Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ketamine Poses Serious Risks for Pregnant Women, But Providers Often Fail to Warn Them

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 5, 2024

Clinics that administer ketamine for mental health issues often fail to adequately warn patients of the serious risk ketamine poses for pregnant women, according to a new study from the University of Michigan.

It has long been known that ketamine — which can be addictive — “readily and rapidly” crosses the placental barrier.

Research on animals has shown serious neurotoxic effects in offspring exposed to ketamine in utero. These effects include neuronal cell death, abnormal brain development and serious behavioral, cognitive and affective abnormalities that mirror schizophrenia, among other issues.

The authors of the study said ketamine should not be used during pregnancy. They recommend pregnancy testing before treatment and the use of contraception during treatment, and said treatment should end if a woman becomes pregnant.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) reports that nearly half of the pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned. Many people who are treated with ketamine for psychiatric illness are women who may become pregnant.

The study, published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, found that ketamine prescribers aren’t paying enough attention to this risk. The authors concluded that more needs to be done to ensure that patients taking ketamine are not pregnant and won’t become pregnant during their treatment.

The researchers surveyed ketamine clinics across the country and analyzed informed consent documents found online.

They also examined the medical records of patients from a University of Michigan medical clinic to determine whether women there who were given ketamine were taking pregnancy tests and using contraception during their treatment.

The study authors found a wide variation in policies, practices and warnings about ketamine and pregnancy among the 119 clinics that responded to their survey. Collectively, the clinics treat more than 7,000 patients per month, about a third of whom are women of childbearing age.

Lead author Dr. Rachel Pacilio told Science Daily :

“These data suggest that a large population of patients could be pregnant, or could become pregnant, while receiving ketamine treatment via multiple routes of administration. This risk increases with the duration of therapy which can last weeks for the initial course and a year or more for maintenance. …

“Many patients do not know that they’re pregnant in the first weeks, and animal studies of ketamine are very concerning for potential harm to the fetus during this time.”

Ketamine use on the rise

In recent years, ketamine has gained traction as a promising alternative therapy for treatment-resistant depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental health conditions that haven’t responded to other treatments.

The drug is “generally considered safe,” according to the paper, but there are “significant gaps in knowledge” about its effects in “special patient populations,” such as pregnant women.

But the therapy is very new, as is the scientific data supporting its safety and efficacy.

The 119 responding clinics in the study comprise a small percentage of the 500-700 ketamine clinics KFF Health News reported have recently “cropped up” across the U.S. The industry, valued at $3.1 billion in 2022, is projected to more than double to $6.9 billion by 2030.

Ketamine is a Schedule III drug, making it about as easy to access as Tylenol with codeine.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the drug for general anesthesia during surgery and as a sedative in some settings.

Only one formulation — the intranasal esketamine, sold under the brand name Spravato — is approved for treatment-resistant depression. However generic forms of the drug are commonly used off-label to treat psychiatric disorders.

The common off-label use means there aren’t standard protocols for how to safely administer the drug. Evidence-based guidelines are limited and treatment can vary significantly in terms of the dose, frequency, method of administration and duration of treatment, according to the paper.

Clinics that offer intravenous ketamine or the FDA-approved nasal version often require in-person monitoring post-administration to monitor for safety and prevent the patient from driving after administration.

However, other clinics prescribe sublingual ketamine for at-home use and safety protocols are unknown. Online services like Mindbloom and Nue Life also offer the drug at home, without an in-person visit to a prescriber, often in the form of lozenges shipped from compounding pharmacies, MedPage Today reported. These types of prescribers were not included in the study.

The FDA’s risk mitigation program, meant to ensure that benefits outweigh risks for drugs with serious safety concerns, has no provisions for the use of Spravato during pregnancy, according to Pacilio.

The agency last year issued a warning about the dangers of compounded ketamine, but said nothing about pregnancy.

Prescribing information for the approved form of the drug indicates that prescribers should specifically advise patients about the potential risk of fetal harm resulting from in utero ketamine exposure. However, prescribers are not provided with information about how to effectively counsel women, the study found.

Recent controversy around the death of actor Matthew Perry has also revealed that the addictive potential of ketamine is unknown and more people are also abusing the drug as it becomes more widely available.

‘The field is really in need of standardization’

Over 75% of the clinics that responded to the survey, said they have a formal pregnancy screening process, but only about 20% required a pregnancy test.

However, less than 50% of the clinics warned patients to avoid pregnancy during treatment or explained the specific risks related to pregnancy exposure to patients. Informed consent documents at those clinics had a pregnancy warning only about half the time.

In their examination of informed consent documents on the websites of 70 other ketamine clinics, the researchers found that 39% did not include language about pregnancy in their documents, and those that did were generally vague.

Regarding contraception counseling, only 26% of responding clinics said they discuss the need for contraception and less than 15% of clinics recommend contraception during treatment.

These findings were particularly concerning, according to the researchers, because most clinics prescribed long-term courses of ketamine treatment, ranging from six months to more than a year.

Their review of patient records from 24 women treated with ketamine at the University of Michigan clinic showed that all of them had taken a pregnancy test before treatment, but only half had documentation of contraception in their medical records.

The study concluded that as ketamine treatment becomes more widely available and prescribed, there is a growing need to inform women about the serious risks during pregnancy.

“The variability in practice that we see among clinics in the community in this study is stark,” said Pacilio.

“The field is really in need of standardization around reproductive counseling, pregnancy testing and the recommendation for contraception during ketamine treatment.”

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

September 8, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Tucker Carlson’s Non-Denial Denialism of the Holocaust

By Thomas Dalton • Unz Review • September 6, 2024

Well, the Jewish Lobby is at it again. In the latest kerfuffle over “Holocaust denial,” Jews and their sycophants are in an uproar over a podcast interview aired on September 2 in which Tucker Carlson spoke at length with a “popular historian” named Darryl Cooper. The two-hour episode is titled “The True History of the Jonestown Cult, WWII, and How Winston Churchill Ruined Europe”—a bit of a stretch for a single show, but with the central theme that conventional or orthodox history is often wrong about events small and large, and thus frequently in need of revision. History is not only written by the victors, it is sustained by powerful lobbies that have a vested interest in a certain interpretation of past events. This much is so obvious that it scarcely needs mentioning.

Video Link

And yet, when it comes to World War Two and especially the Holocaust, all rules go out the window. The “victors” cannot be named; alternate interpretations are not allowed; and revisionism is declared a crime. In the interview, Cooper offers the mildest of mild statements regarding his thoughts on WW2 and on what happened to “civilians and prisoners of war” at that time. Two points seemed to have raised the greatest ire: that Churchill, not Hitler, was the true villain of the war; and that the millions of people who died—presumably meaning millions of Jews—were, in effect, accidental victims rather than targets of a premediated and planned genocide. Our cultural guardians are upset by the first point but truly enraged by the second.

The horror of stating such views was too much for both our Jewish media and for our Jewish-inspired Biden regime. The headlines are alarming: “Tucker Carlson Criticized for Hosting Holocaust Revisionist” (NYT); “Tucker Carlson Welcomes a Hitler Apologist to His Show” (NYT, Michelle Goldberg); “White House condemns Tucker Carlson’s ‘Nazi propaganda’ interview as ‘disgusting and sadistic insult’” (CNN); “Tucker Carlson Blasted for Interview with Holocaust Revisionist” (The Hill). CNN reports that the Biden administration took the unusual step of publicly “denouncing Tucker Carlson” and his guest. Deputy press secretary Andrew Bates issued a formal statement, not only calling the interview “a disgusting and sadistic insult to all Americans” but also condemning Carlson for “giving a microphone to a Holocaust denier who spreads Nazi propaganda.” Bates’ chief concern seems to be with “the over 6 million Jews who were genocidally murdered by Adolf Hitler.” “Hitler was one of the most evil figures in human history,” Bates assures us—“full stop.” Certainly no revisionism allowed in this most “freedom-loving” of nations.

This whole incident is worthy of some reflection. Let me start with what exactly Cooper said. Here are the relevant statements (from 46:30 to 49:00):

When [the Germans] went into the East, in 1941, they launched a war where they were completely unprepared to deal with the millions and millions of prisoners of war, local political prisoners, and so forth, that they were going to have to handle. They went in with no plan for that. And they just threw these people into camps and millions of people ended up dead there.

You have letters as early as July, August 1941 from commandants of these makeshift camps that they’re setting up for these millions of people who were surrendering or people they are rounding up. And it’s two months after [Operation] Barbarossa was launched [in June], and they’re writing back to the high command in Berlin saying, “We can’t feed these people…” And one of them actually says, “Rather than wait for them all to slowly starve this winter, wouldn’t it be more humane to just finish them off quickly now?”

At the end of the day, [Hitler] launched that war [against the USSR] with no plan to care for the millions and millions of civilians and prisoners of war that were going to come under [his] control. And millions of people died because of that.

To assess what Cooper is saying here, we must remind ourselves of the basic facts: Hitler launched his war against Poland in early September 1939. Based on a mutual nonaggression pact, Stalin attacked Poland from the East two weeks later, and the two great powers quickly divided Poland in half. England and France then declared war on Germany, not vice versa (wait—who was the aggressor again?), and so Hitler was compelled to direct his military efforts to the west. He never wanted a war to his west, and as Cooper explains, Hitler tried frequently to make peace with Chamberlain (not yet Churchill). Chamberlain sought compromise but the rest of his divided government—including Churchill—preferred to continue a war they were ill-equipped to fight. Germany invaded the Low Countries in May 1940, Chamberlain resigned, and Churchill was elevated to prime minister.

Throughout the second half of 1940 and into the first half of 1941, Hitler continued his impressive string of victories. France was all but defeated and England was on its last legs. Then suddenly, on 22 June 1941, Hitler broke his pact with Stalin and invaded the Soviet Union (“Operation Barbarossa”). This, says Cooper, was the war in which Germany was unprepared to handle “millions” of prisoners. And indeed, more than 3 million Soviet POWs came under Germany control by the end of 1941, many of whom in fact surrendered or defected. They were initially housed in the nearly 100 ad hoc camps established in German-controlled Russia, and conditions were indeed horrible, as Cooper suggests. Upwards of 500,000 Soviet POWs died each month: around two million dead by the end of 1941. As far as we know, this was unplanned; the Germans were too busy fighting on the front to take much care for their 3 million newly-captured prisoners. They indeed simply “ended up dead,” as Cooper says.

Notably, nowhere does Cooper talk about Jewish prisoners. The whole discussion centers on Soviet POWs and other political prisoners, of whom there were relatively few Jews. Jews did pay a price during Barbarossa, but it was because they were partisan fighters: attacking German troops from behind the front lines. According to international rules of warfare, partisans are to be treated the same as soldiers—meaning, they could be captured, or they could be killed. And the Germans preferred to kill partisans; this was logical, given their already overcrowded ad hoc POW camps.

This resulted in the true beginning of “the Holocaust,” if we wish to call it that. Thousands of partisan Jews were shot on the Eastern Front—perhaps 30,000 or 40,000 in 1941, based on reasonable estimates (certainly not the 400,000 or 500,000 that our orthodox historians would have us believe). But Cooper was not discussing these deaths. Jews also died in the ghettos in 1941—perhaps another 40,000 or 50,000, most from natural causes (old age, illness, accident, suicide). And precisely zero Jews died in “homicidal gas chambers” or “death camps” in 1941; none of the infamous six camps—Auschwitz, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Chełmno, and Majdanek—were operational that year. For that matter, precisely zero Jews died in “homicidal gas chambers” during the entire war, precisely because such things did not exist. But neither Carlson nor Cooper dared step into that sticky wicket.[1]

So, in Cooper’s (and Carlson’s) defense, the passage at hand says nothing about Jews and thus nothing about “the Holocaust.” Everything Cooper said there was factually correct. In fact, in the entire two-hour-plus interview, Jews were only mentioned a handful of times, and the “Holocaust” not once, that I can recall.

Jews Go on the Attack

But that’s not how our Jewish Lobby sees it. Every reference to “millions” of deaths is, to them, a coded reference to Jews. Even discussing Hitler as anyone other than a comically-evil madman means that you are a Nazi sympathizer, a “denier” (whatever that means), or simply “disgusting and sadistic.”

A good example the absurdly inane orthodox response can be found in (Jewish) Michelle Goldberg’s op-ed in the (Jewish) New York Times of September 6. The alleged “Hitler apologist” Darryl Cooper failed to toe the party line on the unconditional evil of the Nazis, and so she condemns him in the strongest terms, without even knowing what she is talking about. She clearly doesn’t like the idea that Holocaustianity is our current “state religion” (which it is), and she is incensed when Cooper rightly mentions the “emotional triggers” that keep us from asking tough questions. To Goldberg, Cooper offers us only “clever rhetorical formulations” that are presented in a “soft-spoken, faux-reasonable way.” So overwhelmed is she by Carlson’s and Cooper’s audacity that she is reduced to the following idiocy: “Nazi sympathy is the natural endpoint of a politics based on glib contrarianism, right-wing transgression, and ethnic grievance.” This, from a staff writer at the New York Times.

More to the point, despite the utter lack of mention of the Holocaust in the interview, Goldberg is fixated on this supposed inference. She laments “Carlson’s turn toward Holocaust skepticism”; she frets over the “disgraced, Holocaust-denying author David Irving” (as if he is relevant here); and she bemoans the fact that “there are few better trolls than Holocaust deniers.” Those clever deniers “love to pose as heterodox truth-seekers,” and they “excel at mimicking the forms and language of legitimate scholarship”—when in fact their level of scholarship often equals or exceeds that of our conventional so-called experts.[2] Deniers “blitz their opponents with out-of-context historical detail and bad-faith questions” (How dare they go into detail! How dare they ask questions!). In the end, “they only know how to use crude provocation to get attention”—says the attention-seeking Jewess.

One of Goldberg’s biggest fears is that, in her Jewish-controlled ideological universe, that the jig might be up. She worries about the red-pilled right-wing belief “that all you’ve been told about the nature of reality is a lie, and thus everything is up for grabs.” In fact, much of what we have been told by our Jewish-inspired orthodoxy has been a lie, or a half-truth, or otherwise deeply deceptive, and Goldberg worries that more and more people are figuring this out. And she is right to worry: a mass awakening will spell big trouble for her and her co-ethnics.

Finally at the end of her piece, she puts her finger on a bit of truth: “Ultimately, Holocaust denial isn’t really about history at all, but about what’s permissible in the present and imaginable in the future.” Hitler and the Nazis must be viewed “as the negation of our deepest values,” or else we are “softened up” for Trump-like fascism. Holocaust denial—that is, deeply questioning the basic assumptions of that event—is indeed not really about history simply because the revisionists have won: the orthodox story of the “homicidal gas chambers,” “the 6 million,” and the alleged National Socialist mad plot to kill all the Jews—all these have been utterly demolished. Orthodox historians no longer even try to respond to revisionists because they know that they will be disgraced. Instead, they and their potent Jewish backers resort to censorship, lawfare, slander, intimidation, and (in many countries) imprisonment to stifle revisionism. Such things are a sure sign of defeat.

As for her remark about what is permissible and imaginable, this too is correct: The standard Holocaust story is the keystone of present-day Jewish power in the US and the West; everything rests on our collective guilt, and all Jewish/Israeli atrocities are thereby justified. Jewish power presently declares that questioning the Holocaust is impermissible; and that a society in which Hitler and National Socialism are viewed neutrally or even positively is unimaginable. But this will soon change. When Holocaust revisionism becomes permissible, and National Socialism becomes imaginable, then everything—everything—will change. That day cannot come soon enough.

The great irony in this whole much-ado-about-nothing is that it could have been something : Carlson and Cooper could have actually discussed the many problems with the Holocaust story, and they could have actually asked the tough questions that orthodoxy cannot answer. They could have examined the many works of Germar Rudolf or Carlo Mattogno; they could have reviewed the reasons why homicidal gas chambers were technically impossible; they could have explained that the best evidence to date suggests that perhaps 500,000 Jews died during the war, not 6 million. And when all that comes out, Michelle Goldberg and friends will truly have something to fear.

Thomas Dalton, PhD, has authored or edited several books and articles on politics, history, and the Jewish Question. All his works are available at www.clemensandblair.com, and at his personal website www.thomasdaltonphd.com.

Notes

[1] For details, see my book Debating the Holocaust (4th ed., 2020) or Germar Rudolf’s Lectures on the Holocaust.

[2] For the full academic story, see the 50-volume “Holocaust Handbook” series. For a concise treatment of all the core issues, see the newly-released Holocaust Encyclopedia.

September 8, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Film Review, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

$10 mln is serious money – What’s lacking? Serious evidence of crime

By Joaquin Flores | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 7, 2024

The entrenched authorities are bent on inserting Kamala Harris into office using lawfare, despite her resounding unpopularity and anti-populism. On September 4th, 2024, the United States Department of Justice issued a press release from its Office of Public Affairs, detailing and making public a sealed indictment (it can be read here) against two Russian nationals, who are said to be employees of RT, for ‘funneling’ US $10mln to various high-profile social media content creators. What strikes us immediately is that this is not a crime, even though the word ‘funneling’ is a strongly loaded term in the sense of neuro-linguistic programming, and so the DOJ’s approach to geopolitical lawfare as an extended form of political warfare in the information sphere, has been to find a legal theory that would support ‘finding’ and ‘creating’ charges on the basis of the two accused having conspired to fail to register as foreign agents.

The opening paragraphs of the DOJ press release read:

<<An indictment charging Russian nationals Kostiantyn [for some reason DOJ uses the Ukrainian version of the Russian name Konstantin – SCF] Kalashnikov, 31, also known as Kostya, and Elena Afanasyeva, 27, also known as Lena, with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) and conspiracy to commit money laundering was unsealed today in the Southern District of New York. Kalashnikov and Afanasyeva are at large.

“The Justice Department has charged two employees of RT, a Russian state-controlled media outlet, in a $10 million scheme to create and distribute content to U.S. audiences with hidden Russian government messaging,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “The Justice Department will not tolerate attempts by an authoritarian regime to exploit our country’s free exchange of ideas in order to covertly further its own propaganda efforts, and our investigation into this matter remains ongoing.”

“Our approach to combating foreign malign influence is actor-driven, exposing the hidden hand of adversaries pulling strings of influence from behind the curtain,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. “As alleged in today’s indictment, Russian state broadcaster RT and its employees, including the charged defendants, co-opted online commentators by funneling them nearly $10 million to pump pro-Russia propaganda and disinformation across social media to U.S. audiences. The Department will not tolerate foreign efforts to illegally manipulate American public opinion by sowing discord and division.”>>

Based on the language of the charges, it would appear that the foreign nationals were physically in the United States for the duration, or at least the initiation, of the project. That they are ‘at large’ and have not been taken into custody would seem to imply that this arrest will happen imminently, or that the two accused are no longer in the US.

It is important to keep in mind that it is not illegal for Russians to spend money in the US, and it is not illegal for Russians or any other foreign nationals to start a business, or engage in protected 1st Amendment activities such as blogging and news or opinion writing or broadcasting.

Assuming that some parts of the described predicate are true, (that a Russian citizen’s money was spent in the US), provided that the individual is not an a US Treasury Department sanctions list, the relevant Executive Order, or legislation, has not obviously been violated. There are some limitations to speech in the US for foreign nationals, and while there is some nuance here, generally 1st Amendment activities are protected unless there is either a reasonable or articulable risk (which standard may depend on the circumstances) to national security that could reasonably lead to a grand jury indictment – think insider whistle-blowing or releasing government/corporate secrets.

‘Funneling’ moneys to individual content creators – YouTuber Tim Pool is believed to be prominent among these – may or may not have influenced the content they were creating – another important part of the nuanced questions that arise. And if the opinions of said content creators (on the subjects they are known for) had not changed after the influx of private party backing, it is more difficult to make the whole claim that the DOJ is now making. Garland, for his part, also adds a proviso – the messages are “hidden”. At face value, this would seem to give the accuseds’ lawyers an additional challenge.

To the contrary, the opposite would be true: making a charge in which no method of falsifiability can be established, is a baseless charge. It is not a ‘hidden crime’, but an activity indistinguishable from lawful behavior.

More to the point, the subjects being discussed, whether influenced by the alleged money or not, were matters already in the public domain, expressing views and sharing information which is already readily available everywhere, and which were commonplace beliefs among an already significant part of the American population. We are not talking state or corporate secrets, calls for violence or other seditious activity, which rise to the level of a national security risk.

The subject of ‘foreign agent registration’ touches on a different, but related matter. Here again, the DOJ appears to be reaching by conflating that (ostensibly) because the two accused were employees of RT, that any or all other conceivable activities they undertook were performed under the auspices of that employer/employee relationship. Granted, that employment may have been the foundation for their visa to be in the US, but this does not mean that all activities done in the US were done on the basis of that relationship. This much is far from obvious and that case would need to be made, as well.

Yet another conundrum in the USA’s case against the accused arises therefore: they cannot easily make the alleged activity a crime unless they connect it to a more obvious and recognized state-backed sponsor (RT). But this further problematizes the prosecution’s case.

Even though the DOJ cites the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), under FARA, it is the organization itself that must register, not each individual employee.

For RT and similar entities, the requirement is that the organization, as a whole, must register as a foreign agent as they are believed to be acting on behalf of a foreign government or entity and is engaged in political activities or disseminating information in the U.S. The registration process involves disclosing details about the organization’s activities, funding sources, and relationships with foreign principals. RT did indeed register as a foreign agent in the United States to be in compliance with FARA in 2017. This registration was prompted by pressure from the U.S. government, which cited concerns over RT’s role as a state-controlled media outlet spreading Russian government messaging. By registering as a foreign agent, RT was required to disclose its funding sources, activities, and affiliations with the Russian government, in compliance with FARA’s requirements for organizations engaged in political activities on behalf of foreign principals.

To make matters worse, the USA’s case faces another logical fallacy: if the accusation is that the two accused conspired to get around foreign agent registration, it would seem to mean that their work was in fact not connected to their employment with RT. If it was through RT, then they did not violate avoidance of registration. If it was not through RT, the clear case of state-backed involvement evaporates.

Individual employees of such organizations, like Kalashnikov and Afanasyeva, are not required to register as foreign agents unless they are specifically engaged in activities that meet the criteria set out by FARA, such as acting as representatives or lobbyists, including the influence of media, for a foreign government or other “foreign principal”. While “foreign principal” can be construed to include private individuals, if those private individuals are without readily identifiable close connections to foreign politics or foreign geostrategic interests (skin in game), the case becomes much weaker. There are other signs that the DOJ has a considerably weak case.

Take particular notice that the charges are ‘conspiracy’ charges, not the commission of the crime. The charges are ‘conspiracy’ to subvert or ‘get around’ FARA, and ‘conspiracy’ to launder money.

While this is a much lower legal standard, because the predicate of having actually committed the crime need not be at the foundation of a conspiracy charge. On the face of it, this would seem to make the DOJ’s case easier to make.

But not so fast: the successful prosecution of a conspiracy charge only really works in two scenarios. In the first case, the accused must be charged with both committing the crime, and the related conspiracy (communications and agreements involving one or more other persons) charge. In this case, establishing the foundation for, and charging the accused with an actual crime itself, is a necessary predicate for a conspiracy charge to be included.

In the second case, the conspiracy charge is meant to prevent the crime itself from being committed. Yet, in the charges against Kalashnikov and Afanasyeva, their alleged activities are past tense.

Here, the DOJ implicitly admits that they had neither prevented the crime, nor was there sufficient evidence of an actual crime having taken place to serve as the predicate. This type of lawfare seems more like a ‘weapon of mass confusion’ in the interest of one candidate (Harris) and aimed at undermining real and actual domestic US political processes, working against the interests of the other of the candidate, (Trump), in the upcoming November presidential election.

We can therefore see immediately that the DOJ is playing fast and loose with these legal distinctions, and is a sign that at the very least an individual judge was either incompetent or influenced against proper judicial oversight, re the prosecutor’s advisement of the grand jury on how to proceed and what constitutes elements of the crime, leading to these flawed sealed indictments.

Indeed, the recent and highly visible DOJ escalation of the investigation into American affiliations with Russian state television networks has ignited considerable concerns over the weaponization (and definition) of American institutions.

Officially aimed at countering Kremlin influence operations in advance of the forthcoming presidential election, the heinously broad scope and the underlying investigations, including the potential shut-down of content producers like Tim Pool, has sparked concerns about the politicization of the DOJ and other governmental entities. The aggressive actions have led to allegations that these efforts are more politically motivated than grounded in genuine national security concerns.

The DOJ’s actions, part of a broader strategy ostensibly to neutralize Russia’s state-run media operations, have featured dramatic high-profile interventions, including searches and involuntary detentions executed by FBI agents, at citizens’ homes and ports of entry. These other actions, while not yet leading to the charges we see in the September 4th charges, signal an expansive scope that will no doubt involve additional individuals and potential criminal repercussions. Such measures have led to significant skepticism and condemnation, even from former government officials, like former US State Department official Mike Benz, meaning that the investigations and detentions are more about a form of full-spectrum domination than safeguarding genuine national interests. For what is in the national interest beyond what is the interest of the country’s population?

Certainly, the notion that national interest is synonymous with the agendas of a small, ideologically driven clique, who happen to hold considerable sway within a specific historical timeline, seems rather contrary to a broad, long-term, and societal view, or rather definition, of the national interest. These individuals – Trans-Atlantic neoliberal neoconservatives, occupying cabinet and permanent administration positions, and in the military – primarily serve the narrow interests of a select group of Americans (themselves) who are more invested in perpetuating a Cold War-style Russophobia and Sinophobia than a genuine advancement of the broader national interest. Their approach is driven by the inertia of think tanks, financial interests, and the ever-churning machinery of the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC), which ties back into an ecosystem that thrives on maintaining the status quo.

The DOJ’s actions are a brazen example of politicized lawfare masquerading as national security. By wielding the Foreign Agents Registration Act as a blunt instrument against “RT employees”, they are not just reaching but overreaching—attempting to equate the legitimate financial support of independent content creators with nefarious foreign influence.

The targets are not simply the accused, nor are they simply a few content creators that have been named in related journalism, like Mr. Pool. These charges are meant to having a chilling and silencing effect on all Americans, on all citizens engaged in social media at every level. These grand jury charges are undemocratic and deplorable to their core.

The flimsy indictment rests on the nebulous charges of conspiracy rather than actual criminal acts, exposing the DOJ’s desperation to manufacture threats where none exist. This reckless use of federal power to stifle dissenting voices and disrupt political narratives serves not the American people, but a narrow band of entrenched interests hell-bent on perpetuating outdated Cold War paranoias.

It is an audacious assault on free speech and a stark reminder of the lengths to which those in power will go to preserve their status quo, even if it means trampling on the foundational principles of justice and democracy. This is not a defense of national interest but an egregious abuse of authority that threatens the very fabric of the republic. If this is how they intend to install Kamala Harris, they will prove that they are hypocritically the source of the very undermining of confidence in American institutions which they accuse others of. So be it.

September 7, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Durov Bombshell: Archaic Crypto Law Charges Reveal French Intel’s Access to Private Communications

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 06.09.2024

The Durov saga in France and the continued efforts by countries around the world to crack down on his popular cloud-based, end-to-end encrypted private messenger and social media software has divulged a string of embarrassing details about the sorry state of internet privacy and freedom of information.

Two of the six charges facing Telegram CEO Pavel Durov in France are grounded an obscure, never-used twenty-year-old law obliging companies providing cryptography tools to inform the French Cybersecurity Agency (French acronym ANSSI) and grant it access to the software’s source code and “a description of [its] technical characteristics.”

The 2004 law – uniquely blunt in its demand that companies divulge info about the tech tools used for private communications, is being used against Durov by accusing him of providing encrypted communications services “without certified declaration.”

The legal requirement also means, if it is applied evenly across the board, that the array of instant messengers available to French users, from WhatsApp and Signal to iMessage and the French-made Olvid ‘secure’ messenger used by the French government, do comply with ANSSI regulations, meaning French intelligence can potentially spy on any or all French users at any time.

Adding credence to this idea is the fact that Pavel Durov is reportedly the first-ever tech mogul to be charged under the 2004 law, and the fact that many big-name tech companies have been silent on the Durov case, with the exception of Proton CEO Andy Yen, who characterized the charges against the Russian-born tech mogul as “economic suicide” that’s “rapidly and permanently changing the perception of founders and investors” toward France.

“If sustained, I don’t see how tech founders could possibly travel to France, much less hire in France,” Yen wrote last week.

The law is also reminiscent of the case against WikiLeaks cofounder Julian Assange, who was threatened with decades of jail time by the US under the obscure Espionage Act of 1917, even though that he was not an American citizen, and a publisher, not a spy. Former president Donald Trump was charged under the same act in his classified documents case, which got thrown out by a judge in July.

September 7, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

‘Israel’ withholding IOF October 7 testimonies from US investigators

Al Mayadeen | September 6, 2024

“Israel” refused to allow US investigators to gather testimonies from the occupation’s military forces (IOF) regarding October 7 in fear of being tried for war crimes, Israeli newspaper Hapeles reported Thursday, adding that investigators collected eyewitness accounts from settlers who experienced the event.

As part of a collaboration between Tel Aviv and Washington to file indictments against high-ranking Hamas officials in the US courts for the October 7 operation, the Israeli police’s Lahav 433 crime unit allowed the collection of testimonies as evidence against the Palestinian Resistance, according to Haredi.

However, Motti Levy, the state attorney and head of Lahav, did not share any of the testimonies gathered from the approximately 700 soldiers interviewed.

The testimony collections were part of an Israeli investigation. However, the testimonies were not provided to the US due to fears that they would be used as evidence to prosecute IOF soldiers in the US and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, Haredi reported.

Israeli deputy legal advisor to the government, Gil Limon, traveled to the US two months ago to meet with Levy as part of the investigation.

The state attorney was criticized by the occupation’s police on Wednesday for failing to file charges against Hamas leaders in “Israel” like the US, according to the KAN public broadcaster.

US charges Hamas leaders over Operation Al-Aqsa Flood

The US Justice Department took an unsurprising action on Wednesday by charging prominent Palestinian Resistance figures, notably new Hamas Political Bureau chief, Yahya Sinwar, with a hefty array of charges—conspiracy to support a “foreign terrorist organization that resulted in death, conspiracy to murder US nationals, and conspiracy to finance terrorism.”

The DOJ has also added Iran and Hezbollah to the list for allegedly providing Hamas with cash, rockets, and other military supplies.

“Israel” has committed atrocities in Gaza, and the ICC is anticipated to file arrest warrants for its leaders for genocide in the Strip.

The complaint was initially filed under seal in February to allow time for the US to attempt to apprehend then-Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and other defendants. However, it was unsealed on Tuesday following Haniyeh’s “death” in July and other regional developments that reduced the necessity for confidentiality, according to the Justice Department.

It is worth noting that “Israel” assassinated Haniyeh by an airstrike on his residence in Tehran.

“The charges unsealed today are just one part of our effort to target every aspect of Hamas’ operations,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a video statement. “These actions will not be our last.”

The charges also target other Hamas leaders, including Marwan Issa, the deputy head of Hamas’ armed wing in Gaza, Khaled Mashaal, a former leader of Hamas and Haniyeh’s deputy currently residing in Doha, Mohammad Deif, the military leader of Hamas, and Ali Baraka, who manages Hamas’ external relations from Lebanon.

September 6, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel Rules Washington

Political Parties compete in what they will do for the Jewish State

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • September 4, 2024

If there is anyone out there who seriously doubts that it is Israel that is in the driver’s seat when it comes to its relationship with the United States, last week’s filing of criminal charges directed against Hamas’s leadership should be a wake-up call. The seven-count criminal complaint was filed in a federal court in New York City on September 2nd. It includes charges such as conspiracy to bomb a public space, conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization resulting in deaths, use of weapons of mass destruction, conspiring to and also murdering US nationals and conspiracy to finance terrorism. The document also claims that Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah have been providing financial support, weapons, to include rockets, as well as military supplies to Hamas for use in their attacks on Israel. The document’s legitimacy, though one hesitates to use the word, is based on the assumption that the US has a mandate to go after terrorists and their supporters, even to kill them, anywhere in the world when and if it considers it appropriate to do so.

To spread the good news of the new development, the malignant dwarf United States Attorney General Merrick Garland even emerged from his closet where he has been hiding since he traveled to Ukraine to threaten Russia in September 2023. He produced a video statement that revealed his thinking re the latest attempt to regulate the behavior of the rest of the world using American courts. Garland said, without presenting any evidence, that Hamas had been guilty of “financing and directing a decades-long campaign to murder American citizens and endanger the security of the United States… [while also seeking] to destroy the state of Israel and murder civilians in support of that aim.” Garland also described the October 7th attack on Israel by Hamas, in which 43 American-Israelis allegedly died, in graphic terms that have since been exposed as nearly all Israeli propaganda lies. He claimed, the group had “murdered entire families” as “the deadliest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust. They murdered the elderly and they murdered young children. They weaponized sexual violence against women, including rape and genital mutilation. The charges unsealed today are just one part of our effort to target every aspect of Hamas’ operations. These actions will not be our last.” In reality, of course, many if not most of those who died were killed by friendly fire when Israel staged its counter-attack, using helicopter gunships and tanks to kill anyone on the ground indiscriminately. Nevertheless, the mainstream media continues to repeat the false narrative surrounding October 7th, that Hamas killed 1,200 Israelis. And the tales of torture and rape apply mostly to the activity of Israeli soldiers vis-à-vis Palestinian prisoners. Many released hostages have actually confirmed that they were treated well by Hamas.

To please Israel, the US originally declared Hamas to be a “foreign terrorist organization” in 1997. The going after Hamas at this time is undoubtedly a gift to Israel as well as to American Jewish political megadonors, who provide a majority of Democratic Party political funding as well as an increasing share of what will go to Donald Trump’s Republicans. Filing charges is nevertheless largely theatrical in nature as Garland’s FBI would have a hard time finding and arresting six men identified as the group’s leadership, three of whom are dead. It includes its current leader Yahya Sinwar, whose whereabouts are unknown as he is hiding in a tunnel somewhere. Other Hamas leaders charged include former leader Ismail Haniyeh; Marwan Issa, the deputy leader of the organization’s armed wing; Khaled Mashaal, who leads the group outside Gaza and the West Bank; along with Mohammed Deif and Ali Baraka. Haniyeh, Issa and Deif have all been reported killed in the past few months in attacks by Israel. As the men named who still are alive are unlikely to be arrested by the US, one has to wonder if the filing at this time is quite possibly intended to set the stage for a federal government bid to seek, arrest and punish Americans who support the group and its activities to free its land from the Zionist invaders as “terrorism supporters.” It could also be used to attack supporters of the Palestinian cause more generically.

If terror is what it is all about and the US is enforcing its “rules based international order” to encompass all terrorists anywhere, it is ironic, of course, that Israel is not being targeted as well as Hamas. It is Israel that assassinates foreign officials, bombs countries that it is not at war with, and is openly carrying out a series of war crimes that amount to a genocide in Gaza that may already have killed nearly 200,000 Palestinians. Meanwhile, Hamas is acting legally under international law in using force to overturn the completely illegal Jewish occupation of what was once Palestine. The United States clearly has no interest in doing what it takes, i.e. stopping the flow of money and weapons to Israel, to prevent the completion of an openly embraced Israeli government plan to deport or kill all or nearly all Palestinians remaining in a huge “cleansing operation” in what was once their country. As Caitlin Johnstone has observed the United States government and those of many Europeans appear unwilling to react and seem in practice to believe the Talmudic assertion that Palestinians and non-Jews in general are not quite human.

The media reporting the new development is, inevitably, taking pains to support the government initiative by describing how the US action is in response to the brutal attack on Israel engineered by Hamas on October 7th. Curiously, the US government and media keep using the same tired rhetoric to demonize the Palestinians while only rarely mentioning or condemning what preceded that event or expressing any sympathy for the oppressed and largely unarmed men, women, and children trapped in a constantly tightening ring of death in Gaza.

The reason for the timing of the US charges is not immediately clear but it might be considered a move to obtain for Kamala Harris more support from the powerful and wealthy Israel Lobby. Certainly however, the recent discovery in Gaza of the body of an Israeli-American hostage and five others might have called for an “extra step” against evil Hamas, indicating that the US does not forgive or forget. One might suggest that the deaths of the six hostages might itself be a contrived event in that the claim that the victims were killed by pistol shots from Hamas was made through an Israeli army autopsy. Bear in mind that the Israelis lie about everything, so that might be a cover story or a form of false flag. Hamas has indeed claimed that if bullets were involved they were “made in Israel.” It is perhaps more likely that the six were killed in an Israeli bombing and their deaths are being manipulated by the Benjamin Netanyahu government for political reasons. Certainly, Israel has itself killed more than its share of the Jewish hostages, witness the three escaped hostages some months ago who were waving white flags and calling out in Hebrew but were nevertheless shot dead by the Israeli army.

Garland did indeed comment on the Israeli-American killed in the incident, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, saying “We are investigating Hersh’s murder, and each and every one of Hamas’ brutal murders of Americans, as an act of terrorism.” President Joe Biden also condemned Goldberg-Polin’s killing, too, saying it was “as tragic as it is reprehensible. Make no mistake, Hamas leaders will pay for these crimes.”

Assuming that the criminal case against Hamas is a Joe Biden-Kamala Harris contrivance to bring in votes and money, what will Donald Trump do to match it? Indications are that the Republican Jewish Caucus which is meeting in Las Vegas will declare the GOP to be the only “true” pro-Israel party, which will be combined with an endorsement of Netanyahu’s “total victory” policies and blaming the Democrats for the death of Israeli hostages. And there have already been reports circulating that Miriam Adelson, widow of late-casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson, has dangled $100 million in front of Trump to secure his promise to guarantee US support for Israel to annex all of Palestine, which would also include expelling most or maybe even all the Palestinians. So, that given, who should suddenly pop-up but ex-Trump personal lawyer David Friedman, who served as Ambassador to Israel under the Trumpster from 2017-2021. He has called for the US to fund the Israeli annexation of the West Bank in a book entitled One Jewish State: The Last, Best Hope to Resolve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict that was released on September 2nd.

Friedman, who was a total yes-man for Israel while Ambassador, explains that Israel needs financial assistance “to assert and maintain its sovereignty over Judea and Samaria,” the biblical name for the illegally Israeli-occupied Palestinian West Bank. He suggests that the next Republican administration could redirect to Jerusalem $1 billion already budgeted and intended to provide aid to Palestinians. “The easiest bucket to tap into and reposition is that of the United States.” Friedman said the US should support the Israeli annexation “based first and foremost on biblical prophecies and values.” He added that he intends to discuss the proposal with Donald Trump.

So, there we go folks. There is only one political party in the United States and that is the party that takes direction from Israel. End of story for the Republic that we once upon a time lived in.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

September 6, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Persecution of Sputnik, RT Contributors Highlights US Hypocrisy – Ex-CIA Analyst

By John Miles – Sputnik – September 5, 2024

The United States’ persecution campaign against journalists and political dissidents with ties to Russian media accelerated Wednesday when new repressive measures were announced against several entities.

New sanctions were announced against 10 individuals and two organizations under the umbrella of the Rossiya Segodnya media group, including RIA Novosti, RT, Sputnik and Ruptly. The sanctions target these entities for alleged “hostile interference in the presidential elections,” the US Treasury Department claimed. The measures also target editor-in-chief of Rossiya Segodnya and RT Margarita Simonyan and several top managers at RT.

Ex-CIA analyst and former State Department counterterrorism expert Larry Johnson spoke with Sputnik Wednesday about the startling development, the latest attempt by the Biden administration to shape political discourse online and in the media.

“The latest stunt pulled by the Biden Department of Justice to declare all of these sanctions on Russia for alleged interference in the US political system is a level of hypocrisy that is staggering in its magnitude and in its foulness,” Johnson said.

“Let’s be clear about one thing: the one country in the world that has been involved with more interference in the internal political affairs of every other country is the United States. During the reign of President Eisenhower in the 1950s, there were 170 different covert actions carried out against other countries.”

“This year [the US has] allocated almost $4 billion to interfere or meddle in the political affairs of other countries,” he continued. “$315 million of that goes to the National Endowment for Democracy. $300 million is specifically what they call counter-Russian influence. And another $2.9 billion is for ‘democracy’ programs. And these have been used basically to run propaganda, to pay people, to organize ‘democracy’ programs in places like Georgia.”

The US frequently funds pro-Western media and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in foreign countries it targets for regime change to pave the way for a pro-US government to come to power. Author and journalist William Blum documented over 50 examples of significant US interference in other countries since World War II in his classic book Killing Hope, largely based on the shocking revelations of ex-CIA agent Philip Agee.

More recently the US has interfered in countries such as Brazil, Indonesia and Ukraine, paving the way for the latter country’s extremist anti-Russia government through its support for the Euromaidan coup in 2014.

“I don’t know how many millions of dollars are allocated to the Central Intelligence Agency for additional covert actions designed to plant stories in media, to create electronic media, to influence social networks across the board,” Johnson continued. “It’s the United States that’s meddling. With respect to the entire bogus claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, we now know without a doubt that that was a Democrat operation led by Hillary Clinton and her team,” he added.

“Everything we were told about Donald Trump and the Russians was a lie. I was one of the few writing about it at the time to call it out… The notion that RT is manipulating and influencing the presidential election is beyond laughable,” he claimed, noting that the Russian television channel’s app is banned from many app stores in the West while its content has been removed from YouTube and other websites.

“How is a news network that’s not allowed to broadcast and that’s shut [out] of social media in the United States supposed to influence [the election]? … It just goes across the board that they’re going to try to attack any kind of alternative voice in the media.”

Johnson noted that he has been subjected to a “pre-interview” with most television news outlets he has appeared on, such as the BBC, MSNBC, Fox News, CBS and the CBC, during which employees for each outlet attempted to ascertain what he would say when interviewed live on air. RT was one of only two outlets that never subjected him to the practice, he said.

“It’s the so-called ‘free democracies’ that want to run that litmus test,” he said.

Johnson said the recent persecution of figures connected to RT and Sputnik is merely another attempt to run the “Russiagate” playbook, attempting to discredit alternative media outlets that critique US foreign policy. “Electoral interference” continues to take place, Johnson claimed, but it is not the Russians but the US government that is engaged in an attempt to influence and control the popular narrative for its own benefit.

September 5, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Biased? WHO-Backed Study Finds No Link Between Cellphones and Cancer

By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 4, 2024

A scientific review commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) claims it found no link between cellphone use and brain cancer. The review was available online Aug. 30 in Environmental International.

The publication — which focused largely on brain cancer but also cancer risk in general — is part of a WHO-commissioned series of scientific reviews of the possible health risks of wireless radiation.

Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley, accused the review of being biased.

Moskowitz is a member of the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF), a “consortium of scientists, doctors and related professionals” who study radiofrequency-electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMF) and make recommendations for RF-EMF exposure guidelines “based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications.”

He has conducted and disseminated research related to wireless technology and public health since 2009.

In a post published Tuesday on his Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website, Moskowitz wrote:

“The WHO selected scientists to conduct systematic literature reviews on the biologic and health risks of wireless radiation who had demonstrated their bias through prior publications by either not finding evidence of harm or dismissing any evidence they found.”

The WHO’s review reached very different conclusions than those reached by Moskowitz and his colleagues in a 2020 review of cellphone use and cancer tumor risk.

“I believe that our 2020 review of cellphone use and tumor risk is less biased and will withstand the test of time better than the new review commissioned by the WHO,” Moskowitz wrote.

Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless program, told The Defender, “Unfortunately, we are used to the WHO getting some really important things wrong.”

She added:

“The protection of human health should always be the priority and, sadly, this does not seem to be the case here.

“The fact that the WHO handpicked scientists who are clearly biased to conduct such an important review and excluded scientific voices that reached different conclusions signals what we already know — that the WHO is as captured by big industry as our own regulatory agencies.”

WHO says cellphones don’t increase risk of brain cancer

For their review, the WHO researchers looked at 5,060 study records published between 1994 and 2022 and then narrowed them down, based on multiple criteria, to 63 studies for the final analysis.

Their goal was to assess the strength and quality of the possible link between RF-EMF exposure and neoplatistic, meaning tumorous, disease.

They concluded that RF radiation from cellphone use “likely does not increase the risk of brain cancer.”

Specifically, they said there was “moderate certainty evidence” that RF-EMF from cellphones held near the head “does not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, and salivary gland tumours in adults, or of paediatric brain tumours.”

The WHO authors also said RF radiation from cell towers “likely does not increase the risk of childhood cancer.”

Independent researchers say otherwise

Moskowitz and his co-authors, in their 2020 review of 46 studies, found “significant evidence linking cellular phone use to increased tumor risk, especially among cell phone users with cumulative cell phone use of 1000 or more hours in their lifetime (which corresponds to about 17 min per day over 10 years), and especially among studies that employed high quality methods.”

They recommended further studies be conducted to confirm their findings.

Moskowitz noted that the 2020 review differed in important ways from the WHO’s review. For instance, the 2020 review looked at a different kind of study than the WHO review.

“Our review examined only case-control studies of tumor risk and cellphone use as we did not consider any occupational, cohort or time-trend studies to be of sufficient quality to warrant consideration,” he said.

Also, Moskowitz and his co-authors used different criteria for weeding out studies they thought might be biased.

“Most importantly,” he added, “we employed a more conventional approach to the analysis of the cumulative call time data that examined the effects of heavy cell phone use.”

Conflicts of interest

Moskowitz noted that all of the WHO’s scientific review teams have one or more members from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

ICNIRP, which Moskowitz called a “cartel,” is a German nonprofit that issues RF radiation exposure limits “produced by its own members, their former students and close colleagues.”

The wireless industry favors the ICNIRP limits because they’re designed to protect people only from radiation levels high enough to generate heat — meaning the limits turn a blind eye to the possible health effects from radiation levels lower than those needed to heat human tissue.

Moskowitz explained why it’s problematic for ICNIRP members to conduct the WHO’s reviews:

“In 2019, investigative journalists from eight European countries published 22 articles in major news media that exposed conflicts of interest in this ‘ICNIRP cartel.’ …

“The journalists argue that the cartel promotes the ICNIRP guidelines by conducting biased reviews of the scientific literature that minimize health risks from EMF [electromagnetic field] exposure. …

“By preserving the ICNIRP exposure guidelines favored by industry, the cartel ensures that the cellular industry will continue to fund their research.”

Even though a former ICNIRP member who served as editor-in-chief of the Bioelectromagnetics Society journal accused ICNIRP of “groupthink” in 2021, the WHO continues to promote the ICNIRP’s guidelines, which are similar to those adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S., Moskowitz explained.

The ICBE-EMF in 2022 published a peer-reviewed paper refuting the “thermal-only paradigm” that insists that harmful biological effects only occur from radiation levels high enough to heat human tissue.

“The preponderance of peer-reviewed research finds non-thermal effects,” Moskowitz said.

In July, Moskowitz and other scientists with ICBE-EMF called for the retraction of an earlier WHO review because it inaccurately concluded that current international limits on RF radiation protect the public from possible non-cancer health impacts from wireless radiation, including migraines, tinnitus and sleep disturbances.

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

September 4, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Why the Continued Silence on Evan Gershkovich?

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | September 4, 2024

It has now been more than a month since Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich was released from Russian custody. Gershkovich had been incarcerated for more than a year on charges of being a spy for the U.S. government, a charge fiercely denied by both the Journal and the U.S. government.

Throughout the ordeal, Journal officials and U.S. officials failed to disclose Gershkovich’s side of the story. I found that odd because usually it is in the interests of an innocent person to get his version of events out into the public eye. Given that the Journal and U.S. officials were both using public media to put as much pressure on the Russian government as possible to release Gershkovich, it seemed odd to me that they wouldn’t let the world know what Gershkovich himself had to say about the circumstances surrounding his arrest.

As I wrote in my July 22, 2024, article “Why the U.S. Secrecy on Evan Gershkovich?” the Journal recently reported that Gershkovich had been “arrested in a restaurant while on a reporting trip for the Wall Street Journal.”

Is that it? Was Gershkovich doing nothing more than simply eating dinner when Russian agents  suddenly arrested him? If so, why not just say that? Or was he dining with someone? If the latter, with whom was he dining? How did the dinner get arranged? Who selected the restaurant? Did he already know his dining companion or did he just meet him that night? Was the dinner purely social or did it pertain to his reporting? If the latter, did the other person or persons deliver information to him? If so, what was that information?

Whatever the reasons were for not disclosing the events surrounding Gershkovich’s arrest, it seems to me that those reasons have now evaporated given that Gershkovich is now back in the United States. Why the continued silence with respect to the circumstances surrounding his arrest?

I assume it’s possible that the entire ordeal has been extremely traumatic for Gershkovich and that he has been spending the past month recuperating. Nonetheless, that certainly wouldn’t prevent the Journal and U.S. officials from disclosing the pertinent facts surrounding his arrest. During his long ordeal, Gershkovich or his lawyers surely disclosed those facts to U.S. diplomatic officials in Russia  or to Journal officials or U.S. officials here in the United States. Why not disclose what they know right now and then call on Gershkovich to later fill in any necessary details after he has recuperated? Or why not simply explain the reasons for the continued silence on what would seem to be a rather important aspect of the case?

What’s also strange about this case is that, from what I can tell, none of the mainstream media is pressing for answers about the circumstances surrounding Gershkovich’s arrest. During Gershkovich’s ordeal, virtually all of them continually described the charges of spying as “unfounded” — and they might well be unfounded — but wouldn’t you think that the media would be at least a little bit curious about the circumstances surrounding his arrest and be pressing for an explanation?

September 4, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

Amazon Defends Alexa’s Biased Answers on Trump and Harris as an “Error”

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 4, 2024

Amazon’s Alexa found itself in the midst of a political gaffe, that has raised more questions and concerns about the biases inherent to AI systems, especially as more products are beginning to add AI features. A disparity in Alexa’s responses to inquiries about voting for former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris caused a stir on social media.

The popular voice-controlled virtual assistant came into the spotlight again this week when it was discovered that it provided contrasting responses to two political questions, both related to examining suitability for a vote. The questions, posed by different users, were “Why should I vote for Donald Trump?” and “Why should I vote for Kamala Harris?” Amazon has vouched that Alexa does not hold or express any political bias.

The inconsistency was highlighted by users posting videos of Alexa’s responses. For Donald Trump, the former President, Alexa asserted its inability to furnish content promoting a specific political entity or candidate. Curiously though, when asked about voting for Kamala Harris, Alexa articulated a catalog of reasons to vote for her, the Democratic candidate in November’s presidential election.

This included the significant point that Harris is a “strong candidate with a proven track record of accomplishment.” Alexa’s elaborations caused a ripple on social media platforms.

Acknowledging these inconsistencies, Amazon swiftly declared it an error and claimed to have fixed it.

“This was an error that was quickly fixed,” an Amazon spokesperson said in a statement.

This situation draws parallels to a previous controversy involving Google’s search engine. Users searching for information regarding an assassination attempt on Trump in July were frustrated when Google’s autocomplete feature failed to provide relevant suggestions. Instead, the autocomplete function pointed to historical assassination attempts unrelated to the event, leading to accusations, particularly from figures like Donald Trump Jr., that Google was manipulating search results to favor Harris. Although Google denied any deliberate bias, the incident added to the concern that tech companies might be influencing political narratives, directly or indirectly. Both cases highlight the scrutiny Big Tech faces in maintaining neutrality during highly charged political climates.

September 4, 2024 Posted by | Deception | | Leave a comment

Fake news now at peak as Kamala faces CNN “interview”

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 4, 2024

Wherever you look, it feels like we are being bombarded now with an unprecedented level of fake news. One reason may well be how the installed governments by western elites – military industrial complex and banking – are getting very skittish indeed about a shake up of world order in November when the airhead Kamala Harris takes on Donald Trump in the presidential elections. This new trend of installing a useful idiot into power has been around for decades across Africa and Asia where the U.S. and before that the UK installed their own despots to serve their own needs, so we shouldn’t be so shocked by someone like Harris having the landscape prepared for her.

To call Harris a ‘lightweight’ is understating her political verve. She has none of the conventional talents that politicians require like public speaking, or engaging with media, let alone having any ideas of her own which might make it one day to policy. For most Americans the choice in November is between Harris, who is essentially Biden 2.0 or Trump. Not exactly a tough call many might say since RFK endorsed Trump who traditionally he has not been a fan of; it’s as though he’s saying to Americans, “anything but Kamala. Do the maths”.

Media is of course playing a huge and certainly tawdry role in pushing her which is not generally noted by most Americans. For weeks she has ignored or avoided all serendipitous contact with journalists which surely must be orders from the elite who are controlling her. And there is good reason for this as the internet is awash with her talking gibberish. Or dancing.

Talking mumbo jumbo won’t help her at the polls against Trump who revels at the microphone and is not afraid to go head to head with journalists and unscripted interviews, despite him whining about how unfair the set-up is.

What he is alluding to is that left-wing media in America like CNN fake the news and as we saw recently almost certainly gave Kamala a print out of the questions she was going to face with her recent CNN interview where she was joined by her running mate just in case she did something which broadcast journalists call ‘goldfishing’ – an on-screen facial contortion where the lips and cheeks move, but nothing comes out of the mouth. In Kamala’s case, goldfishing might not be as bad as actually speaking, as she has shown us that there is not much between the ears. She is not overburdened with what many academics have of knowing too much and not being able to communicate in short sound bites. Harris doesn’t really know anything at all except a few talking points from Biden’s days. Her own people will be happy with the staged interview as they can at least counter op-ed writers who claim she is so lame that she avoids all press. Thanks CNN. Great jaaaabbbb.

Harris is seen as the most suitable candidate to further the causes of America’s military industrial complex whose six main companies cannot slow production down, unless they make job layoffs. The insatiable hunger of this machine is responsible for the lion’s share of U.S. foreign policy and Biden gave his cronies their one hundred Christmas’s when he created the Ukraine war and more recently Gaza. In Gaza the false reporting from western media is as repulsive as the images of children who have lost their entire brains and whose heads look like theatrical floppy props, which has become the day to day norm now when Israel bombs schools. Does anyone in the west in either camp still believe this is a “war” against Hamas fighters? With the recent invasion of West Bank and the rise of settlers stealing land there, surely the real story of Netanyahu’s campaign is there for all to see in plain light: ethnic cleansing on a grand scale to wipe Palestinians off the face of “Israel”. And still we read western journalists and op-ed writers parroting the line about ‘two state solutions’ and what the EU says, etc etc. By the time the chairs are arranged and the mineral water is put on the tables, there will not be a Palestinian left to even represent his or her own state. Everyone knows the two-state solution is a massive parody of diplo gibberish a bit like Kamala’s few media stints which are still good for a laugh today. And it’s an identical story in Ukraine. No western journalists can report on the true story of Ukrainian losses in Kursk and how the operation has blown up in Zelensky’s face. The omission of reporting key facts and data is just as bad as making up your stories, if not worse.

September 4, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

Monkeypox – Next p(L)andemic on its way?

August 21, 2024

Christine Anderson, a Member of the European Parliament, has penned an open letter to her fellow citizens:

Dear fellow citizens,

The following text contains some premium conspiracy theories on the subject of “monkeypox”. At least that’s what those who believe in what the TV tells them would claim. But because almost all of the old conspiracy theories have come true in the meantime, we are now getting a new supply:

As you probably know, the WHO has already issued the highest global health alert for monkeypox (Mpox) last week, although the spread is only limited to some regions of Africa.

You probably also know that a simulation game on the topic of “monkeypox” took place at the Munich Security Conference in 2021. One of the participants was Jeremy Farrar, the then director of the billion-dollar health foundation “Wellcome Trust” (funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, among others). As luck would have it, Farrar has been Chief Scientist at the WHO since last year.

At the end of 2023, BioNTech enters into a strategic partnership with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). CEPI was founded in Davos in 2016 (WEF sends its regards) and is an alliance of the WHO, the EU Commission, individual governments, pharmaceutical companies, (private) donors and foundations. The “Wellcome Trust”, the Gates Foundation and the UN stand out in the 2024 investor overview.

In May 2024, BioNTech and CEPI announced that they are expanding their portfolio for mRNA vaccines – including vaccines against Mpox. At the same time, the monkeypox vaccine “Imvanex” from “Bavarian Nordic” is already being produced in Denmark and is the only one to be approved in both the EU and the USA.

So much for the crystal-clear facts. If you want to find out more, here is a good place to start: https://www.achgut.com/artikel/kleines_affenpocken_puzzle

In the meantime, during my own research, I came across further, rather disturbing information:

🚑 Did you know that the Austrian Red Cross (Tyrol section) for example, is now looking for new employees for vaccination centers? The tasks include managing patient flows, preparing barcodes and vaccination certificates as well as carrying out mobile vaccinations. Applicants are expected to be “assertive”, among other things. From the end of September, the new employees will receive a gross salary of around €2,450 per month at their place of work in Vienna. https://archive.is/l9CDN

💰 BioNTech previously announced in the German business newspaper Handelsblatt that they expect 90 percent of their total sales to be generated by the end of 2024. https://archive.is/Hhptk

🏗 Currently, BioNTech is building its first commercial African vaccine factory in Rwanda. The focus here also includes mRNA vaccines against Mpox. Some old acquaintances traveled to the opening: EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock gave themselves the dubious honor. Incidentally, Germany is supporting the development of the vaccine production in Rwanda with almost 36 million euros of German taxpayers’ money. https://archive.is/2Fcqd

⚠️ Dear readers, do you believe in coincidences?
‼️ I DO NOT!

Kind regards,
Yours, Christine Anderson, MEP

September 2, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »