Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

NYT Threatens Senator Manchin With Witchcraft If He Obstructs Democrat “Climate” Agenda

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | October 19, 2021

It’s always been just a little odd that the guy the Democrats most need to get on board to get their big transformational plans enacted is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, while at the same time the centerpiece of those plans is to put the most important industry of West Virginia, coal mining, completely out of business. That sounds like it’s going to be a tough sell. Is there any argument that might convince this guy to get with the program?

In one of the funniest articles I have read anywhere recently, the New York Times thinks that it has come up with the argument that will carry the day: threaten Manchin with witchcraft! The article, covering about half of the front page of yesterday’s print edition, tells Manchin that if he continues to “block” the Democrats’ plans to destroy the coal industry, a spell will be cast over his state and it will be inundated with floods. The headline is “Blocking Climate Plan With Hometown at Risk.”

The Times characterizes Mr. Manchin’s stance thusly:

Mr. Manchin, a Democrat whose vote is crucial to passing his party’s climate legislation, is opposed to its most important provision that would compel utilities to stop burning oil, coal and gas and instead use solar, wind and nuclear energy, which do not emit the carbon dioxide that is heating the planet. Last week, the senator made his opposition clear to the Biden administration, which is now scrambling to come up with alternatives he would accept. Mr. Manchin has rejected any plan to move the country away from fossil fuels because he said it would harm West Virginia, a top producer of coal and gas.

Seems reasonable. Better threaten the guy:

Others say that by blocking efforts to reduce coal and gas use, Mr. Manchin risks hurting his state.

And how exactly would that work? Simple: if Manchin remains intransigent, West Virginia will be destroyed by epic floods.

First Street [Foundation] calculated the portion of all kinds of infrastructure at risk of becoming inoperable because of a so-called 100-year flood — a flood that statistically has a 1 percent chance of happening in any given year. The group compared the results for every state except Alaska and Hawaii. In many cases, West Virginia topped the list. Sixty-one percent of West Virginia’s power stations are at risk, the highest nationwide and more than twice the average. West Virginia also leads in the share of its roads at risk of inundation, at 46 percent. The state also ranks highest for the share of fire stations (57 percent) and police stations (50 percent) exposed to a 100-year flood. And West Virginia ties with Louisiana for the greatest share of schools (38 percent) and commercial properties (37 percent) at risk.

But what, if anything, does any of this have to do with Mr. Manchin’s opposition to the destruction of West Virginia’s coal industry? The Times article does not say, other than repeatedly invoking the phrase “climate change,” as if that has something to do with flood risk from rivers in West Virginia. The article makes no attempt to demonstrate any relationship between climate change and river flood risk.

Perhaps we should look to see what we can find about trends in flooding and/or extreme wet conditions in the United States over the last century or so. That is the period when human “greenhouse gas” emissions have supposedly been warming the atmosphere. Here is, for example, this NOAA chart of what they call “very wet/dry” conditions in the U.S. from 1895 through September 2021:

Can you detect the trend of increasing “extreme wet conditions” in that chart as the atmosphere has warmed (by maybe 1 deg C) over the time in question? Neither can I. How about U.S. flood damage as a percentage of GDP? Here is a chart presented to Congress by Roger Pielke, Jr. in testimony in 2015:

That trend looks to be significantly down rather than up. Mr. Pielke’s comment:

The good news is U.S. flood damage is sharply down over 70 years.

How about the IPCC. Surely they can come up with something to scare us? Here is a 2018 IPCC document with the title “Changes in Climate Extremes and their Impacts on the Natural Physical Environment.” On the subject of floods, from page 175:

The AR4 and the IPCC Technical Paper VI based on the AR4 concluded that no gauge-based evidence had been found for a climate-driven globally widespread change in the magnitude/frequency of floods during the last decades (Rosenzweig et al., 2007; Bates et al., 2008).

In short, the evidence to date gives no reason to believe that there is any reason that floods have increased, or are about to increase, due to “climate change.” In other words, the threat against Mr. Manchin to destroy West Virginia with floods can’t really be based on that. It must be witchcraft!

October 21, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Colin Powell’s Own Staff Had Warned Him Against His War Lies

By David Swanson | Let’s Try Democracy | October 17, 2021

In the wake of WMD-liar Curveball’s videotaped confession, Colin Powell was demanding to know why nobody warned him about Curveball’s unreliability. The trouble is, they did.

Can you imagine having an opportunity to address the United Nations Security Council about a matter of great global importance, with all the world’s media watching, and using it to… well, to make shit up – to lie with a straight face, and with a CIA director propped up behind you, I mean to spew one world-class, for-the-record-books stream of bull, to utter nary a breath without a couple of whoppers in it, and to look like you really mean it all? What gall. What an insult to the entire world that would be.

Colin Powell doesn’t have to imagine such a thing. He has to live with it. He did it on February 5, 2003. It’s on videotape.

I tried to ask him about it in the summer of 2004. He was speaking to the Unity Journalists of Color convention in Washington, D.C. The event had been advertised as including questions from the floor, but for some reason that plan was revised. Speakers from the floor were permitted to ask questions of four safe and vetted journalists of color before Powell showed up, and then those four individuals could choose to ask him something related – which of course they did not, in any instance, do.

Bush and Kerry spoke as well. The panel of journalists who asked Bush questions when he showed up had not been properly vetted. Roland Martin of the Chicago Defender had slipped onto it somehow (which won’t happen again!). Martin asked Bush whether he was opposed to preferential college admissions for the kids of alumni and whether he cared more about voting rights in Afghanistan than in Florida. Bush looked like a deer in the headlights, only without the intelligence. He stumbled so badly that the room openly laughed at him.

But the panel that had been assembled to lob softballs at Powell served its purpose well. It was moderated by Gwen Ifill. I asked Ifill (and Powell could watch it later on C-Span if he wanted to) whether Powell had any explanation for the way in which he had relied on the testimony of Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law. He had recited the claims about weapons of mass destruction but carefully left out the part where that same gentleman had testified that all of Iraq’s WMDs had been destroyed. Ifill thanked me, and said nothing. Hillary Clinton was not present and nobody beat me up.

I wonder what Powell would say if someone were to actually ask him that question, even today, or next year, or ten years from now. Someone tells you about a bunch of old weapons and at the same time tells you they’ve been destroyed, and you choose to repeat the part about the weapons and censor the part about their destruction. How would you explain that?

Well, it’s a sin of omission, so ultimately Powell could claim he forgot. “Oh yeah, I meant to say that, but it slipped my mind.”

But how would he explain this:

During his presentation at the United Nations, Powell provided this translation of an intercepted conversation between Iraqi army officers:

“They’re inspecting the ammunition you have, yes.

“Yes.

“For the possibility there are forbidden ammo.

“For the possibility there is by chance forbidden ammo?

“Yes.

“And we sent you a message yesterday to clean out all of the areas, the scrap areas, the abandoned areas. Make sure there is nothing there.”

The incriminating phrases “clean all of the areas” and “Make sure there is nothing there” do not appear in the official State Department translation of the exchange:

“Lt. Colonel: They are inspecting the ammunition you have.

“Colonel: Yes.

“Lt. Col: For the possibility there are forbidden ammo.

“Colonel: Yes?

“Lt. Colonel: For the possibility there is by chance, forbidden ammo.

“Colonel: Yes.

“Lt. Colonel: And we sent you a message to inspect the scrap areas and the abandoned areas.

“Colonel: Yes.”

Powell was writing fictional dialogue. He put those extra lines in there and pretended somebody had said them. Here’s what Bob Woodward said about this in his book “Plan of Attack.”

“[Powell] had decided to add his personal interpretation of the intercepts to rehearsed script, taking them substantially further and casting them in the most negative light. Concerning the intercept about inspecting for the possibility of ‘forbidden ammo,’ Powell took the interpretation further: ‘Clean out all of the areas. . . . Make sure there is nothing there.’ None of this was in the intercept.”

For most of his presentation, Powell wasn’t inventing dialogue, but he was presenting as facts numerous claims that his own staff had warned him were weak and indefensible.

Powell told the UN and the world: “We know that Saddam’s son, Qusay, ordered the removal of all prohibited weapons from Saddam’s numerous palace complexes.” The January 31, 2003, evaluation of Powell’s draft remarks prepared for him by the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (“INR”) flagged this claim as “WEAK”.

Regarding alleged Iraqi concealment of key files, Powell said: “key files from military and scientific establishments have been placed in cars that are being driven around the countryside by Iraqi intelligence agents to avoid detection.” The January 31, 2003 INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK” and added “Plausibility open to question.” A Feb. 3, 2003, INR evaluation of a subsequent draft of Powell’s remarks noted:

“Page 4, last bullet, re key files being driven around in cars to avoid inspectors. This claim is highly questionable and promises to be targeted by critics and possibly UN inspection officials as well.” That didn’t stop Colin from stating it as fact and apparently hoping that, even if UN inspectors thought he was a brazen liar, US media outlets wouldn’t tell anyone.

On the issue of biological weapons and dispersal equipment, Powell said: “we know from sources that a missile brigade outside Baghdad was disbursing rocket launchers and warheads containing biological warfare agents to various locations, distributing them to various locations in western Iraq.”

The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK”:

“WEAK. Missiles with biological warheads reportedly dispersed. This would be somewhat true in terms of short-range missiles with conventional warheads, but is questionable in terms of longer-range missiles or biological warheads.”
This claim was again flagged in the February 3, 2003, evaluation of a subsequent draft of Powell’s presentation: “Page 5. first para, claim re missile brigade dispersing rocket launchers and BW warheads. This claim too is highly questionable and might be subjected to criticism by UN inspection officials.”

That didn’t stop Colin. In fact, he brought out visual aids to help with his lying

Powell showed a slide of a satellite photograph of an Iraqi munitions bunker, and lied:

“The two arrows indicate the presence of sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions . . . [t]he truck you […] see is a signature item. It’s a decontamination vehicle in case something goes wrong.”
The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK” and added: “We support much of this discussion, but we note that decontamination vehicles – cited several times in the text – are water trucks that can have legitimate uses… Iraq has given UNMOVIC what may be a plausible account for this activity – that this was an exercise involving the movement of conventional explosives; presence of a fire safety truck (water truck, which could also be used as a decontamination vehicle) is common in such an event.”

Powell’s own staff had told him the thing was a water truck, but he told the U.N. it was “a signature item…a decontamination vehicle.” The UN was going to need a decontamination vehicle itself by the time Powell finished spewing his lies and disgracing his country.

He just kept piling it on: “UAVs outfitted with spray tanks constitute an ideal method for launching a terrorist attack using biological weapons,” he said.

The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this statement as “WEAK” and added: “the claim that experts agree UAVs fitted with spray tanks are ‘an ideal method for launching a terrorist attack using biological weapons’ is WEAK.”

In other words, experts did NOT agree with that claim.

Powell kept going, announcing “in mid-December weapons experts at one facility were replaced by Iraqi intelligence agents who were to deceive inspectors about the work that was being done there.”

The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK” and “not credible” and “open to criticism, particularly by the UN inspectorates.”

His staff was warning him that what he planned to say would not be believed by his audience, which would include the people with actual knowledge of the matter.

To Powell that was no matter.

Powell, no doubt figuring he was in deep already, so what did he have to lose, went on to tell the UN: “On orders from Saddam Hussein, Iraqi officials issued a false death certificate for one scientist, and he was sent into hiding.”

The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK” and called it “Not implausible, but UN inspectors might question it. (Note: Draft states it as fact.)”

And Powell stated it as fact. Notice that his staff was not able to say there was any evidence for the claim, but rather that it was “not implausible.” That was the best they could come up with. In other words: “They might buy this one, Sir, but don’t count on it.”

Powell, however, wasn’t satisfied lying about one scientist. He had to have a dozen. He told the United Nations: “A dozen [WMD] experts have been placed under house arrest, not in their own houses, but as a group at one of Saddam Hussein’s guest houses.”

The January 31, 2003, INR evaluation flagged this claim as “WEAK” and “Highly questionable.” This one didn’t even merit a “Not implausible.”

Powell also said: “In the middle of January, experts at one facility that was related to weapons of mass destruction, those experts had been ordered to stay home from work to avoid the inspectors. Workers from other Iraqi military facilities not engaged in elicit weapons projects were to replace the workers who’d been sent home.”

Powell’s staff called this “WEAK,” with “Plausibility open to question.”

All of this stuff sounded plausible enough to viewers of Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. And that, we can see now, was what interested Colin. But it must have sounded highly implausible to the U.N. inspectors. Here was a guy who had not been with them on any of their inspections coming in to tell them what had happened.

We know from Scott Ritter, who led many UNSCOM inspections in Iraq, that U.S. inspectors had used the access that the inspection process afforded them to spy for, and to set up means of data collection for, the CIA. So there was some plausibility to the idea that an American could come back to the UN and inform the UN what had really happened on its inspections.

Yet, repeatedly, Powell’s staff warned him that the specific claims he wanted to make were not going to even sound plausible. They will be recorded by history more simply as blatant lies.

The examples of Powell’s lying listed above are taken from an extensive report released by Congressman John Conyers: “The Constitution in Crisis; The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War.”

October 20, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , | 1 Comment

Extrajudicial Biden Regime Extradition

By Stephen Lendman | October 18, 2021

Hegemon USA is at war on Venezuela by other means for not subordinating its sovereign rights to a higher power in Washington.

According to US Treasury Department fake news:

Venezuelan envoy Alex Saab “enabled” Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro “to significantly profit from food imports and distribution in” the country (sic), falsely adding:

“Saab has personally profited from overvalued contracts (sic).”

He and Maduro “insiders r(an) a wide scale corruption network… to steal from the Venezuelan people (sic).”

“They use food as a form of social control, to reward political supporters and punish opponents, all the while pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars through a number of fraudulent schemes (sic).”

All of the above rubbish is part of bipartisan US war on the country by illegal sanctions and other hostile actions because of its freedom from Washington’s control.

No evidence was cited to support the above accusations because there is none.

Everything claimed by Treasury was fake news — supported by MSM like the NYT, falsely calling Saab a “financial fixer for President Maduro’s… authoritarian government (sic).

Time and again since democratically elected Hugo Chavez took office in early 1999, the Times and other MSM demeaned the hemisphere’s model democracy and its leadership — polar opposite US/Western fantasy versions, run by their criminal class.

No evidence of “money laundering charges” against Saab and Maduro exist — a longstanding US practice.

Bolivarian Venezuela operates by higher standards, one long ago ago abandoned by the US-dominated West.

In June 2020 — on Trump regime orders — Saab was kidnapped by Cape Verde authorities during a stopover in the African archipelago en route to Iran to arrange for the purchase of food and medicines.

His invented “crime” is all about organizing and heading a humanitarian mission for this purpose — that flies in the face of Washington’s illegal blockade.

Illegally detained since last June, he was extrajudicially extradited to the US on Saturday.

The move followed an early September ruling by the island country’s so-called Constitutional Court.

At the time, Saab’s lawyers denounced it, calling it “politi(zed)” based on irregularities, yielding to US pressure.

Last month, Maduro called Saab’s kidnapping and detention a US plot to undermine Venezuela’s Local Provision and Production Committees (CLAPs) program.

Established in early 2016, it distributes subsidized food to around seven million Venezuelan families, around two-thirds of the population, part of the nation’s participatory social democracy.

From inception, the Obama/Biden regime falsely claimed that the program is used as a political weapon against opposition interests.

It’s nothing of the sort. All Venezuelans in need are able to receive aid regardless of their political affiliations.

The CLAP program is administered by neighborhood committees connected to communal councils, social organizations operating nationwide, including community, environmental and feminist groups, others involved in cultural, education and various other activities.

Their common theme is defending Bolivarian social democracy they want preserved and protected, notably serving the rights and welfare of all Venezuelans as constitutionally mandated.

The nation’s Social Development and Popular Participation Ministry, later the Communes Ministry, mobilized activists to form government funded communal councils.

They encourage Venezuelans to become involved in defending the revolution from internal and external efforts to undermine it — mainly by hegemon USA.

In mid-September, head of Venezuela’s National Assembly and dialogue delegation, Jorge Rodriguez, announced that Saab would be included in dialogue with opposition elements in Mexico.

At the time, he said that his detention is part of diabolical US efforts to undermine the process.

On Saturday, Venezuela’s Foreign Affairs Ministry accused Cape Verde authorities, in cahoots with the Biden regime, of harming Saab’s “life and physical integrity” — by illegally detaining and mistreating him, causing his health to deteriorate.

At the same time because of his extrajudicial extradition to the US, Maduro’s government suspended talks with opposition elements, Rodriguez saying:

“In connection with those outrageous actions, the delegation announces it is suspending its participation in the dialogue,” adding:

“Therefore, we will not arrive (for) a new round of talks that was to begin in Mexico on October 17.”

Illegal extradition of Saab was “another act of US aggression against Venezuela.”

Based on phony accusations, his kidnapping, detention and extradition to the US for judicial lynching represents a flagrant breach of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

It’s another example of hegemon USA’s war on humanity at home and abroad.

Waged against invented enemies by the most ruthless regime in US history — including ordinary Americans targeted for elimination — it’s ongoing with the worst of draconian aims in mind.

October 18, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | 1 Comment

The figures that show the real risk of Covid vaccine in pregnancy

By Sally Beck | TCW Defending Freedom | October 12, 2021

SINCE February, the BBC have been urging pregnant women to take the Covid vaccination despite the fact that no manufacturer will complete a trial in expectant mothers before December this year. Instead, British health chiefs have relied on information from women in the US who accidentally found themselves pregnant after taking the Covid jab, and reported the results of their pregnancy to the V-safe app. V-safe is hosted by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) but it is not a scientific study.

This fact has been ignored, notably by Lucy Chappell, Professor in Obstetrics at King’s College London, and the BBC, to tell women it is safe to go ahead and get the jab.

If that were the case, there would be no related adverse reactions reported to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the drug company-funded government body collating information on Covid vaccination safety.

But it is there in black and white: miscarriages, stillbirths and one foetal death have been reported, 590 to date, 12 last week alone. Pfizer have one third more reports than AstraZeneca and Moderna, primarily because the AZ jab has been suspended for under-40s and the Moderna has been in use only since April, while the Pfizer has been available since December 2020. Women in their 30s were invited to receive the jab in May so those of child-bearing age have officially been receiving the vaccine for around four months.

The MHRA is not concerned about the figures and says: ‘The numbers of reports of miscarriage and stillbirth are low in relation to the number of pregnant women who have received Covid-19 vaccines to date (more than 92,000 up to end of August 2021) and how commonly these events occur in the UK outside of the pandemic. There is no pattern from the reports to suggest that any of the Covid-19 vaccines used in the UK, or any reactions to these vaccines, increase the risk of miscarriage or stillbirth.’ No further detail is provided so it is not possible to scrutinise the figures.

This sounds reassuring, but when American investigative journalist Jefferey Jaxen analysed a study by 21 authors analysing data from V-safe published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, he discovered they had manipulated the figures. He was not the only one and Dr Hong Sun PhD, from Dedalus Healthcare, Antwerp, Belgium, complained to the NEJM editor.

The published figures showed a rate of 12.6 per cent miscarriage in women 20 weeks pregnant and under, which is similar to pre-Covid figures and raises no red flags. They did not include 700 reports of miscarriage in women over 20 weeks pregnant. Once those figures were added, the miscarriage rate increased to 82 per cent.

As always, the devil is in the detail, and without additional detail from the MHRA or Big Pharma, it is impossible to tell whether British women should be worried.

Latest Yellow Card scheme figures are published below with 1,698 fatalities reported. That’s an increase of 66 deaths in the three weeks since we published the last figures from September 9.

Updated report published October 7, 2021

MHRA Yellow Card Reporting up to September 29, 2021

• Pfizer BioNTech: 22.5million people – 42.1m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate 1 in 189 people impacted

• Oxford/AstraZeneca: 24.9m people – 48.9m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate 1 in 106 people impacted

• Moderna: 1.4m people – 2.6m doses – Yellow Card reporting rate 1 in 84 people impacted

Overall, 1 in 132 people injected experiences and reports a Yellow Card Adverse Event. A significant proportion require urgent medical care, and the effects may be life-changing or long-lasting. The MHRA says as few as 10 per cent of reactions may be reported.

Reactions – 335,344 (Pfizer) + 830,818 (AZ) + 53,032 (Moderna) + 3,372 (Unknown) = 1,222,566

Reports – 118,970 (Pfizer) + 233,904 (AZ) + 16,582 (Moderna) + 1118 (Unknown) = 370,574 people impacted

Fatal – 552 (Pfizer) + 1097 (AZ) + 19 (Moderna) + 30 (Unknown) = 1,698

Blood Disorders – 11,342 (Pfizer) + 7474 (AZ) + 972 (Moderna) + 47 (Unknown) = 19,835

Anaphylaxis – 486 (Pfizer) + 820 (AZ) + 40 (Moderna) + 1 (Unknown) = 1,347

Acute Cardiac – 5,734 (Pfizer) + 9,474 (AZ) + 671 (Moderna) + 42 (Unknown) = 15,921

Pericarditis/Myocarditis (Heart inflammation) – 560 (Pfizer) + 288 (AZ) + 126 (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 976

Infections – 7,902 (Pfizer) + 18,572 (AZ) + 883 (Moderna) + 96 (Unknown) = 27,453

Herpes – 1,666 (Pfizer) + 2,524 (AZ) + 93 (Moderna) + 15 (Unknown) = 4,298

Headaches & Migraines – 26,145 (Pfizer) + 92,289 (AZ) + 3610 (Moderna) + 266 (Unknown) = 122,310

Eye Disorders – 5,562 (Pfizer) + 14,044 (AZ) + 601 (Moderna) + 62 (Unknown) = 20,269

Blindness – 107 (Pfizer) + 292 (AZ) + 16 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 419

Deafness – 205 (Pfizer) + 372 (AZ) + 17 (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 596

Spontaneous Abortions – 346 + 8 stillbirth/foetal death (Pfizer) + 207 + 3 stillbirth (AZ) + 35 + 1 foetal death (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 590 + 12

Skin Disorders – 23,303 (Pfizer) + 51,098 (AZ) + 7,418 (Moderna) + 238 (Unknown) = 82,057

Psychiatric Disorders – 6,970 (Pfizer) + 17,425 (AZ) + 1,070 (Moderna) + 77 (Unknown) = 25,542

Facial Paralysis incl. Bell’s Palsy – 757 (Pfizer) + 913 (AZ) + 58 (Moderna) + 7 (Unknown) = 1,735

Strokes and CNS haemorrhages – 525 (Pfizer) + 2094 (AZ) + 19 (Moderna) + 10 (Unknown) = 2,648

Guillain-Barré Syndrome – 53 (Pfizer) + 428 (AZ) + 3 (Moderna) + 5 (Unknown) = 489

Nervous System Disorders – 57,975 (Pfizer) + 176,644 (AZ) + 8,321 (Moderna) + 633 (Unknown) = 243,573

BCG Scar Reactivation – 46 (Pfizer) + 35 (AZ) + 30 (Moderna) + 1 (Unknown) = 112

Respiratory Disorders – 14,352 (Pfizer) + 29,009 (AZ) + 1420 (Moderna) + 120 (Unknown) = 43,901

Pulmonary Embolism & Deep Vein Thrombosis – 618 (Pfizer) + 2,806 (AZ) + 23 (Moderna) + 20 (Unknown) = 3,467

Seizures – 789 (Pfizer) + 1,926 (AZ) + 140 (Moderna) + 12 (Unknown) = 2,867

Paralysis – 327 (Pfizer) + 786 (AZ) + 42 (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 1,161

Nosebleeds – 782 (Pfizer) + 2242 (AZ) + 82 (Moderna) + 9 (Unknown) = 3,115

Dizziness – 9,123 (Pfizer) + 24,486 (AZ) + 1654 (Moderna) + 91 (Unknown) = 35,354

Renal/Urinary Disorders – 915 (Pfizer) + 2,590 (AZ) + 116 (Moderna) + 23 (Unknown) = 3,644

Vomiting – 3,609 (Pfizer) + 11,423 (AZ) + 657 (Moderna) + 42 (Unknown) = 15,731

Reproductive/Breast Disorders – 21,797 (Pfizer) + 18,593 (AZ) + 2893 (Moderna) + 149 (Unknown) = 43,432

See Annex One for full reports.

October 12, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Doctor Says Physicians Are Being “Hunted” For Speaking Out by Press & Medical Boards

Dr Robert Malone branded a “terrorist” by Italian media

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | October 7, 2021

Dr Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccines, says he was branded a “terrorist” by the media in Italy and warns that physicians who speak out are being “hunted via medical boards and the press.”

“I am going to speak bluntly,” tweeted Malone. “Physicians who speak out are being actively hunted via medical boards and the press. They are trying to deligitimize and pick us off one by one. This is not a conspiracy theory – this is a fact. Please wake up. This is happening globally.”

“I was labeled as a ‘terrorist’ in the Italian press when I was in Rome for the International COVID Summit. My crime? Advocating for early treatment of COVID-19 disease. I suggest that merits a bit of meditation,” he added.

Malone is one of many doctors who have been completely persecuted merely for discussing issues relating to COVID treatments and vaccine side-effects.

He has faced fierce opposition for his assertion that children shouldn’t be given COVID-19 vaccines and has also consistently highlighted concerns over links to myocarditis risk.

Those concerns are now being justified by Finland, Denmark and Sweden halting the Moderna jab for for younger males after reports of cardiovascular side effects.

Despite such concerns being regularly voiced by doctors, the Federation of State Medical Boards announced back in July that it would consider pulling medical licenses of doctors who traffic in “misinformation” about COVID.

In another stunning development, Malone’s IP address was blocked by the New England Journal of Medicine so he couldn’t read studies on their website.

The doctor said he was aware of how to get around the IP block, but called the move a “petty act.”

October 11, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 2 Comments

FULL OF GAS

By Paul Robinson | IRRUSSIANALITY | October 8, 2021

It’s 20 degrees here in Ottawa. For October, that’s something of a heatwave, and it’s meant to stay this way for a week or so, well into the middle of the month. Beyond that, the weather guys say that we’re in for a generally warm autumn. No need for the winter tires just yet.

Europe, though, is said to be headed for a deep cold spell in the coming months. So good for us, bad for Europe – unless you like winter sports, of course, in which case it’s the other way around. But regardless of what weather you prefer, cold has consequences, one of which is that you have to turn the heating up, for which you need fuel. And in the modern post-coal world, that increasingly means burning natural gas.

Unfortunately, this is a bad time to do so, for the price of natural gas has shot up in recent months, as you can see from the chart below. This is a result of increased demand, reduced output from wind turbines, and a reduction in supplies as Europe’s main suppliers – Norway and Russia – fill up their own stocks before winter. This has apparently ‘all but wiped out stocks’ in the rest of Europe. The markets have responded with a binge of frenzied speculation, shoving natural gas prices up to unnaturally high levels.

Which is obviously Russia’s fault. Because, well … it’s bad, and it’s natural gas, and so Russia must be to blame. After all, we know that all those traders on the futures markets take their orders from the Kremlin.

To give example of the hysterical rhetoric floating around, CNBC ran this headline yesterday: ‘The US was right – Europe has become a “hostage” to Russia over energy, analysts warn.’ The following story then told readers that ‘Europe is now largely at Russia’s mercy when it comes to energy,’ citing analyst Timothy Ash (who regularly pops up on the pages of the Kyiv Post) denouncing Russia’s ‘energy blackmail’ and saying that:

‘Europe has now left itself hostage to Russia over energy supplies … [It’s] crystal clear that Russia has Europe (the EU and U.K.) in an energy headlock, and Europe (and the U.K.) are too weak to call it out and do anything about it … Europe is cowering as it fears [that] as it heads into winter Russia will further turn the screws (of energy pipelines off) and allow it to freeze until it gets its way and NS2 [North Stream 2] is certified.’

If I get this right, the logic is that Russia is deliberately withholding supplies from Europe in order to force Germany to complete the certification of the North Stream 2 pipeline linking Germany and Russia. Unfortunately, Ash fails to provide a shred of evidence for this claim, and it’s not as if the Russians are expressing any sort of concern that the certification may not happen, or that they are specifically targeting Germany.

In fact, there’s no evidence that Russia is blackmailing anybody. Russia’s president Vladimir Putin even sought to calm international markets by telling the Russian gas company Gazprom to keep sending supplies through Ukraine even though it would be cheaper to send them via alternative routes. It’s important to maintain Russia’s reputation as a reliable supplier of energy, he noted, adding that Russia would indeed increase supplies to Europe this year, with exports possibly reaching a record high.

Critics complain that Russia could be pumping more gas to Europe than it currently is. It is apparently true that the volume of deliveries has been down in the past couple of months, as Russia fills up its own stocks before what is expected to be a harsh winter. But, deliveries for 2021 as a whole are on par with last year and Russia is meeting all its contracts. Furthermore, as Ben Aris has pointed out, it’s not that easy for Russia to greatly increase the quantity of gas it supplies Europe via existing pipelines. This is because different gas fields serve different pipelines, with limited connections. The line going via Ukraine comes from fields that are already ‘maxed out’. Additional gas would have to come from the Yamal peninsula – i.e. via North Stream or North Stream 2. With the former already at capacity, that in essence means the latter. In other words, Aris concludes:

‘It is possible for Russia to send more gas west without using NS2 but it’s limited & most expensive option for Gazprom. By far easiest & cheapest option for both Gazprom & EU is to turn NS2 on. This would solve the current gas crisis.’

It seems to me that Russia’s critics need to decide what they want. For years, they’ve been complaining that Europe is buying too much Russian gas. Now, though, they’re complaining that the Russians won’t sell them more! The Russians sell you gas – that’s a sign that they’re out to get you. They won’t sell you gas – proof that they’ve got you!

Frankly, it makes no sense.

Besides which, people don’t sell you stuff unless you ask them to, which in business terms means signing a contract with them. Russia, as previously said, is fulfilling its contracts. What more is it meant to do? As German chancellor Angela Merkel pointed out this week, if European states haven’t signed up to buy Russian gas, they can’t really complain if they don’t get it. She said:

‘To my knowledge, there are no orders where Russia has said we won’t deliver it to you, especially not with regard to the pipeline in Ukraine. Russia can only deliver gas on the basis of contractual obligations, and not just only like that.’

Absolutely.

Of course, if Russia was exploiting the rising cost of gas by engaging in price gouging, there might still be some grounds for complaint. But that’s not the case. Russia prefers to lock its customers into long-term contracts. Anybody who had the good sense to sign such a contract with Gazprom a while back when prices were low will now be laughing: their supplies are guaranteed and they’ll be cheap. Germans, Hungarians, Serbs, and the like are probably feeling a bit smug right now. Others who preferred to gamble on the market, or to dump Russia for an alternative supplier such as American LNG will now have to pay the price. But that’s their fault not Russia’s. As Putin pointed out:

‘The practice of our European partners has confirmed it once more that they made mistakes. We talked to the European Commission’s previous lineup, and all its activity was aimed at phasing out of so-called long-term contracts. It was aimed at transition to spot gas trade. And as it turned out, it has become obvious today, that this practice is a mistake.’

None of this, unfortunately, has stopped the flood of stories blaming Russia for Europe’s gas crisis, a crisis that is in large part due to the latter’s own errors. To give a flavour, here’s some of the headlines in the American and British press this past 24 hours:

‘Don’t Fall For Putin or Orban as They Try to Exploit Europe’s Energy Crisis’ – Washington Post

‘As Europe Faces a Cold Winter, Putin Seizes on the Leverage From Russia’s Gas Output’ – The New York Times

‘Russia has the West over a barrel: Fury at “bullying” Putin for offering Europe more natural gas IF his Nord Stream 2 pipeline is approved.’ – Daily Mail

‘Gas price crisis: Is Putin using energy supply as a weapon and what is its new Nord Stream 2 pipeline?’ – Sky News

‘UK dubbed “Putin’s puppet” as “Soviet” Britain’s gas prices plummet after Russian offer’ – Daily Express

‘How “Sleepy Joe” handed Putin the bargaining chip he is using to hold Europe to ransom in gas crisis’ – Daily Mail

Now, I can understand why Western politicians would want to find a scapegoat for their own failings, but why does the press go along with this? Wasn’t there a time when the Fourth Estate prided itself on holding the powers that be at home to account? Apparently no more. Blaming Russia obviously sells more copy. As long as that remains the case, expect the pipelines of BS to keep on flowing profusely!

October 8, 2021 Posted by | Economics, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | | 2 Comments

Every US state-funded exposé on the lavish lives of elites is about Russia & Putin, even when he’s not mentioned

By Paul Robinson | RT | October 5, 2021

The powerful are wealthy, and the wealthy are powerful. They’ll also often go to great lengths to avoid paying taxes. Those are the conclusions from some 12 million financial files leaked to reporters last week and covered widely.

Known as the Pandora Papers, the revelations were handed to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and then picked up on Sunday by the BBC and The Guardian newspaper. The secret documents reveal how some 400 former and current world leaders, government officials and billionaires have funnelled their money through offshore accounts to buy property incognito and avoid paying taxes.

Oh, and in case you wondered what the fuss is all about, it all somehow leads back to Russia and President Vladimir Putin – though quite how is never properly explained. Suffice it to say that readers are meant to be shocked at the apparent corruption of the world’s elites, led by the most corrupt of them all – the Russians. Curiously though, none of those exposed are Americans. This may be because the American tax system allows its wealthy citizens to evade taxes without resorting to offshore companies. Or it could have something to do with the fact that the OCCRP is funded by, among others, the US Agency for International Development and the US Department of State.

Regardless, its discovery that the wealthy are good at tax evasion is hardly a huge surprise. Moreover, the revealed transactions all appear to be entirely legal.

For instance, the papers discuss how King Abdullah of Jordan purchased properties worth £70 million ($95 million) in the US and UK via a network of offshore companies. They also show how the wife of former British prime minister Tony Blair avoided paying over £300,000 ($408,651) in stamp duty by setting up a company to purchase a building from the offshore organization that owned it. But neither transaction was illegal. As lawyers for King Abdullah noted, it is “common practice for high profile individuals to purchase properties via offshore companies for privacy and security reasons.”

If there’s a scandal here, it’s that countries like the UK have set up their financial systems in such a way as to allow the wealthy to avoid stumping up the money that ordinary folk has to pay. Oddly, though, that’s not the way that the press has decided to play the story. Instead, the words “Russia,” “Putin,” and “Kremlin” have led the way, as if clever tax dodges were somehow part and parcel of a web of corruption leading back to Moscow.

So it is that BBC’s lead story starts off with a big picture of Putin, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliev, and King Abdullah, before telling readers that the leak “links Russian President Vladimir Putin to secret assets in Monaco.” Meanwhile, on The Guardian’s website, the biggest headlines all mention Russia, referring to “the Kremlin,” a “Russian tycoon’s links to alleged corruption” and “Putin’s inner circle.” A group of headshots of several prominent world leaders sits atop the Guardian headlines, with Putin’s head by far the largest of them all.

This is odd, because the name “Vladimir Putin” never appears in the Pandora Papers even once.

This doesn’t stop The Guardian mentioning the name “Putin” no less than 50 times in an article entitled “Pandora papers reveal hidden  riches of Putin’s inner circle.” The obsession with a person not even mentioned in the papers seems rather excessive. Moreover, the alleged “inner circle” consists of just two people, and no evidence is provided to connect Putin to those persons’ financial dealings. In short, the “link” to Putin is decidedly thin.

The nature of the alleged connection is that in 2003, a wealthy Russian woman named Svetlana Krivonogikh purchased a luxury flat in Monaco via a complex network of offshore companies. The Russian media outlet Proekt has alleged that in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Krivonogikh was Putin’s lover and gave birth to his daughter, allegations that have never been substantiated.

In short, 20 years ago, somebody who may, or may not, have been Putin’s lover bought an apartment in Monaco. That’s it. As stories go, it’s not very exciting.

Nor is the other Putin “link” revealed in the papers. Krivonogikh’s apartment purchase was supposedly set up by a British accountancy and tax firm whose other clients include a long-standing friend of the Russian president – Gennady Timchenko.

And, that’s it, folks. That’s all that The Guardian has got. It can’t even come up with some allegedly crooked dealings by Timchenko and his British pals. And it most definitely doesn’t show that Putin himself is stashing cash away in Monaco, or anywhere else for that matter. But that doesn’t stop The Guardian’s ever-reliable mis-reporter Luke Harding from stirring up the dirt.

For Timchenko, you see, was a founder of Swiss-based oil trading company Guvnor, which is worth several billion dollars. This provides Harding with an opportunity to bring up allegations made by Moscow political scientist Stanislav Belkovsky that Putin is the real owner of Guvnor, supposedly making him a multi-billionaire.

The problem with Belkovsky’s claim is that absolutely no evidence has been produced to substantiate it. The entire story is one completely unconnected person’s entirely unsupported allegation. One would imagine that journalists devoted to reporting reliable information would give it a wide berth. Harding, however, devotes nearly 150 words to repeating the claim in depth. You can tell that he wants you to believe it.

It is a very curious piece of journalism. A set of leaked documents that have absolutely nothing to do with Putin are used as an excuse to throw out lots of articles mentioning his name over and over, and as an opportunity to dig out old and unverified rumours that are entirely irrelevant to the story in question.

The problem, one suspects, is that having got their hands on millions of pages of financial documents showing the wheelings and dealings of the rich and powerful, the massed ranks of Western journalism were left with the awkward reality that none of it shows any obvious wrongdoing. In fact, it’s all completely above board. There’s no scandal there – save for that of the fact it’s legal in the first place. So one has to be invented. At which point, Harding et al. turn to their favorite targets – Russia and Vladimir Putin – and make them their focus of attention. It’s a fairly shoddy tactic.

So what do the Pandora Papers actually tell us? Nothing about Russia. Merely that there are rich people out there; that power and money go together; and that the wealthy have the means and opportunity to exploit tax loopholes that ordinary mortals do not. In short, the rules favor the rich. Not quite the bombshell some had hoped for.

Paul Robinson is a professor at the University of Ottawa. He writes about Russian and Soviet history, military history and military ethics, and is the author of the Irrussianality blog.

October 6, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , | 1 Comment

Dr. Mercola’s Latest Response to CNN’s Hit Piece

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | October 5, 2021

CNN reporter Randi Kaye visited my home unannounced, then tracked me down as I bicycled around my home town in August 2021. Her purpose was to publish a hit piece further labeling me as a “super-spreader of COVID-19 misinformation,”1 based primarily on the opinions of foreign agent Imran Ahmed, founding CEO Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH),2 which is a recently spun up front group funded by dark money.

After that story aired, she again contacted me, this time via email, to request an interview regarding my latest book, “The Truth About COVID-19: Exposing The Great Reset, Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports, and the New Normal.” Interview questions were provided via email, as were my responses. CNN ran this new story October 4, 2021.

In the interest of transparency, below I’ll post the email exchange so you can read my response to her questions firsthand. You can tell from the leading questions that this “story” isn’t true journalism but rather another hit piece manipulated to fit a preformed agenda.

CNN Interview Request for My Latest Book

August 26, 2021, Kaye emailed, “Here are the questions we would like answered about Dr. Mercola’s new book. We would welcome responses by 5pm tomorrow, please.” The questions, which are clearly accusatory, are as follows:

“You say in your book that “A large amount of data strongly suggests the COVID – 19 vaccine may be completely unnecessary, which means the global population is being bamboozled into participating in a dangerous and unprecedented experiment for no good reason whatsoever.” Can you please point us to that data that suggests the covid vaccines are unnecessary or dangerous?

You say in your book that “vaccine trials are rigged.” What proof do you have of that? Which trials? How many? Who rigged them and for what purpose?

You say in your book, “Common sense dictates that if the vaccines cannot prevent or reduce infection and transmission, hospitalization, or death, then they cannot possibly end the pandemic.” And that “There’s no telling whether they will ultimately prevent hospitalizations and deaths.”

Can you please provide us with the source and support for your statements since the CDC says vaccines are nearly 100% effective at preventing severe disease and death and greatly reduce infection.

How do you explain statements from hospitals and government officials that nearly all those who are getting sick and dying now are the unvaccinated?

Do you feel responsible for the spread of misinformation by writing a book full of conspiracy theories and false claims?

What were you paid for this book deal by the publisher?

Are you donating 100% of the earnings from your book?

If so, to which organization? Are you concerned this book will cost people their lives?”

My Response to CNN

Media organizations contact Mercola.com regularly, sometimes to challenge us on the researched, fact-checked articles we post for our readers. In CNN’s case, the information they were seeking was directly related to my book, which was the No. 1 best seller in all categories for four straight days with thousands of five-star ratings.

Much like the information on Mercola.com, the information in my book is thoroughly referenced, but Kaye, ironically, engaged in the dissemination of misinformation herself by describing my book as being “full of conspiracy theories and false claims.” My response to her questions follows:

“Many studies and other literature offer support for my position in answering several of your questions, which are combined since they can be answered with the same literature. Here are the important points that drive my book:

The vaccines are just 39% effective and waning, and the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has now advised booster doses to the mRNA vaccines in immunocompromised persons. CDC’s goal is to begin offering booster doses to everyone else beginning this fall.3,4,5,6

Additionally, breakthrough infections among fully vaccinated persons are becoming more and more prevalent around the world. Evidence is beginning to mount that people with breakthrough infections can spread the Delta variant more easily.7,8,9,10,11,12,13

Most recently, researchers in Israel report that fully vaccinated persons are up to 13 times more likely to get infected than those who have had a natural COVID infection.

As explained by ScienceMag: The study “found in two analyses that people who were vaccinated in January and February were, in June, July and the first half of August, six to 13 times more likely to get infected than unvaccinated people who were previously infected with the coronavirus.

In one analysis, comparing more than 32,000 people in the health system, the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher.”14

The study also said that, while vaccinated persons who also had natural infection did appear to have additional protection against the Delta variant, the vaccinated were still at a greater risk for COVID-19-related-hospitalizations compared to those without the vaccine, but who were previously infected.

Vaccinees who hadn’t had a natural infection also had a 5.96-fold increased risk for breakthrough infection and a 7.13-fold increased risk for symptomatic disease.

“This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity,” study authors said.15

A majority of gravely ill patients in Israel are double vaccinated.16 A majority of deaths over 50 in England are also double vaccinated.17 Also, mass vaccination of the population with the highly mutating coronavirus will only evolve perfectly vaccine-resistant strains of the virus.”18

Injection Trials Included COVID-19 Infections as Successes

The next part of my response focused more specifically on the vaccine trials, which were problematic from the start since they did not include prevention of infection as an endpoint. Instead, all study endpoints required infection with SARS-CoV-2, and “successes” included subjects with confirmed COVID-19 cases. The difference measured wasn’t whether or not the vaccines prevented COVID-19 but whether, and how, they modified symptoms among those infected.19

Also problematic is the unblinding of the vaccine trials, which means the placebo groups were removed. As medical investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer wrote in the BMJ, “The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded.”20 This is the next section of my response to Kaye:

“Regarding the vaccine trials: The vaccine trials were designed specifically to succeed for profit. The public health authorities and media like CNN are utilizing fear of the virus to induce psychological stress that promotes obedience and servitude.21

Additionally, proof that the trials are “rigged” can be shown by virtue of the fact that they’ve done away with the control groups — who were getting a placebo but who were then offered the vaccine, which virtually does away with the ability to compare adverse reactions including deaths. Pfizer’s own vaccine insert for Comirnaty admits that the control group hasn’t existed since December 2020:

Section 6.1 — “Upon issuance of the Emergency Use Authorization (December 11, 2020) for COMIRNATY, participants were unblinded to offer placebo participants COMIRNATY. Participants were unblinded in a phased manner over a period of months to offer placebo participants COMIRNATY.”22

NPR has noted that removing the placebo groups from vaccine trials will prevent accurate data from long-term studies from being known.23

Additionally, the CDC is being dishonest by utilizing data from the beginning of this year when the vaccine campaign had just been initiated to conflate their claim. They are using data that were scant early in the year because so few were vaccinated, as opposed to using current information.24

Proceeding with the FDA approval of Comirnaty this week was unprecedented. No other vaccine has ever received approval this fast — and without public comment being allowed through ACIP [the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] or VRBPAC [the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee] before approval was issued.

The approval is unconscionable because over 600,000 adverse reactions and 6,000 deaths [now over 14,500 deaths25] have been reported in the U.S. to VAERS. A majority of these reports are filed by medical professionals.

This shows that the safety of these vaccines is not proven. Besides, the experiments are continuing through 2027 as the FDA APPROVAL requires Pfizer to submit study results analyzing risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, and risk to long-term infant development in pregnant women. Study results will be submitted to the FDA for review on Oct 31, 2025 and May 31, 2027 respectively.”26

Lifesaving Information That CNN Won’t Share

CNN and other media outlets have the power to share lifesaving information that could turn the pandemic around and save lives in the process — but they won’t. Instead, the media are ignoring the basics of healthy immune function and the importance of early COVID-19 treatment to continue to push the narrative that the only solution is to get an injection.

The last part of my response to Kaye includes empowering steps that virtually everyone can take to support their health and reduce their risk of infectious disease. This includes having supplies from the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Working Group (FLCCC) I-MASK+ protocol on hand in the event you do get COVID-19.

FLCCC’s I-MASK+ protocol can be downloaded in full,27 giving you step-by-step instructions on how to prevent and treat the early symptoms of COVID-19. FLCCC also has protocols for at-home prevention and early treatment, called I-MASS, which involves ivermectin, vitamin D3, a multivitamin and a digital thermometer to watch your body temperature in the prevention phase and ivermectin, melatonin, aspirin and antiseptic mouthwash for early at-home treatment.

I also recommend getting a nebulizer, and the moment you feel a sniffle or something coming on, use nebulized hydrogen peroxide. Having a pulse oximeter on hand is also wise, as it’s a noninvasive way to measure the oxygen levels in your blood, allowing you to monitor your levels and help gauge whether a trip to the ER is truly in order.

As I told Kaye, taking control of your health continues to be the “secret” that I strive to share with the masses. The remainder of my response to CNN follows:

“I am donating all proceeds to the National Vaccine Information Center. I encourage every person to fully educate themselves to make individual decisions about medical risk-taking by talking with their personal physician and comparing the risks and benefits to make an informed decision that includes all the information on how these vaccines are working (or not working) and what all the possible side effects may be.

This pandemic is a direct reflection of the health of our population: 95% of COVID deaths have multiple comorbidities. Obesity, vitamin D deficiency and metabolic dysfunction are at the core of this pandemic and can be resolved by taking control of your health by following science-based dietary and lifestyle recommendations.

Since building up your health can’t be done overnight, what you can do beginning right now is avoid linoleic acid, check to ensure your vitamin D levels are above 40ng/ml, exercise, get fresh air and proper sun exposure, and restrict your eating window to a 6- to 8-hour time frame each day.

If you do get COVID-19, early treatment is crucial. Follow the Front Line Critical Care Alliance iMASK+ or MATH+ treatment protocols.”28

Sources and References

October 6, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Absolutely no evidence in Pandora papers leak to back up assertions about ‘hidden riches of Putin’s inner circle’

By Jonny Tickle | RT | October 4, 2021

Assertions by the publishers of the Pandora papers that the entourage of Russian President Vladimir Putin has secretly enriched itself have no substance and aren’t backed up by proof, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has claimed.

The Pandora papers are 11.9 million leaked documents published by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), which worked with journalists from over 117 countries, including outlets like The Washington Post and the BBC. It is said to be the biggest ever leak exposing tax evasion.

In the papers, several Russians are named, and according to the ICIJ, the country is “disproportionately represented” in the leaked documents. Two of the people named include Konstantin Ernst, the head of Russia’s most-watched broadcaster Channel One; and German Gref, the CEO of Sberbank, the country’s biggest financial institution.

However, despite his name not appearing in the documents, some of the journalists investigating the papers say that they show the great wealth of the president’s entourage, with London-based newspaper the Guardian claiming that it reveals the “hidden riches of Putin’s inner circle.”

However, according to the Kremlin, there is absolutely no evidence for this assertion.

Speaking to journalists on Monday, Peskov said that Moscow has not seen any “hidden wealth.”

“We haven’t seen anything in particular so far,” he explained. “So far, it’s just about some assertions, and it’s not clear what they are based on. This is certainly not a reason for an investigation.”

In fact, according to Peskov, the investigation simply proves that the US is the world’s most prominent location for tax evasion.

The Pandora paper authors also name Svetlana Krivonogikh, the woman claimed by investigative website Proekt to be the mother of one of Putin’s children. The Kremlin has never responded to the allegations. In 2021, Proekt was labeled as a foreign agent.

Outside of Russia, the paper also names Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Czech President Andrej Babiš, and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as those storing money offshore.

October 5, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | 1 Comment

It’s unacceptable that Canada’s military ran a secret psyops campaign to manipulate & control public views on Covid

By Eva K Bartlett | RT | September 28, 2021

The plan, devised by the Canadian Joint Operations Command, relied on propaganda techniques like those used during the Afghan war. What on earth is going on in the upper echelons of Ottawa?

High-up elements of the Canadian Forces have been waging psychological operations on the public over Covid-19 to manipulate their emotions and thoughts, and to gauge their reactions. While this is not uncommon around the world, getting caught is.

A new article in Canada’s National Post states that the Canadian Joint Operations Command used “propaganda techniques similar to those employed during the Afghanistan war” on the Canadian public.

The Post cites a December 2020 investigation by retired Major-General Daniel Gosselin, who was asked to look into it by then-Chief of the Defence Staff General Jon Vance.

According to the article, the federal government was innocent and not aware of the plan – a claim I find unbelievable, considering the amount of gaslighting and knowingly pointless regulations the government has subjected Canadians to since the start of the pandemic scare.

The plan involved “shaping” and “exploiting” information, the Post noted, to “head off civil disobedience by Canadians” and “bolster government messages about the pandemic.”

Among the stranger aspects was scaring Canadians with stories of a wolf invasion.

This, according to the Post, involved Canadian Forces’ military information operations staff forging a letter from the Nova Scotia government warning about wolves on the loose, in September 2020.

The Post claims the letter’s release was inadvertent, and basically ran with the Canadian Forces’ claim that this was down to a few bad apples, reservists who “lacked formal training and policies governing the use of propaganda techniques.”

Canadian journalist Dan Dicks, who was among the first to report on and analyze the wolves story, noted at the time that it was a classic example of a psychological operation.

Dicks has also pointed out what the National Post omitted, highlighting:

“They created a fake letter from the government saying there are dangerous wolves, and they set up loudspeakers in the area, projecting out wolf noises. This isn’t just research, this isn’t just a training exercise, they’re actively engaging in this psychological operation to scare people using loudspeakers.

‘Psyops’, he noted, is a term used “to denote any action which is practiced mainly by psychological methods with the aim of evoking a planned psychological reaction in other people,” and they are “aimed at influencing a target audience’s value system, belief system, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behaviour.”

Canadian journalist James Corbett likewise commented on this at the time, pointing out how a rumour is floated to see how the public reacts:

“This entire coordinated campaign to convince an entire public of a threat that doesn’t exist, in order to test how they will react to that, what will the public respond to and how will they respond? That really speaks volumes to the world we are living in. And you really think they are going to do all of that, but they are never going to use that for any nefarious purposes?”

An article in the Ottawa Citizen noted at the time that Canada’s Department of National Defence claimed: “The fake letter wasn’t meant to be released to the public and an investigation is underway to determine how that happened. The letter was an aid for the propaganda training.”

The department also claimed to not know why the loudspeaker was set up to transmit wolf sounds.

I guess a member of the public who read the letter must have taken it upon themselves to set up the loudspeaker then, hey?

The same Ottawa Citizen article cites Bard College professor Emma Briant, who specializes in researching military propaganda, calling the stunt a “major violation of ethics.”

UK “anti-masker” razor-blade poster hoax

The “shaping” and “exploiting” of information on Covid-19 to gauge and shape the public mood is, of course, not unique to Canada. To give another example, in May 2020, the UK Column obtained a leaked internal document of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) from March 26, 2020, which advised:

“Use the media to increase the sense of personal threat. Use the media to increase the sense of responsibility of others. Use the media to promote positive messaging around actions. Tailor the messaging and use and promote social approval for desired behaviours.”

I recently spoke to UK-based journalist Iain Davis on a variety of issues pertaining to fear porn and media hype around the issue of Covid-19.

In our interview, Davis spoke of another hoax that appeared on the BBC last July: a Cardiff woman who claimed she had been cut by a razor blade allegedly stuck on the back of an ‘anti-mask’ poster.

What the BBC did not bother investigating was that the poster in question was laminated, thus stiff, and the razor blade stuck flat to the back of it, making it virtually impossible that the woman had actually cut herself.

“When you took it off the wall, it would have been like a card, not a piece of paper you could scrunch up, it would have been a stiff card,” David said.

Nor did the BBC question why she threw away the ‘evidence’ instead of turning it over to the police she had contacted. They didn’t look into her apparent history of outlandish and improbable claims, like being disemboweled and walking to hospital holding her intestines in, nor her admitted history of self-harming, lending credence to the likelihood she staged the sliced-hand photo.

While this story seemingly originated from an unstable individual, it was pushed unquestioningly by British state-owned media.

Further, as Davis noted, the nonsensical razor poster story re-emerged two months later, this time with London transport warning of “anti-mask posters with razor blades.”

In this story, the Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union cited by the BBC actually said it wasn’t aware of any razor-blade incidents. Yet the BBC ran with the claims nonetheless (using the previous unstable person’s photo to support the claims).

These were not the first razor-blade poster stories, though. In 2020, the BBC and other media ran stories claiming razor blades (and needles) had been put behind anti-5G posters, again not providing any actual evidence to back the claims.

Anti-mask, anti-5G… and ‘razor-blade posters’. Clearly, this looks like another psyop to indoctrinate the public into equating people who have legitimate and science-based concerns about particular issues as being not only bat-s**t crazy, but dangerous, a menace to society.

But these stories are being cooked up in underhand ways by some powerful forces that shouldn’t be engaged in these matters, while the masses actually concerned about these issues are raising their concerns in peaceful manners: petitions, peaceful demonstrations, scientific papers… All that is easily obscured by a few tabloid stories with screaming headlines.

According to Davis, the point is “to seed the idea into the public imagination to associate people that question vaccines with extremism, ultimately with terrorism. There is a lineage going back quite a few years where you can see this narrative being seeded into the public consciousness. It has really ramped up in the last couple of months.”

Indeed, in November 2020, the Ottawa Citizen revealed the Canadian Forces’ desire to “establish a new organization that will use propaganda and other techniques to try to influence the attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of Canadians,” noting they’ve already spent over $1 million to “train public affairs officers on behaviour modification techniques of the same sort used by the parent firm of Cambridge Analytica.”

While noting nominal opposition and concern by the defence minister, the Citizen reported that “work is already underway on some aspects of the plan and some techniques have been already tested on the Canadian public,” as well as that “a series of town halls were already conducted last week for a number of military personnel on the strategies contained in the draft plan.”

Dan Dicks, in his commentary on the wolves scare story, aptly opined, “It frustrates me so much that the government is actively trying to silence me as being ‘fake news’ or putting out ‘false information’, when they are actively engaged in propaganda campaigns to distribute false information designed to scare Canadians.”

Indeed, we who speak out on uncomfortable issues are censored, ostracized, and labeled as ‘conspiracy theorists’, while governments are actively spewing misinformation and manipulating the masses.

September 29, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , | Leave a comment

The Emperor Has No Clothes: COVID Math Simply Doesn’t Add Up

The Defender | September 23, 2021

From the beginning of the series of events branded as a global health emergency, many people have smelled a rat.

Whether one looks at leaders’ willingness to engage in wanton economic destruction, or the rapidity with which billionaires have amassed new wealth or the multisectoral efforts to link and mine people’s intimate data, it is not hard to recognize that something much larger than a health crisis is afoot.

However, even if one restricts oneself to the narrow confines of the health narrative, 18 months of data — emerging in spite of ferocious censorship — have repeatedly illustrated that the official story is full of lies and omissions.

One of the biggest holes in the story is the trail of destruction that the experimental COVID vaccines are leaving in their wake, with hundreds of thousands of reported injuries in the U.S. alone and, according to some statisticians, as many as 150,000 dead Americans.

With this level of damage after just nine months, now is as good a time as any to reexamine “COVID math” and highlight some of the embedded falsehoods that cast serious doubt on official and corporate pronouncements about risks and benefits.

The false case for vaccinating kids

Pfizer’s CEO, veterinarian Albert Bourla, is currently drumming up buzz in anticipation of a likely decision by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to green-light emergency use of his company’s COVID vaccine in children ages 5-11. To buttress his arguments, Bourla claims that pediatric COVID cases are on the rise.

However, setting aside the questionable PCR testing methodology being used to identify these “cases” (that is, until the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) retires the PCR test at the end of the year), recent studies show reported COVID-19 hospitalizations — “one of the primary metrics for tracking the severity of the coronavirus pandemic” — have been grossly inflated for children. In actuality, pediatric COVID hospitalization rates are “vanishingly small.”

One fact, especially, bears repeating: Through age 19, children and adolescents have a 99.9973% COVID-19 survival rate. This information, which has been a constant throughout the reported pandemic, is reiterated in the most recent analyses by Stanford physician, epidemiologist and statistician John Ioannidis, who has been a steadfast critic of COVID alarmism from the very beginning.

And Ioannidis’s good news does not stop with the 19-and-unders. Until people hit their seventies, all age groups have survival rates well over 99%:

  • 0-19: 99.9973%
  • 20-29: 99.986%
  • 30-39: 99.969%
  • 40-49: 99.918%
  • 50-59: 99.73%
  • 60-69: 99.41%
  • 70+: 97.6% (non-institutionalized)
  • 70+: 94.5% (institutionalized and non-institutionalized)

As Off-Guardian’s Kit Knightly wrote about another Ioannidis study this past spring, “With every new study, with every new paper, the ‘deadly’ pandemic gets less and less, well, deadly.”

At that time, Ioannidis ascertained that the global infection fatality rate was 95% lower than the one disseminated by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Risks: the example of myocarditis

Commenting on the pediatric hospital studies — in which more than half of the children entered the hospital for reasons having nothing to do with anything resembling COVID — a reporter wrote, “The implications … are enormously important, as reports of pediatric hospitalizations have regularly made headlines over the past year, greatly affecting public perceptions about risks to children.”

Those headlines and perceptions likely will prompt some parents to rush into the waiting arms of their local vaccinator.

Bourla and other Pfizer executives have remained mum about the many 12- to 17-year-olds who are ending up hospitalized and injured after taking the company’s experimental mRNA product.

Sadly, the post-jab statements made by these disabled teens and their parents share a common refrain: influenced by skewed media reports from some corners, and without the benefit of information censored in other corners, they were not aware of the risks.

What are some of those risks? 

A study out of Ottawa recently estimated that one of every 625 Moderna doses administered results in myocarditis (heart inflammation), as does an estimated one in 2,500 doses of the Pfizer shot, with a “tight temporal association between receipt of mRNA vaccine and subsequent development of symptoms in a relatively short time frame afterwards.”

The Ottawa authors pointed out that their estimates — based on “direct investigation of patients” who were “largely in the vulnerable 18- 30 age category” — were tenfold higher than the incidence produced by a less rigorous study that looked only at “administrative health data.”

The authors also noted the relevance of their findings for the “ongoing public debate regarding proposals for vaccination of children under the age of 16.”

According to another new study, healthy boys between the ages of 12 and 15, with no underlying medical conditions, were four to six times more likely to be diagnosed with vaccine-related myocarditis than they were to be hospitalized with COVID.

The Ottawa study may have pointed more of a finger at the Moderna shot, but a late August CDC update on heart problems reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the aftermath of COVID vaccination suggests the Pfizer injection may be equally treacherous, especially for young men.

Using a statistically credible estimate that VAERS data are underreporting COVID injuries by a factor of 41Steve Kirsch (founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund) has calculated (slide #15) that roughly one in 318 boys ages 16 and 17 can be expected to develop myocarditis after two Pfizer doses, and a third booster dose of the Pfizer vaccine could escalate that risk to a frightening one in 25.

Another recent look at VAERS data by Health Impact News showed that in 2021, to date, 12- to 19-year-olds have been 50 times more likely to experience heart problems after receiving experimental COVID shots — and nearly eight times more likely to die — compared to all other FDA-approved vaccines combined.

Considering adverse events reported to VAERS over the past decade for all vaccines combined, there has been a “highly anomalous” 1,000% increase in total adverse events reported thus far for 2021.

With these kinds of findings, the pushback against giving children the shots is growing louder and stronger.

The authors of a just-published study in Toxicology Reports openly ask, “Why are we vaccinating children against COVID-19?” They warn that younger age groups could experience longer-term effects (such as myocarditis) “that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades.”

Safe treatments withheld, dangerous protocols incentivized

John Ioannidis’s new study shows that institutionalization negatively skews outcomes for the 70-plus age group. Whereas the survival rate is 97.5% for the community-dwelling elderly 70 or older, it falls to 94.5% when institutionalized elderly in that age group are included in the count.

Why are the institutionalized elderly faring so poorly? In the UK, reporters and undertakers have furnished one possible answer, sharing troubling on-the-ground descriptions about illegal euthanasia alleged to be taking place on a widespread basis in care homes as well as hospitals.

In the U.S., meanwhile, regulators, hospitals and pharmacies have implemented equally disturbing policies that require withholding inexpensive drugs, such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine — shown elsewhere to be effective and safe — while essentially forcing hospitalized COVID patients onto protocols that are not only unhelpful but murderous.

Mexico City achieved up to a 76% reduction in COVID hospitalizations by making ivermectin-based home treatment kits widely available. With evidence like this, why are U.S. hospitals stubbornly adhering to life-threatening protocols involving remdesivir (known to produce fluid in the lungs and longer hospital stays) and intubation?

One rather dark answer is that hospitals are not only immune from liability for any fatal outcomes resulting from this approach but receive hefty federal payments — including a 20% Medicare “add-on” that may sum up to as much as $40,000 for patients who spend four or more days on a ventilator.

Although hospitals may hasten to refute that these factors are at play, the growing number of hospital whistleblowers is becoming hard to ignore.

In March, Baylor University’s Dr. Peter McCullough lamented that as many as 85% of COVID deaths could have been prevented with early treatment using ivermectin and other formerly commonplace drugs disallowed by regulators and for which U.S. pharmacies will no longer fill “off-label” prescriptions.

There is international agreement with McCullough’s position that “large reductions in COVID-19 deaths are possible using ivermectin,” and the U.S.-based Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance describes the drug as potentially the “global solution to the pandemic.”

However, instead of applauding these advocates of early intervention for their efforts to save lives, they have become, according to mRNA vaccine inventor Dr. Robert Malone, the focus of intense “coordinated strategies” to subject them to “derision and attacks and character assassination.”

Those ‘anomalous’ deaths

In analyses presented by Steve Kirsch to the FDA (slide #6), Kirsch summarized data showing the COVID vaccines are killing more people than they are saving — including producing six excess deaths for each life reportedly saved in nursing home residents, and five excess deaths per life saved according to Pfizer’s early clinical trial data.

Independent statisticians estimate the injections are linked to roughly 470 deaths per million doses administered. (By way of comparison, CDC researchers once conceded that smallpox vaccination was responsible for one death per million.)

In February, studies out of Israel were already showing the Pfizer shot (the only one used in Israel) was causing “mortality hundreds of times greater in young people compared to mortality from coronavirus without the vaccine, and dozens of times more in the elderly.”

Investigative journalist Corey Lynn of Corey’s Digs pointed out the CDC’s methodology for calculating COVID vaccine-related deaths is highly misleading because it is based on the number of doses administered, rather than on the number of people who receive injections.

Lynn’s analysis shows this methodology reduces the percentage of deaths almost by half, “an incredible mathematical error, surely done with intention.”

Another CDC ploy for undercounting the damage done by the COVID injections has to do with the agency’s definition of “fully vaccinated. The CDC currently considers as “unvaccinated” anyone who is not two weeks out from their second dose (in a two-dose series) or two weeks out from a single-dose vaccine. (And as Children’s Health Defense President Mary Holland recently pointed out, “unvaccinated” could “soon mean anyone who’s missing the latest booster dose,” with even more boosters likely in store down the road.)

Given that 17% of the deaths reported to VAERS have occurred within 48 hours of COVID vaccination, it is clear many U.S. vaccine deaths are being counted as “unvaccinated” deaths and misattributed to COVID-19 or other causes.

In the UK, however, public health data show that 80% of “COVID-19” deaths in August were in people who had been vaccinated, and hospitalization rates were 70% higher in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated.

Increasingly, members of the public are not fooled by the statistical shenanigans. When a Detroit TV channel recently tried to drum up hostility against the unvaccinated by asking viewers to submit tales of recalcitrant uninjected relatives dying from COVID-19, they instead got more than 182,000 comments about loved ones who had died or been injured after receiving one or more COVID shots.

These replies provide compelling evidence that what we are now experiencing is a “pandemic of the vaccinated.”

© 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

September 23, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | 1 Comment

NPR Embarrasses Itself With Misinformation and Blatant Lies About Dr. Mercola

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | September 23, 2021

In a broadcast rife with disinformation, misinformation and outright lies, National Public Radio has embarrassed itself while maligning Dr. Mercola.

The broadcast opens with NPR host Robin Young calling Dr. Mercola “the biggest disseminator of COVID lies,” and then proceeding to call America’s Frontline Doctors, an independent organization of which Dr. Mercola is not a member and with which he has zero affiliation, “his” group that “he created.”

Young then interviews Dr. Humayun Chaudhry, president and CEO of the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) about FSMB’s recommendation to state medical boards to fine, suspend and revoke the licenses of doctors who don’t follow the mainstream COVID narrative.

Together, Young and Chaurdhry repeatedly show that they’re either ignorant or deliberately spreading their own misinformation and disinformation when it comes to vaccine hesitancy, COVID treatments such as ivermectin (referring to it as an animal drug that has shown “absolutely no ability” to treat COVID) and medical professionals who are questioning the vaccines.

Asking whether Dr. Mercola still has his license to practice, Young claims a second time that he’s the “biggest distributor of misinformation” and that he doesn’t seem to care about that, as he’s making a lot of money by “selling alternatives to traditional standard care.”

Obviously, Young is only getting her news from the dark money-funded Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which analyzed 483 pieces of social media content over six weeks to come up with what they called the “Misinformation Dozen,” with Dr. Mercola at the top of their list. The thing is Young is spreading more misinformation herself, seeing that Facebook’s vice president of content policy Monika Bickert issued a statement saying that there not only is no evidence that CCDH’s list is accurate, but that the people named by CCDH were responsible for only 0.05% of all vaccine content on Facebook’s site, not the 73% CCDH claims.

Young and Chaudhry conclude their show by calling on social media companies to better watch their forums to censor COVID and vaccine “misinformation” and for individual states to take a more active role in investigating and revoking the licenses of doctors who don’t toe the COVID line.

SOURCES:

WBUR (NPR Boston) September 21, 2021

New York Post August 18, 2021

September 23, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment