Throughout the pandemic, governments have claimed to be following “the science”. But of course, many aspects of “the science” were never settled.
The WHO, as well as the UK Government, initially told us not to wear face masks. They then decided that face masks were essential. Countries like Australia and New Zealand introduced border controls in early February. Meanwhile, UK scientists were advising against port-of-entry screening. Researchers predicted there would be 96,000 deaths in Sweden by July. But as it turned out, there were less than 6,000.
Of course, many people have been sceptical of “the science” (by which I mean the officially endorsed science) from the very beginning. And of course, they’ve formed communities online with other like-minded persons. (Lockdown Sceptics would be one example of such a community.)
In an unpublished paper, researchers from MIT sought to understand how the users of these communities obtain, analyse, share and curate information. Surprisingly (to them), they found that users place a premium on data literacy and scientific rigour.
The researchers used a mixed methods design. First, they analysed a large sample of pandemic-related tweets sent between January and July 2020. Second, they employed ethnographic methods to study users on “anti-mask” Facebook groups. (Note that they use “anti-mask” as a “synecdoche for a broad spectrum of beliefs: that the pandemic is exaggerated, schools should be reopening, etc.”.)
In their analysis of Twitter data, the researchers found that sceptics “share the second-highest number of charts across the top six communities”, and that they are “the most prolific producers of area/line charts”, while sharing “the fewest number of photos”. They also found that such individuals “often create polished counter-visualizations that would not be out of place in scientific papers”.
In their study of “anti-mask” Facebook groups, the researchers found that users “value unmediated access to information and privilege personal research and direct reading over “expert interpretations”, and that “their approach to the pandemic is grounded in more scientific rigour, not less”.
“Most fundamentally,” the researchers write, “the groups we studied believe that science is a process, and not an institution”. They note:
While academic science is traditionally a system for producing knowledge within a laboratory, validating it through peer review, and sharing results within subsidiary communities, anti-maskers reject this hierarchical social model. They espouse a vision of science that is radically egalitarian and individualist.
According to the researchers, “anti-maskers often reveal themselves to be more sophisticated in their understanding of how scientific knowledge is socially constructed than their ideological adversaries”, and data literacy is a “quintessential criterion for membership within the community they have created”.
Based on these descriptions, one might assume the paper was written by a cadre of undercover sceptics. But the researchers make clear they are “not promoting these views”. Overall, it’s a fascinating study which is worth reading in full.
CBS News’ story covering of the Biden administration’s new U.S Climate Normals report says government data show the United States is warming at an unusually rapid rate due to human induced climate change, causing more frequent and severe extreme weather events. This story, as with the government report it is based upon, is long on alarm but short on facts. Data from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) show temperatures in the United States aren’t rising at an unusually rapid rate. In addition, incidences of extreme weather events are neither more frequent nor more severe than in the past.
“Just a quick glance at the new U.S. Climate Normals maps published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on Tuesday is enough for most climate scientists to say, ‘I told you so,’” writes CBS in an article, titled “NOAA’s “new normal” climate report is anything but normal.”
“While the new normals are just 10 years removed from the earlier set, the changes are still significant. In that time the nation has warmed an average of half a degree Fahrenheit,” CBS continues. “That may not sound like much, but small changes in the normals mean much larger changes in the extremes like extremes like heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods and hurricanes.”
NOAA’s new report may claim temperatures are rising across the United States, and weather is getting more extreme, but its own data and data from the IPCC say otherwise.
Data from the IPCC and NOAA also demonstrate there has been no measurable increase in the number or severity of droughts, hurricanes or floods, since the early part of the 19th century. Also, data from the IPCC and NOAA show the incidences of heatwaves [see the figure below] and wildfires in the United States and globally have actually declined during the recent period of modest warming.
Had CBS compared the publicly available data against the alarming soundbites contained in the Biden administration’s new U.S. Climate Normals report, it could have easily discovered the report misrepresents what data show. A news organization committed to pursuing the truth, wherever it leads, would have looked beneath the surface of the report at the underlying data. Such an investigation would have revealed temperatures aren’t rising unnaturally, and weather extremes aren’t increasing.
That’s the good news CBS should have reported.
H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. is managing editor of Environment & Climate News and a research fellow for environment and energy policy at The Heartland Institute. Burnett worked at the National Center for Policy Analysis for 18 years, most recently as a senior fellow in charge of NCPA’s environmental policy program. He has held various positions in professional and public policy organizations, including serving as a member of the Environment and Natural Resources Task Force in the Texas Comptroller’s e-Texas commission.
COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers (and their allies in mainstream science and government) have so far failed to acknowledge evidence from adverse event reporting schemes that their products are killing and injuring thousands. They say that apart from ‘extremely rare’ allergic reactions – to which they have reluctantly added ‘extremely rare’ blood clotting disorders – there are no known mechanisms whereby such damage could be occurring.
That position was never tenable. The famous spike protein, which most of the vaccines introduce into the body as a means of countering the virus, is in itself a dangerous toxin. The reason it is so dangerous is similar to the reason why the virus itself is a threat to human beings: it has characteristics that enable it to bind to, and distort the action of, a wide range of human cells.
These characteristics almost certainly stem from it being a chimeric virus, originally native to Chinese bats but manipulated in the laboratory to test its capacity to change into a threat to humans.
Scientists hope that the vaccine, through challenging our immune systems by getting our body cells to manufacture small quantities of the protein, will protect against much greater damage from the virus. But the nature of the protein is such as to make it inherently risky, a risk that may be dangerously multiplied when vaccination coincides with a wave of infection, as in India recently.
A paper widely held to be the ‘smoking gun’ for ultimately bequeathing us Covid-19 was published in Nature in 2015 by US and Chinese researchers, who deliberately altered the spike protein of a bat coronavirus so that it could infect human cells. The work, mainly at the laboratory in Wuhan, China, from which many believe the virus to have accidentally escaped, was claimed to ‘underscore the potential threat of cross-species transmission’ of the virus.
The researchers acknowledged that these so-called ‘gain of function’ experiments carried risks, writing: ‘The potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens.’
Also in 2015, a document written by Chinese scientists and public health officials discussed the weaponisation of such viruses, according to a report published on Saturday by Weekend Australian. It says the document is discussed in a book, What really happened in Wuhan, by The Australian investigations writer Sharri Markson, to be published by HarperCollins in September.
Entitled The Unnatural Origin of SARS and New Species of Man-Made Viruses as Genetic Bioweapons, the paper is said to have predicted that World War Three would be fought with biological weapons. It describes SARS viruses as a ‘new era of genetic weapons’ which can be ‘artificially manipulated into an emerging human disease virus, then weaponised and unleashed in a way never seen before’.
Despite the enormous importance to the world of getting to the truth of how Covid-19 originated, the scientific establishment has seemed desperate to deny the possibility that it was man-made.
In March last year Nature added an ‘Editors’ note’ to the ‘smoking gun’ paper, stating: ‘We are aware that this article is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing Covid-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus.’
This is, to say the least, being economical with the truth, and may come to be seen as an extreme betrayal of science by a journal world-famous for its supposed reliability.
More than a year ago, an Anglo-Norwegian team of scientists pointed to the 2015 Nature report findings as the most likely precursor of research which culminated in SARS-COV-2, the virus causing Covid-19. They emphasised that vaccine makers who failed to acknowledge its chimeric nature might unwittingly put the public at risk.
British vaccines expert Angus Dalgliesh, a London University professor of oncology, co-authored with leading Norwegian researchers a paper that spells out in ruthless detail the sequence of laboratory events through which they claim the SARS-COV-2 spike protein arose. This understanding was reached through the team’s own work aimed at developing a safe candidate Covid vaccine.
The paper is headed: ‘The evidence which suggests that this is no naturally evolved virus – A reconstructed aetiology of the SARS-COV-2 spike.’
After analysing the biochemistry of the spike, the team concludes that it has six inserts, ‘unique fingerprints . . . indicative of purposive manipulation’. It describes four linked published research projects ‘which, we suggest, show by deduction how, where, when and by whom the SARS-COV-2 spike acquired its special characteristics’.
The authors write: ‘Since, regrettably, international access has not been allowed to the relevant laboratories or materials, since Chinese scientists who wished to share their knowledge have not been able to do so and indeed since it appears that preserved virus material and related information have been destroyed, we are compelled to apply deduction to the published scientific literature, informed by our own biochemical analyses.
‘We refute pre-emptively objection that this methodology does not result in absolute proof by observing that to make such a statement is to misunderstand scientific logic. The longer the chain of causation of individual findings that is shown, especially converging from different disciplines, the greater the confidence in the whole.’
The researchers say that the four key ‘gain of function’ studies are linked in two ways: scientifically, in that the third and fourth build on the results of the first and second; and in the continuity of the institution and personnel across all four.
‘The Wuhan Institute of Virology is a key collaborator in all these projects and Dr Zheng-Li Shi is one of the institute’s most experienced virologists and bat specialists. She is a common thread through all the key research projects.’
The unique ‘fingerprints’ of manipulation which make what was once a bat virus so dangerous include the following:
A large part of the spike protein has high human similarity, ‘a built-in stealth property’ that also ‘implies a high risk for the development of severe adverse events/toxicity and even antibody-dependent enhancement’ [a problem in which a previous infection or vaccination increases rather than reduces the risk from subsequent infection]. Specific precautions would be needed when using the spike protein in any vaccine candidate, ‘precautions that might not suggest themselves to designers employing conventional methodologies and innocent assumptions about the target virus’.
The spike protein has inserts on its surface which greatly increase its ability to hook into, infect and harm a wide range of human cells. ‘Such a result is typically the objective of gain of function experiments to create chimeric viruses of high potency.’
The paper tracks in detail how these and other unique features of the virus came about, from work on bat and human viruses first reported in 2008 by Dr Zheng-Li Shi and Wuhan Institute of Virology colleagues, through collaboration with American researchers working with human epithelial cells, which are widespread throughout the body, and culminating in a virus capable of infecting human lung, taste, intestinal and other tissues.
Despite the eminence of its authors the paper has remained largely hidden from view, being published only on a Norwegian website.
Its importance, however, is highlighted by a string of recent research findings which confirm that Covid-19 is much more than a simple respiratory infection, and that even without the virus, the spike protein can damage blood vessel linings (epithelial tissues), causing heart and circulatory disorders as well as respiratory disease and gut problems (see here and here and here and here and here).
Despite millions seemingly receiving the vaccine safely, scientists and regulators may be failing to recognise deaths and injuries linked to this wide-ranging toxic potential of the spike protein that forms the basis of most of the jabs. The research findings add urgency to calls on the government and regulators to investigate numerous reports of vaccine-related deaths, especially in the elderly and care homes, and especially in the hours or days immediately following vaccination.
The Telegraph‘s Global Health Security correspondents Paul Nuki and Sarah Newey claimed this morning that there is “no trade off” between the economy and public health when it comes to COVID-19 and lockdowns.
Writing in the newspaper, the correspondents (whose coverage is partly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) write that the “‘health v economy’ trade-off” is “false” because “countries where the virus was swiftly contained – such as Vietnam – have seen less economic damage, plus far fewer deaths”.
This claim, based on one country, fails to acknowledge that the entire South East Asian region, regardless of the measures taken, has had a much milder experience of COVID-19 than some other parts of the world, particularly Europe and the Americas. Furthermore, while it may be true that Vietnam’s early border closures produced better outcomes (there is some evidence of this), that bird has well and truly flown for most of the world so the example of Vietnam is now irrelevant as far as this pandemic is concerned.
Perhaps, though, they have a future pandemic in mind. In fact, the peer-reviewed evidence is that lockdowns have no impact on the epidemic death toll (although it’s worth noting that Vietnam, which Nuki and Newey hold up as an example we should follow in future, has never imposed a full, country-wide lockdown). It’s also not clear how countries which close their borders to an endemic virus can ever hope to open them again – a problem Vietnam is currently experiencing. Vietnam is also not exactly an international global hub.
The article is part the Global Health Security team’s promotion of an agenda to give the World Health Organisation more funding and more power to declare pandemics faster and be more proactive in ensuring compliance amongst states with public health edicts. They note approvingly that the pandemic has “thrust health to the centre stage, and may be an opportunity to promote a ‘green and healthy recovery’”. They appear to like the idea of a fast-acting global government imposing lockdowns so we can all be like Vietnam and “contain” the virus quickly, supposedly without suffering economic damage despite the vast disruption to the global economy this would bring.
Nuki and Newey highlight the problem of “viral misinformation” as one of 13 “mistakes” made early in the pandemic, though they blame the internet and social media rather than the WHO, despite its part in promoting myths about the virus such as that it doesn’t spread between humans and it doesn’t spread via aerosols.
But are Nuki and Newey engaging in disseminating misinformation of their own, making the bizarre claim that public health containment strategies have no trade-off with the economy based on a single unrepresentative country? When the U.K. economy shrank by a record 9.9% in 2020, this claim is frankly ridiculous and such claims are at odds with the Telegraph’s overall coverage of the way different countries have managed the pandemic, which has been quite balanced. Should the paper really be allowing a team of journalists whose work is partly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to use its platform to promote an agenda of enhanced global control in the name of public health?
One potential positive from the whole Covid-19 debacle is that we have learned an incredible amount about the society in which we live. This will be crucial if we manage to stave off a descent into a nightmare future of techno-fascist slavery.
We will have a new understanding of what our world has become and what we would like it to be in the decades and centuries to come. And “we” means we. While the majority have apparently learnt nothing at all from what has happened, they will eventually catch up.
There is no way that knowledge gained by a wide-awake 15% or 20% of the population will not end up being shared by almost everyone. Once the truth is out, it tends to stay out. As H.R. Haldeman so wisely put it, “you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube”.
Here are ten things we have learned during the Covid coup:
1. Our political system is hopelessly corrupt. Virtually all politicians are hopelessly corrupt. No political party can be trusted. They all can be, and have been, bought.
2. Democracy is a sham. It has been a sham for a very long time. There will never be any real democracy when money and power amount to the same thing.
3. The system will stop at nothing to hold on to its power and, if possible, increase its levels of control and exploitation. It has no scruples. No lie is too outrageous, no hypocrisy too nauseating, no human sacrifice too great.
4. So-called radical movements are usually nothing of the sort. From whatever direction they claim to attack the system, they are just pretending to do so and serve to channel discontent in directions which are harmless to the power clique and even useful to its agendas.
5. Any “dissident” voice you have ever heard of through corporate media is probably a fake. The system does not hand out free publicity to its actual enemies.
6. Most people in our society are cowards. They will jettison all the fine values and principles which they have been loudly boasting about all their lives merely to avoid the slightest chance of public criticism, inconvenience or even minor financial loss.
7. The mainstream media is nothing but a propaganda machine for the system and those journalists who work for it have sold their sorry souls, placing their (often minimal) writing skills entirely at the disposition of Power.
8. Police are not servants of the public but servants of a powerful and extremely wealthy minority which seeks to control and exploit the public for its own narrow and greedy interests.
9. Scientists cannot be trusted. They will use the hypnotic power of their white coats and authoritative status for the benefit of whoever funds their work and lifestyle. He who pays the piper calls the tune.
10. Progress is a misleading illusion. The “progress” of increasing automisation and industrialisation does not go hand in hand with a progress in the quality of human life, but in fact will “progressively” reduce it to the point of complete extinction.
The CDC will soon be changing how they record covid-19 breakthrough cases. With this change, breakthrough infections in vaccinated individuals will no longer be recorded unless the infection results in hospitalization or death.
As expected, this change is happening at a time when thousands of breakthrough cases are being reported in the fully vaccinated. I suppose when you start seeing numbers you don’t like, it’s easiest to just stop counting. It’s like that classic scientific adage says “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”.
So in a few weeks, when you start seeing the artificial drastic decline in covid infections among the vaccinated, remember to give the CDC a big ol’ pat on the back for its hard world… or lack of it.
These are the facts concerning Covid-19 and the vaccine
1. Covid-19 is a nasty disease when allowed to progress for more than a week, untreated, and develop into an autoimmune illness.
2. It is highly contagious.
3. In some parts of the country (not Maine) 80% herd immunity has already been reached, based on antibody levels. Eventually we will reach this too, and then everyone will breathe a sigh of relief.
4. It appears that the adenovirus vectored DNA vaccines are about to be scuttled, due to high rates of bleeding (3% in Norway) and clotting (rate uncertain). Platelet activation was a known complication of adenovirus vaccines since at least 2007.
5. The mRNA vaccines were authorized by the FDA using poorly designed studies whose goal was to get them to market as quickly as possible. They cause higher rates of short-term reactions than any other licensed US vaccines. No one knows what kinds of long-term reactions they may cause, nor how often.
6. They were tested to see if they prevented mild disease. We still don’t know to what extent they prevent severe disease, nor to what extent they prevent asymptomatic spread.
7. It is almost impossible to receive any type of compensation if you are injured by an Emergency Use Authorized product, including all Covid vaccines and some new Covid drugs, as everyone involved with them has been given a waiver of liability, so you cannot sue anyone. The Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program was created as an alternative, but so far, this program has turned away over 90% of applicants. There is a one-year statute of limitations.
Now for the good news. Treatment
8. Most people with severe cases of Covid had low levels of Vitamin D, and multiple comorbidities. Unless you work outside all day, everyone should be supplementing with this vitamin and should consider checking a blood level.
9. Multiple old, licensed, generic medications work wonders against Covid. The best one is ivermectin, which has been shown to reduce both deaths and hospitalizations by 80% when used early. Had it been used routinely in the US, up to 400,000 of the 500,000 deaths might have been prevented. There are now 50 studies supporting its use. All are positive. And it’s very safe.
10. Many other old drugs are also beneficial, and others are being tested and look very promising. It is remarkable what a wide range of repurposed drugs have activity against Covid, from antihistamines (H1 and H2 blockers), melatonin, Zinc, the chloroquine drugs, an antidepressant, an anti-estrogen, a gout drug and several more.
11. The two most devastating complications of Covid are thrombosis and autoimmune cytokine storm. A whole aspirin daily reduces thrombosis when Covid hits, and an inhaled or oral steroid reduces autoimmunity. These are simple, safe measures.
12. I have posted information about treatment on my blog, and have posted several other protocols from different groups of American doctors who treat Covid aggressively and early. There are plenty of doctors who are able and willing to effectively treat Covid patients.
13. Early treatment is key. None of my patients have needed oxygen or hospitalization; none have died. With early treatment you will almost always develop a robust immune response to all currently known Covid variants, which is something the vaccines are not able to provide.
14. The most complete source of information on every common treatment for Covid is c19study.com, which updates constantly as studies are published.
15. My colleagues said that dealing with Covid is a team sport. Maybe. But armed with knowledge, everyone can hit a home run when Covid comes calling.
16. Dr. Peter McCullough, a distinguished cardiology professor at Baylor, has a 20 minute video on Covid that nobody should miss. Watch below.
Nuremberg Trial 2.0 is in preparation, with a class action lawsuit supported by thousands of lawyers and medical professionals worldwide, led by the American-German lawyer Reiner Fuellmich, who is prosecuting those responsible for the Covid-19 scandal manipulated by the Davos Forum.
In this respect, it is worth recalling that Reiner Fuellmich is the lawyer who succeeded in condemning the automobile giant Volkswagen in the case of the tampered catalytic converters, as well as succeeding in condemning Deutsche Bank as a criminal enterprise.
According to Reiner Fuellmich, all the frauds committed by German companies are derisory compared to the damage that the Covid-19 crisis has caused and continues to cause. This Covid-19 crisis should be renamed the “Covid-19 Scandal” and all those responsible should be prosecuted for civil damages due to manipulations and falsified test protocols. Therefore, an international network of business lawyers will plead the biggest tort case of all time, the Covid-19 fraud scandal, which has turned into the largest crime against humanity to ever be committed.
A Covid-19 commission of inquiry was set up in July 2020 on the initiative of a group of German lawyers with the aim of bringing an international class action lawsuit using Anglo-Saxon law.
Here’s what Reiner Fuellmich had to say on the findings of the inquiry and the questions to be answered in the forthcoming trial against the WHO and World Leaders for crimes against humanity –
The hearings of around 100 internationally renowned scientists, doctors, economists and lawyers, which have been conducted by the Berlin Commission of Inquiry into the Covid-19 affair since 10.07.2020, have in the meantime shown with a probability close to certainty that the Covid- 19 scandal was at no time a health issue.
Rather, it was about solidifying the illegitimate power (illegitimate because it was obtained by criminal methods) of the corrupt “Davos clique” by transferring the wealth of the people to the members of the Davos clique, destroying, among other things, small and medium-sized enterprises in particular. Platforms such as Amazon, Google, Uber, etc. could thus appropriate their market share and wealth.
The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the Corona Scandal are:
1) Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
2) Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world’s population from corona? Or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe, without asking any questions, that their lives are in danger — so that, in the end, the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
3) Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic (Mr. Drosten, virologist at Charité Hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, head of the World Health Organization or WHO) because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?
Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not here in Germany.
But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide.
These were the conclusions of the committee –
‘The corona crisis must be renamed the “Corona Scandal”
It is:
• The biggest tort case ever
• The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
Those responsible must be:
• Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
• Sued for civil damages
Deaths:
• There is no excess mortality in any country
• Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
• 94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes where they infected old people with weak immune systems
• Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of Covid-19
• US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality statistics
Autopsies showed:
• Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
• Almost all deaths were very old people
• Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and mortality statistics
Health:
• Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
• Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
• Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
• Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
Tests:
• Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
• Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
• Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
• Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China
• The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
• PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
• A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has been found
• Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45 cycles
Illegality:
• The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the basis of a single opinion
• The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
• The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
• Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the constitutionality of the corona measures
• Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for corona measures
• German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
• Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately
• No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson’s false computer models warning of millions of deaths
• Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called pandemic
• Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
• Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
• Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the long overdue public scientific discussion
Conspiracy:
• Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
• Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules”
• The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
• There can be no talk of a second wave
Injury and damage:
• Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
Anti-corona measures have:
• Killed innumerable people
• Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
• Children are being taken away from their parents
• Children are traumatized en masse
• Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
Redress:
• A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties worldwide having the opportunity to join
• Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damages’
Is the writing on the wall for Gates, Hancock, Fauci and friends? Well the lawsuits have been filed and Reiner Fuellmich’s track record certainly suggests they don’t stand a chance.
The mainstream media (radio, TV, newspapers) are full of reports of the successes of COVID-19 “vaccines” in reducing the number of new “cases” here and in many other jurisdictions.
However, to this date none of those “mRNA-type vaccines” (like from Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Novavax) and, perhaps, other manufacturers/providers) have received an unequivocal “stamp of approval” by any government entity (e.g., the U.S. Centers for Disease Control [CDC] and U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA]), or by Canada, or by Europe’s EMA (European Medicines Agency).
The pictures above will show that. Read the label carefully: Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine vial with the label stating: “For use under Emergency Use Authorization”; Source: Wikipedia (page last edited on 6 May 2021).
A Case In Point
On May 5, 2021, in the CTV News, Canada’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. T. Tam, spoke of “authorized” vaccines—in contrast to other medicines (for other kinds of ailments) that are described as having been “approved” by the authorities for specific other kinds of ailments.
There is, certainly in many places, a misunderstanding between the (U.S.) legal terms for medicines/vaccines that are “Authorized” and those that are “Approved.” This differentiation is akin to the (U.S.) legal terms of “Agreement” and “Treaty.”
In both examples, the first is non-binding (or not subject to legal proceedings) but the latter is.
Regrettably, few journalists and politicians (especially outside the U.S.) seem to understand the differences. In common language parlance they appear to have identical meanings but not in “legalese” as common and binding language on this continent.
Other Example
Another example of the fierce competition in the field of COVID-19 vaccine developments, barely mentioned in western societies’ media, are products developed elsewhere. For example, the Sputnik vaccines developed in Russia on the basis of an approximately 70-year old proven (non-mRNA-type) vaccinetechnology, similar to the AstraZeneca product, barely ever gets mentioned.
Then there are at least three similar anti-COVID products currently available in China (with others still under development) and in other countries. Some countries have ordered millions of doses from their manufacturers. The Wall Street Journal website at https://www.wsj.com/articles/tracking-covid-19-vaccine-distribution-11611355360 provides some good graphics for international product comparisons.
The question is what’s the better/best long-lasting protection with the least amount of negative effects that is also able to defend against the rapidly evolving mutations (so-called variants) and potential future varieties?
Already, the CEO of the Pfizer group has stated that a third jab may be necessary and annual “vaxxings” thereafter. Of course, that is very reminiscent of past decades’ annual flu-shot recommendations here.
You may wonder “What gives?” Yes, that’s exactly what I’m asking, too.
Questions ought to be answered forthwith by the official health agencies’ representatives and not just with platitudes but with measurable “endpoints,” numbers, dates, and in formats that provide comparable data to other vaccine-like products and diseases (like the common seasonal flu). Answers are urgently required.
This is not a game of one-upmanship between the pharma giants but rather answers to question of long-term safety (especially also for young children and pregnant women) are of worldwide importance. For example, Norway’s National Institute of Public Health recently recommended stopping further use of one of the currently used injections there.
Long-Term Safety Concerns
The long-term safety, efficacy and lack of “side-effects” (including deaths) of the anti-COVID-19 injections are much more important than benevolent ideas of setting-aside legal provisions for the protection of intellectual property and patent protections for the development and/or manufacture of such materials.
Even Pfizer’s own documents warn of a variety of known side effects and that non-vaxxed folks should stay away from those that have been injected with the company’s product. Clearly, there are global implications to such considerations.
Short of accepting, without question, any and all globalist ideas, claimed to be for “protection,” clear answers to those questions about long-term safety are urgently needed! Approval must rest on standard testing methods, procedures, and statistical analyses that should equally apply to all materials offered.
Nothing else will do!
Dr. Klaus L.E. Kaiser is author of CONVENIENT MYTHS, the green revolution – perceptions, politics, and facts Convenient Myths
An important and highly concerning study published early this year in the journal Microbiology & Infectious Diseases titled, “Covid-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Diseases,” addresses one of the many potential, unintended, adverse health effects of the experimental mRNA Covid-19 vaccines presently being deployed worldwide, namely, their possible induction of prion diseases, a category of highly fatal brain disorders.
The study abstract, well worth reading, summarizes both the context, intention, and results of the investigation:
“Development of new vaccine technology has been plagued with problems in the past. The current RNA based SARSCoV-2 vaccines were approved in the US using an emergency order without extensive long term safety testing. In this paper the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated for the potential to induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients. The RNA sequence of the vaccine as well as the spike protein target interaction were analyzed for the potential to convert intracellular RNA binding proteins TAR DNA binding protein (TDP-43) and Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) into their pathologic prion conformations. The results indicate that the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce TDP-43 and FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations. In the current analysis a total of sixteen UG tandem repeats (ΨGΨG) were identified and additional UG (ΨG) rich sequences were identified. Two GGΨA sequences were found. Potential G Quadruplex sequences are possibly present but a more sophisticated computer program is needed to verify these. Furthermore, the spike protein, created by the translation of the vaccine RNA, binds angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), a zinc containing enzyme. This interaction has the potential to increase intracellular zinc. Zinc ions have been shown to cause the transformation of TDP-43 to its pathologic prion configuration. The folding of TDP-43 and FUS into their pathologic prion confirmations is known to cause ALS, front temporal lobar degeneration, Alzheimer’s disease and other neurological degenerative diseases. The enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks leads the author to believe that regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than benefit. [emphasis added]”
As you can see above, the author is clearly concerned about the fact that the novel mRNA-based Covid-19 vaccines presently being deployed to hundreds of millions within the US, and around the world, have both been plagued by problems in the past, and are presently being allowed to bypass proper safety and efficacy testing normally required for FDA approval, through an Emergency Use Authorization enacted on Feb 4th, 2020, which indemnifed manufacturers from liability, and which was made possible through the declaration of national health emergency (now known to be based on faulty disease modeling, Covid death statistics, and faulty PCR-based Covid case numbers) and the emergency medical powers invoked, thereof.
Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease (CJD), also known as neurocognitive disorder or subacute spongiform encephalopathy is due to prion disease, a rapidly progressing and highly fatal degenerative brain disorder
The research, therefore, sought to evaluate and identify the possibility that one of the unintended, adverse effects of the vaccines (specifically, the Pfizer vaccine) may be that either the synthetic nucleoside-mRNA sequence chosen for these vaccines or the spike protein target interaction following their administration may result in the pathological misfolding of proteins normally present in cells, transforming them into what are known as prions — which can lead to rapid and highly lethal brain degeneration related disorders. [To learn more about prion diseases, you can get a summary at the PrionAlliance.com website]
The research uncovered that, indeed, a plausible mechanism for mRNA Covid-19-induced prion formation exists, namely, “the folding of TDP-43 and FUS into their pathologic prion confirmations is known to cause ALS, front temporal lobar degeneration, Alzheimer’s disease and other neurological degenerative diseases.”
The study points that previous research has been done that indicates there is a link between COVID-19 vaccines and prion disease:
“Finally, others working in the field have published additional support that COVID-19 vaccines could potentially induce prion disease. Authors [18] found prion related sequences in the COVID-19 spike protein which were not found in related coronaviruses. Others [19] have reported a case of prion disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, initially occurring in a man with COVID-19.” [emphasis added]
The author also states in the introduction that concerns about long-term adverse health effects of vaccines are not new, even when vaccines have been approved through normal, long-term trials (~10-15 years) and have passed regulatory approval by the FDA:
“Vaccines have been found to cause a host of chronic, late developing adverse events. Some adverse events like type 1 diabetes may not occur until 3-4 years after a vaccine is administered [1]. In the example of type 1 diabetes the frequency of cases of adverse events may surpass the frequency of cases of severe infectious disease the vaccine was designed to prevent. Given that type 1 diabetes is only one of many immune mediated diseases potentially caused by vaccines, chronic late occurring adverse events are a serious public health issue.”
The advent of new vaccine technology creates new potential mechanisms of vaccine adverse events. For example, the first killed polio vaccine actually caused polio in recipients because the up scaled manufacturing process did not effectively kill the polio virus before it was injected into patients. RNA based vaccines offers special risks of inducing specific adverse events.
One such potential adverse event is prion based diseases caused by activation of intrinsic proteins to form prions. A wealth of knowledge has been published on a class of RNA binding proteins shown to participating in causing a number of neurological diseases including Alzheimer’s disease and ALS. TDP-43 and FUS are among the best studied of these proteins [2].
The Pfizer RNA based COVID-19 vaccine was approved by the US FDA under an emergency use authorization without long term safety data. Because of concerns about the safety of this vaccine a study was performed to determine if the vaccine could potentially induce prion based disease.” [emphasis added]
In the discussion portion of the study, another important factor is addressed, namely, the possibility that there has been misuse of RNA research (funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Ellison Medical Foundation), and that disease causing prions could be considered bioweapons:
“There is an old saying in medicine that “the cure may be worse than the disease.” The phrase can be applied to vaccines. In the current paper the concern is raised that the RNA based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19. This paper focuses on a novel potential adverse event mechanism causing prion disease which could be even more common and debilitating than the viral infection the vaccine is designed to prevent. While this paper focuses on one potential adverse event there are multiple other potential fatal adverse events as discussed below. Over the last two decades there has been a concern among certain scientists that prions could be used as bioweapons. More recently there has been a concern that ubiquitous intracellular molecules could be activated to cause prion disease including Alzheimer’s disease, ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases. This concern originates due to potential for misuse of research data on the mechanisms by which certain RNA binding proteins like TDP-43, FUS and others can be activated to form disease causing prions. The fact that this research, which could be used for bioweapons development, is funded by private organizations including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Ellison Medical Foundation [2] without national/international oversight is also a concern. In the past, for example, there were prohibitions for publishing information pertaining to construction of nuclear bombs.” [emphasis added]
Another salient and concerning point is made that should be discussed further:
“Data is not publicly available to provide information on how long the vaccine RNA is translated in the vaccine recipient and how long after translation the spike protein will be present in the recipient’s cells.” [emphasis added]
While the promotional copy and superficial explanations provided the public by both the manufacturers of the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines and their would-be regulatory agencies in government, who describe the vaccines as unequivocally safe, despite the existence of over 118,000 adverse events reports on the government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database as of May 6th, 2021, the reality is that these vaccines genetically modifiy a portion of the recipient body’s cells into vaccine antigen (“spike protein”) producing bio-factories — something never done before in the world history of vaccination campaigns.
Nowhere is there evidence presented (based on multi-year human research) that this process will occur safely, nor for how long the effects will last, and what the possible adverse effects are to both the vaccinated and those exposed to them as bystanders and who might experience the horizontal transfer of vaccine-induced antigens/antibodies via exosome- or “microvessicle shedding”-mediated processes (learn more about this here: Ways mRNA Covid-19 Vaccines Could Harm the Unvaccinated Explored In Depth). Nor is their a discussion of how these changes in the physiology and genetic makeup of those affected might be passed down to their progeny, which is now an established possibility given the publication of the following study: “Soma-to-Germline Transmission of RNA in Mice Xenografted with Human Tumour Cells: Possible Transport by Exosomes, and which I have previously reported on extensively here.
The study also raises concerns about the mRNA vaccines possibly inducing autoimmune diseases:
“Autoimmunity and the opposing condition, metabolic syndrome, are well know adverse events caused by vaccines [14]. COVID-19 infections are associated with the induction of autoantibodies and autoimmune disease [15,16] making it more than plausible a vaccine could do the same. One author has found amino acid sequences coded by the spike protein to be identical to sequences in human proteins including proteins found in the CNS [17]. Autoimmunity can also be induced by epitope spreading when a foreign antigen, like the spike protein, is presented by an antigen presenting cell that also has self molecules attached to its MHC molecules.” [emphasis added]
The study concludes with a stern warning:
“Approving a vaccine, utilizing novel RNA technology without extensive testing is extremely dangerous. The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original infection.” [emphasis added]
It takes courage, as a researcher, to address and publish on topics like these. Especially, in this time of the near universal centralization and weaponization of the international media against open discussion of the true risks of the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines — or any vaccines for that matter. As Orwell once said, “in times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” No doubt, this researcher, and this paper, will be attacked, and “fact checked and debunked,” and tossed in the growing bin of so-called “conspiracy theories.” Retractions are another form of censorship growing increasingly frequent in the space of scientific research that challenges the dominant narrative, regardless of whether the science is accurate. That said, there is a growing movement of millions upon millions, around the world, who understand the agenda that is being pushed with experimental vaccines and other pharmceutical products is dangerous, violates basic medical ethical principles established after the Nuremberg trials (1947) against human medical experimentation without full informed consent, and must be countered with strong, evidence-based, peaceful dissent and constructive action. That’s why we encourage our readers to do the following:
Share this article. In times of widespread de-platforming, forwarding this by email, or sharing on what remains of social media, helps spread the truth.
Join the Greenmedinfo.com newsletter list and consider making a one time donation or becoming a member (as little as .16 cents a day); we are a 100% user-free, ad-free platform that relies completely on user support to serve you. Never before has your support been more critical to our survival, and ability to empower you with the information you need to make informed choices about your health.
Follow us on Telegram, an alternative to widespread social media censorship, for real-time updates: https://t.me/sayeregengmi
Learn more about the unintended, advese effects of vaccinations on the Greenmedinfo.com database, which contains over 1300 studies that call into question the claim that vaccines are a priori and unequivocally safe and effective: www.greenmedinfo.com/anti-therapeutic-action/vaccination-all
Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.
We are a broad and diverse group of Canadian physicians from across Canada who are sending out this urgent declaration to the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons of our various Provinces and Territories and to the Public at large, whom we serve.
On April 30, 2021, Ontario’s physician licensing body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), issued a statement forbidding physicians from questioning or debating any or all of the official measures imposed in response to COVID-19. 1
The CPSO then went on to threaten physicians with punishment – investigations and disciplinary action.
We regard this recent statement of the CPSO to be unethical, anti-science and deeply disturbing.
As physicians, our primary duty of care is not to the CPSO or any other authority, but to our patients.
When we became physicians, we pledged to put our patients first and that our ethical and professional duty is always first toward our patients. The CPSO statement orders us to violate our duty and pledge to our patients in the following ways:
1. Denial of the Scientific Method itself:The CPSO is ordering physicians to put aside the scientific method and to not debate the processes and conclusions of science.
We physicians know and continue to believe that throughout history, opposing views, vigorous debate and openness to new ideas have been the bedrock of scientific progress.Any major advance in science has been arrived at by practitioners vigorously questioning “official” narratives and following a different path in the pursuit of truth.
2. Violation of our Pledge to use Evidence-Based Medicine for our patients:By ordering us not to debate and not to question, the CPSO is also asking us to violate our pledge to our patients that we will always seek the best, evidence-based scientific methods for them and advocate vigorously on their behalf.
The CPSO statement orders physicians for example, not to discuss or communicate with the public about “lockdown” measures. Lockdown measures are the subject of lively debate by world-renown and widely respected experts and there are widely divergent views on this subject. The explicitly anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration – https://gbdeclaration.org – was written by experts from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford Universities and more than 40,000 physicians from all over the world have signed this declaration. Several international experts including Martin Kuldorf (Harvard), David Katz (Yale), Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford) and Sunetra Gupta (Oxford) continue to strongly oppose lockdowns.
The CPSO is ordering physicians to express only pro-lockdown views, or else face investigation and discipline. This tyrannical, anti-science CPSO directive is regarded by thousands of Canadian physicians and scientists as unsupported by science and as violating the first duty of care to our patients.
3. Violation of Duty of Informed Consent:The CPSO is also ordering physicians to violate the sacred duty of informed consent – which is the process by which the patient/public is fully informed of the risks, benefits and any alternatives to the treatment or intervention, before consent is given.
The Nuremberg Code, drafted in the aftermath of the atrocities perpetrated within the Nazi concentration camps – where horrific medical experiments were performed on inmates without consent – expressly forbids the imposition of any kind of intervention without informed consent.
In the case of the lockdown intervention for example, physicians have a fiduciary duty to point out to the public that lockdowns impose their own costs on society, including in greatly increased depression and suicide rates, delayed investigation and treatment of cancer (including delayed surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy), ballooning surgical waiting lists (with attendant greatly increased patient suffering) and increased rates of child and domestic abuse.
We physicians believe that with the CPSO statement of 30 April 2021, a watershed moment in the assault on free speech and scientific inquiry has been reached.
By ordering physicians to be silent and follow only one narrative, or else face discipline and censure, the CPSO is asking us to violate our conscience, our professional ethics, the Nuremberg code and the scientific pursuit of truth.
We will never comply and will always put our patients first.
The CPSO must immediately withdraw and rescind its statement of 30 April 2021.
We also give notice to other Canadian and international licensing authorities for physicians and allied professions that the stifling of scientific inquiry and any order to violate our conscience and professional pledge to our patients, itself may constitute a crime against humanity.
The College is aware and concerned about the increase of misinformation circulating on social media and other platforms regarding physicians who are publicly contradicting public health orders and recommendations. Physicians hold a unique position of trust with the public and have a professional responsibility to not communicate anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing and anti-lockdown statements and/or promoting unsupported, unproven treatments for COVID-19. Physicians must not make comments or provide advice that encourages the public to act contrary to public health orders and recommendations. Physicians who put the public at risk may face an investigation by the CPSO and disciplinary action, when warranted. When offering opinions, physicians must be guided by the law, regulatory standards, and the code of ethics and professional conduct. The information shared must not be misleading or deceptive and must be supported by available evidence and science.
This video features the compelling presentation by renowned physicist Dr. William Happer at the National Leadership Seminar, sponsored by Hillsdale College, on February 19, 2021, in Phoenix, Arizona. William Happer is the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor Emeritus in the Department of Physics at Princeton University, where he received his Ph.D. A Fellow of the American Physical Society and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, he has served as Co-Director of the Columbia Radiation Laboratory, Director of Energy Research in the U.S. Department of Energy, Chairman of the Steering Committee of JASON, Co-Founder of Magnetic Imaging Technologies Inc., Founder and first President of the CO2 Coalition, and Deputy to the President and first Senior Director of Emerging Technologies at the National Security Council. He is the recipient of the Alexander von Humboldt Award, Broida Prize, Davisson-Germer Prize from the American Physical Society, and Thomas Alva Edison Patent Award. https://www.independent.org/aboutus/p…
The Independent Institute is a non-profit, non-partisan, public-policy research and educational organization that shapes ideas into profound and lasting impact through publications, conferences, and multi-media programs. Our mission is to boldly advance peaceful, prosperous, and free societies grounded in a commitment to human worth and dignity.
“Hot Talk, Cold Science: Global Warming’s Unfinished Debate,” Third Revised and Expanded Edition, by S. Fred Singer with David R. Legates and Anthony R. Lupo, with forewords by Frederick Seitz and William Happer “Nature Unbound: Bureaucracy vs. the Environment,” by Randy Simmons, Ryan M. Yonk and Kenneth J. Sim https://www.independent.org/store/boo…
“Electric Choices: Deregulation and the Future of Electric Power,” edited by Andrew N. Kleit, with a foreword by Pat Wood III https://www.independent.org/store/boo…
Our world is run by oligarchs, the holders of vast wealth from monopolies in banking, resource extraction, manufacturing, and technology. Oligarchs have such power that most of the world doesn’t even know of their influence over our lives. Their overall agenda is global power — a world government, run by them — to be achieved through planned steps of social engineering. The oligarchs remain in the background and have heads of state and entire governments acting in their service. Presidents and prime ministers are their puppets. Bureaucrats and politicians are their factotums.
Who are politicians? Politicians are people who work for the powerful while pretending to represent the people who voted for them. This double-dealing involves a lot of lying, so successful politicians must be good at it. It’s not an easy job to make the insane agenda of the powerful seem reasonable. Politicians can’t reveal this agenda because it almost always goes against the interests of their constituents, so they become adept at sophistry, mystification, and the appearance of authority. For example, wars for Israel have been part of the agenda of the powerful for years. Since 2001, wars for Israel have been sold as “the war on terror” and lots of lies had to be made up as to why the war on terror was a real thing. The visible faces promoting the war on terror were neoconservatives in the US, almost all of whom were advocates for Israel, or Zionists. Zionists are not the only members of the oligarchy, but they seem to be its lead actors. ... continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.