a medical indemnity scheme for health professionals.  Instead, Murray told Hart, “the former [Morrison] Government established the no-fault Scheme, which commenced operations on 13 December 2021.”  Later in the same letter, he again confirmed the scheme did not exist:

“While a medical indemnity scheme for health professionals administering the Covid-19 vaccine was not established per se, the creation of the no-fault Scheme was intended to support increased participation by health professionals in the Covid-19 Vaccination roll-out.”

Hart informed Butler, the promise of “a medical indemnity scheme for health professionals administering the Covid-19 vaccine” probably did intend “to support increased participation by health professionals in the Covid-19 Vaccination roll-out”. But it turns out they are not personally protected by a government scheme. She explained to Butler:

In July 2021, the Morrison Government stated it was establishing a “fit-for-purpose Covid-19 vaccine medical indemnity scheme” to “support increased vaccination uptake by assuring Australians that health professionals, including GPs, nurses and pharmacists administering Covid vaccines as part of the Commonwealth vaccination program have appropriate indemnity coverage”, with a further announcement in August 2021 stating “The Morrison Government has finalised the details of the no-fault Covid-19 Vaccine Claim Scheme following extensive consultation with the peak medical, healthcare, business and insurance sectors to ensure a comprehensive National Scheme”, noting “It also ensure [sic] that health professionals administering vaccines will be able to continue with their crucial role in the vaccine roll out with assurance that the claims scheme will offer them protection”

But it now turns out health professionals are not personally protected by a specific Covid-19 medical indemnity scheme.

The letter from Nigel Murray also confirms: “Informed consent should be obtained for every Covid-19 vaccination, as per usual consent procedures for other vaccinations.”

Mark Butler, it appears health practitioners don’t have specific government medical indemnity re the Covid jab rollout, although they might think they do. They will have to look to their own medical indemnity insurance to protect them. And they should be obtaining informed consent for every Covid-19 jab…but is this actually happening?

What is the quality of information being provided to people, including parents of children, to enable them to properly evaluate the threat of SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19, and the risks and benefits of the multiple Covid jabs, in their own specific circumstances? Why are people of most ages and health status being called upon to have the Covid-19 jabs? Who is actually at serious risk with SARS-CoV-2/Covid-19? Does having repeated Covid jabs compromise the immune system and make people more vulnerable? Nigel Murray includes reference to the ‘Covid-19 vaccination – Patient resources’ webpage in his letter, but this webpage only includes information re Covid jabs for children, not for adults. Nigel Murray’s letter also includes a link to a ‘Consent form for Covid-19 vaccination’.

How does this information re Covid jabs referred to by Nigel Murray stack up in the ‘valid informed consent’ stakes? I would say not very well at all…

This is an extremely serious situation, Mark Butler – it’s highly likely ‘valid informed consent’ has not been properly obtained by many health practitioners before administering Covid-19 jabs.

The health practitioners inserting the needle must be warned they’re not protected by a specific government Covid medical indemnity scheme after all…and they need to consider the quality of the information they’re providing to people to gain their ‘valid informed consent’ to the jabs. They must also consider the impact of jab mandates – which pressure, coerce and manipulate people to submit to Covid jabs, in contravention of The Australian Immunisation Handbook, i.e., jab mandates inhibit a ‘voluntary’ decision.

Mark Butler, please advise what steps you are taking to address this matter.

This email is being circulated to other parties, including the response from your department.

Health practitioners, Covid jabs and ‘valid informed consent’ – a medical ethics disaster, Elizabeth Hart emails

As Dr. Mike Yeadon noted on his Telegram channel: “This has all the appearance of government throwing medical staff under the bus on liability & requirements for informed consent.”

Two days later, Hart forwarded her email trail with Butler to Kamran Abbasi, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal (“BMJ”), copying in numerous “people influential on international public health/vaccination policy via the scientific and medical establishment, and other parties.”  People copied into her email included infamous modeller Neil Ferguson, UK’s Chief (Covid) Medical Adviser Chris Whitty, President of the Royal Society, and Oxford/AstraZeneca injection’s developers Adrian Hill and Sarah Gilbert.

The BMJ claims to be evidence-based and patient-centred and customer-focused – surely ensuring ‘valid informed consent’ before medical interventions, such as Covid jabs, should be foremost in your values?

Sadly, ‘valid informed consent’ appears to have been sacrificed during the grossly disproportionate and ill-targeted Covid debacle. This scandal is now unfolding in Australia.

FYI, please see [above] my response to Australian federal health minister Mark Butler, on the subject of health practitioners’ medical indemnity insurance for Covid-19 jab administration, and health practitioners’ obligation to obtain ‘informed consent’.

This information has major implications for health practitioners administering Covid-19 jabs in Australia – they need to know they’re not covered by a specific government Covid-19 medical indemnity scheme, and that they’re obligated to obtain informed consent before every Covid-19 jab.

But I strongly suspect many health practitioners have failed to obtain ‘valid informed consent’ before the Covid jabs. How have things gone so terribly wrong?

This is a very serious situation, Kamran Abbasi, at the heart of medical ethics. This should be a priority topic on the BMJ.

November 28, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , , | Leave a comment

Reporter Who Offered Curious Details on Paul Pelosi Hammer Attack Not Seen on Air in Nearly a Month

By Ilya Tsukanov – Samizdat – 28.11.2022

Miguel Almaguer, the NBC News reporter whose reporting on last month’s Paul Pelosi hammer attack incident offered curious details which challenged the mainstream narrative at the time, has not been seen on air or tweeted since the media giant expunged his report and suspended him over unspecified “inaccurate information” in his report.

Almaguer, 45, reported on air on November 4 that Mr. Pelosi calmly opened the door to police officers responding to the 911 emergency call he placed after 2 am on October 28, but that he did not “declare an emergency” or try to leave the domicile, instead walking several feet into the foyer of his home toward the suspect, 42-year-old David DePape, who was armed with a hammer.

The report sparked questions about what 82-year-old Pelosi and DePape were doing before police showed up.

Almaguer’s reporting, which NBC has attempted to scrub from the internet, also challenged claims made by media that the attack was an act of “right-wing political violence” by an enraged Trump supporter “enflamed by right-wing conspiracy theories” and anti-Pelosi sentiment ahead of the November 8 midterm elections.

In a speech on November 3, President Biden attempted to tie the attack to the riots at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, which he said had been fueled by the “dangerous” “lie” that the 2020 election had been stolen from Trump. “Thankfully, by the grace of God, Paul survived,” Biden said.

Further reporting uncovered that DePape was a Canadian national living in the US illegally, a nudism enthusiast suffering from drug addiction, and apparent supporter of liberal causes, hoisting a rainbow flag and a BLM sign on the rundown school bus he was living in.

DePape has been charged with attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon and elder abuse and with federal charges of assault and kidnapping, with the latter carrying a maximum combined sentence of 50 years in prison. He has plead not guilty.

Pelosi was released from hospital on November 3 after recovering from surgery to treat a skull fracture and injuries to his hands and right arms.

November 28, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »