A bit over half a century ago, the United States under the Nixon administration sent its then-State Secretary Henry Kissinger to China in order to exploit the infamous Sino-Soviet split that nearly escalated into a full-blown war between Moscow and Beijing. The “cold war” between the two previously closely allied communist powers was a strategic gift to the US-led political West, as the belligerent thalassocracy was terrified of the prospect of facing a giant Eurasian monolith spanning from East Germany to Vietnam. The brewing ideological conflict between the post-Stalinist Soviet Union and Maoist China was heavily (ab)used by the US to somewhat soften the consequences of the humiliating defeat of America’s genocidal aggression in Indochina, where millions were killed in its indiscriminate attacks on Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
Henry Kissinger is often credited as the instrumental figure in engineering the Sino-American detente that gave the US much-needed geopolitical breathing room in the late 1970s and much of the 1980s after the belligerent thalassocracy pulled back to “lick its Vietnam wounds”. However, it should be noted that, despite Kissinger’s vast diplomatic experience and knowledge, the very fact that the early 1970s China was still largely isolationist, as well as in the process of recovering from the consequences of WWII and the Cultural Revolution, made his efforts significantly easier. Still, thanks to Kissinger, the Nixon administration achieved a major diplomatic win that lasted until the very end of the Cold War and was completely nullified only by the recent suicidal US foreign policy.
Back in the 1970s, it would’ve been almost entirely unimaginable that Henry Kissinger, quite literally a historical figure at this point, not only due to his Cold War-era achievements, but also his advanced age (now in triple digits), would have to engage in his “shuttle” and “triangular diplomacy” concepts once again. However, precisely this happened last week, culminating with Kissinger’s meeting with Xi Jinping himself on July 20. The Chinese President even called the centenarian “an old friend of China”. Owing to the Asian giant’s great attention to detail, particularly when it comes to diplomatic protocols, the meeting was held at the Villa 5 of the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, the exact same place where Kissinger met the then-Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in 1971.
Precisely that meeting was instrumental in preparing Richard Nixon’s visit to China the next year. However, that’s where the historical parallels end. Despite the reputation, influence and respect that he enjoys in China and worldwide, Kissinger went to Beijing in an unofficial capacity. Not representing the US anymore, he was largely relieved of the burden and responsibility for America’s diplomatic standing in China, a far cry from what it used to be during the (First) Cold War. The situation has changed drastically since Kissinger’s tenure, as the Asian giant is anything but a poor, underdeveloped nation with major ideological identity issues that could be exploited to further US interests. On the contrary, precisely Washington DC is the side that’s been going through major internal issues and waning global influence.
Although the Joe Biden administration and much of the major media contend that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has nothing to do with NATO expansion, U.S. Army Col. Douglas Macgregor (ret.) told Valuetainment Founder Patrick Bet-David that Vladimir Putin has opposed “the movement of NATO to his borders” for “at least 15 years” because he sees such expansion “as a threat.”
Macgregor’s view is shared by the University of Chicago’s Distinguished Service Professor John Mearsheimer, considered one the world’s leading scholars on “realist” foreign policy. He argues that Russia considers NATO expansion into Ukraine as an “existential threat,” a position it has publicly held since at least 2008.
Yet U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken says the conflict “was never about NATO enlargement” or “about some threat to Russia’s security.” Blinken also claims that Russia’s assertion that it was promised NATO would not spread eastward after the collapse of the USSR is false.
So who is telling the truth? Let’s look at the record.
On Bet-David’s June 28 PBD Podcast, Macgregor explained that Putin has “been talking at least for 15 years about his opposition to the movement of NATO to his borders. He’s made it very clear that he regarded it as a threat. One of the reasons he moved into Crimea was that he saw that becoming a NATO naval base principally for the U.S. Navy, obviously in the Black Sea. So, he moved on that first and then said, look, this has got to stop.”
Declassified documents in the National Security Archive at George Washington University show that former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, starting in 1990, was given many assurances by U.S. and European leaders that they would not expand NATO eastward to Russia. “Not one inch eastward,” said then-Secretary of State James Baker.
Ukraine, the cradle of Kievan Rus (Russia), is on Russia’s western border, and western Ukraine borders Poland, Hungary, and Romania.
The archives document that one of the earliest assurances to Gorbachev came from a speech by the German foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, in January 1990. In a cable to Washington, DC, the U.S. Embassy stated that Genscher made clear that NATO should rule out an “expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e., moving it closer to Soviet borders.”
In a February 10, 1990 meeting between German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Gorbachev, the archive reports that the “West German leader achieved Soviet assent in principle to German unification in NATO, as long as NATO did not expand to the east.”
The archive further states, “Not once, but three times, [U.S. Secretary] Baker tried out the ‘not one inch eastward’ formula with Gorbachev…He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that ‘NATO expansion is unacceptable.’”
Baker also assured Gorbachev that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” [Emphasis added]
After being briefed by Baker, Chancellor Kohl told Gorbachev, “We believe that NATO should not expand the sphere of its activity.”
On May 31, 1990, President George H.W. Bush said to Gorbachev, “[W]e have no intention, even in our thoughts, to harm the Soviet Union in any fashion. That is why we are speaking in favor of German unification in NATO…Such a model, in our view, corresponds to the Soviet interests as well.”
In 1991, British Prime Minister John Major assured Gorbachev, “We are not talking about the strengthening of NATO.” As for NATO inclusion of East European countries, Major said, “Nothing of the sort will happen.”
After a meeting in July 1991 with NATO Secretary General Manfred Woerner, a Russian memo reads, “Woerner stressed that the NATO Council and he are against the expansion of NATO (13 of 16 NATO members support this point of view).”
The archive article concluded, “Thus, Gorbachev went to the end of the Soviet Union assured that the West was not threatening his security and was not expanding NATO.”
After Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin became the first president of the Russian Federation, serving from 1991 to 1999. Vladimir Putin became president in May 2000, serving until 2008. He then returned to the presidency in 2012.
According to Professor Mearsheimer, author of “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin,” “Since the mid-1990s, Russian leaders have adamantly opposed NATO enlargement and in recent years, they have made it clear that they would not stand by while their strategically important neighbor turned into a Western bastion.”
“For Putin, the illegal overthrow [in 2014] of Ukraine’s democratically elected and pro-Russian president—which he rightly labeled a ‘coup—was the final straw,” said Mearsheimer. “He responded by taking Crimea, a peninsula he feared would host a NATO naval base, and working to destabilize Ukraine until it abandoned its efforts to join the West.”
“The United States pushed forward policies towards Ukraine that Putin and his colleagues see as an existential threat to their country, a point they have made repeatedly for many years,” Mearsheimer said in a June 2022 speech at the European Union Institute. “Specifically, I am talking about America’s obsession with bringing Ukraine into NATO and making it a Western bulwark on Russia’s border.”
“The United States is not seriously interested in finding a diplomatic solution to the war, which means the war is likely to drag on for months, if not years,” added Mearsheimer. “The United States and its allies are helping lead Ukraine down the primrose path.”
Mearsheimer made those remarks one year ago. Today, the Ukraine-Russia war is still ongoing and the U.S. has made no serious effort to broker a peace deal.
President Biden, Secretary Blinken, and their cheerleaders in the major media relentlessly deny that potential NATO expansion into Ukraine had anything to do with Russia’s invasion in 2022. Such an assertion, they claim, is Putin propaganda. However, the historical record does not support their story, “not one inch” of it.
Michael W. Chapman, a longtime writer on Russian-American relations, is the former managing editor of CNSNews.com
The six months after the United States declared war on Japan in December 1941 were disastrous. Political treachery and military incompetence led to a series of major military defeats despite years of preparation. Official American history portrays President Franklin Roosevelt and his team of Admirals and Generals as great professionals. Actual history proves they were incompetent clowns who caused embarrassing defeats that the American media covered up. Most of this history remains hidden to this day, especially in school and college textbooks.
_______________________________
HIGHLIGHTS OF MOBILIZATION, WORLD WAR II, 1938-1942; Office of the Chief of Military History; Department of the Army; Dr. Stetson Conn; 10 March 1959; https://history.army.mil/documents/WW…
Related Tale: “The Attack on Pearl Harbor Was No Surprise”; also watch Part II; • The Attack on Pea…
Related Tale: “U-boats Slaughtered Americans in 1942”; defenses did not exist; • U-boats Slaughter…
Related Tale: “The Lost Victory on Wake Island”; cowardly Admiral Pye withdraws three carriers; • The Lost Victory …
Related Tale: “The Empire’s Disastrous Defeat in 1942”; MacArthur’s rapid defeat in the Philippines; • The American Empi…
Related Tale: “Treachery of US Army Generals in World War II”; treason and incompetence in the Philippines; • Treachery by US A…
Related Tale: “The Destruction of the Asiatic Fleet”; twenty American warships were sunk in a disorganized defensive effort; • The Destruction o…
Related Tale: “World War II Suicide Missions”; The Doolittle Raid failed; • World War II Suic…
I sit here in the silence of the awakening dawn’s stillness stunned by the realization that I exist. I wonder why. It is my birthday. The first rays of the rising sun bleed crimson over the eastern hills as I imagine my birth. The house and my family sleep.
Someday I will die and I wonder why. This is the mystery I have been contemplating since I was young. That and the fact that I was born in a time of war and that when my parents and sisters were celebrating my first birthday, my country’s esteemed civilian and military leaders celebrated another birth: the detonation of the first atomic bomb code-named Trinity.
Trinity has shadowed my life, while the other Trinity has enkindled my days.
Sick minds play sick word games as they inflict pain and death. They nicknamed this death bomb “the Gadget,” as if it were an innocent little toy. They took and blasphemed the Christian mystery of the Trinity as if they were mocking God, which they were. They thought they were gods.
Now they are all dead gods, their fates sealed in their tombs.
Where are they now?
Where are all their victims, the innocent dead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Where are the just and the unjust?
Where are the living now, asleep or awake as Trinity’s progenitors in Washington, D.C. and the Pentagon prepare their doomsday machines for a rerun, the final first-strike run, the last lap in their race to annihilate all the living? Will they sing as they launch the missiles – “So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, good night?”
Joseph Biden, the second Roman Catholic president, while mocking the essence of Jesus’s message, pushes the world toward a nuclear holocaust, unlike JFK, the first Catholic president, who was assassinated by the CIA for pushing for the elimination of nuclear weapons and the end of the Cold War.
The wheel turns. We count the years. We wonder why.
Years ago I started my academic life by writing a thesis entitled “Dealing With Death or Death Dealing.” It was a study of the transformation of cultural symbol systems, death, and nuclear weapons. The last hundred years and more have brought a transformation and disintegration of the traditional religious symbol system – the sacred canopy – that once gave people comfort, meaning, and hope. Science, technology, and nuclear weapons have changed all that. Death has been socially relocated and we live under the nuclear umbrella, a sinister “safeguard” that is cold comfort. The ultimate power of death over all life has been transferred from God to men, those controlling the nuclear weapons. This subject has never left me. I suppose it has haunted me. It is not a jolly subject, but I think it has chosen me.
Was I born in a normal time? Is war time our normal time? It is. I was.
But to be born at a time and place when your country’s leaders were denouncing their German and Japanese enemies as savage war criminals while execrably emulating them and then outdoing them is something else again. With Operation Paperclip following World War II, the United States government secretly brought 1,600 or more Nazi war criminals into the U.S. to run our government’s military, intelligence, space, chemical, and biological warfare programs. We became Nazis. Lewis Mumford put it this way in The Pentagon of Power:
By the curious dialectic of history, Hitler’s enlargement and the refurbishment of the Nazi megamachine gave rise to the conditions for creating those counter-instruments that would conquer it and temporarily wreck it. In short, in the very act of dying the Nazis transmitted their disease to their American opponents; not only the methods of compulsive organization or physical destruction, but the moral corruption that made it feasible to employ those methods without stirring opposition.
There are always excuses for such moral corruption. When during WW II the U.S. firebombed almost all Japanese cities, Dresden and Cologne in Germany, and then dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in gratuitously savage attacks, these were justified and even celebrated as necessary to defeat evil enemies. Just as Nazi war criminals were welcomed into the U.S. government under the aegis of Allen Dulles who became the longest running CIA director and the key to JFK’s assassination and coverup, the diabolic war crimes of the U.S. were swept away as acts of a moral nation fighting a good war. What has followed are decades of U.S. war crimes from Korea through Vietnam and Iraq, etc. A very long list.
The English dramatist Harold Pinter, in his Nobel Address, put it bluntly:
It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.
Nothing could be truer. When in 2014 the U.S. engineered the coup in Ukraine (coups being an American specialty), it allied itself with neo-Nazi forces to oppose Russia. This alliance should have shocked no one; it is the American way. Back in the 1980s when the U.S. was supporting death squads in Central America, Ronald Reagan told the world that “The Contras are the moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers.” Now the Ukrainian president Zelensky is feted as a great hero, Biden telling him in an Oval Office visit that “it’s an honor to be by your side.” Such alliances are not anomalies but the crude reality of U. S. history.
But let me return to “Trinity,” the ultimate weapon of mass destruction since I was reading a recent article about it.
Kai Bird, the coauthor of American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the book that inspired the new film Oppenheimer about J. Robert Oppenheimer, the scientist credited as “the father of the atomic bomb” and the man who named the first atomic bomb Trinity, has written an Op Ed piece in The New York Times titled, “The Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer.” True in certain respects, this article is an example of how history can be slyly used to distort the present for political purposes. In typical NY Times fashion, Bird tells certain truths while concealing, distorting, and falsifying others.
I do not consider Oppenheimer a tragic figure, as does Bird. Complicated, yes; but he was essentially a hubristic scientist who lent his services to a demonic project, and afterwards, having let the cat out of the bag by creating the Bomb, guiltily urged the government that used it in massive war crimes to restrain itself in the future. Asking for such self-regulation is as absurd as asking the pharmaceutical or big tech industries to regulate themselves.
Bird rightly says that Oppenheimer did not regret his work inventing the atomic bomb, and he correctly points out the injustice of his being maligned and stripped of his security clearance in 1954 in a secret hearing by a vote of 2 to 1 of a security panel of The Atomic Energy Commission for having communist associations. “Celebrated in 1945 as the ‘father of the atomic bomb,’” Bird writes, “nine years later he would become the chief celebrity victim of the McCarthyite maelstrom.” A “victim,” I should add, who named names to save his own reputation.
But tucked within his article, Bird tells us: “Just look at what happened to our public health civil servants during the recent pandemic.” By which he means these officials like Anthony Fauci were maligned when they gave the public correct scientific information. This is absurd. Fauci – “attacks on me quite frankly are attacks on science” – and other government “civil servants” misinformed the public and lied over and over again, but Bird implies they too were tragic figures like Oppenheimer.
He writes:
We stand on the cusp of another technological revolution in which artificial intelligence will transform how we live and work, and yet we are not yet having the kind of informed civil discourse with its innovators that could help us to make wise policy decisions on its regulation. Our politicians need to listen more to technology innovators like Sam Altman and quantum physicists like Kip Thorne and Michio Kaku.
Here too he urges “us” to listen to the very people responsible for Artificial Intelligence, just as “we” should have listened to Oppenheimer after he brought us the atomic bomb. Implicit here is the belief that science just marches progressively on and there’s no stopping it, and when dangerous technologies emerge from scientists’ work, we should trust them to control them. Nowhere does Bird suggest that scientists have a moral obligation before the fact to not pursue a certain line of research because of its grave possible consequences. Maybe he has never read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, only written over two hundred years ago.
Finally, and most importantly, Bird begins his concluding paragraph with these words:
Today, Vladimir Putin’s not-so-veiled threats to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine are a stark reminder that we can never be complacent about living with nuclear weapons.
This is simply U.S. propaganda. The U.S. has provoked and fueled the war in Ukraine, broken all nuclear weapon treaties, surrounded Russia with military bases, stationed nuclear weapons in Europe, engaged in nuclear blackmail with its first strike policy and threats, etc. Putin has said in response that if – and only if – the very existence of the Russian state and land is threatened with extinction would the use of nuclear weapons be considered.
A little history is informative.
“Barely six weeks after the Hiroshima-Nagsaki bombings,” Michel Chossudovsky tells us, “the US War Department [Pentagon] issued a blueprint (September 15, 1945) to ‘Wipe the Soviet Union off the Map’(66 cities with 204 atomic bombs), when the US and the USSR were allies. This infamous project is confirmed by declassified documents.” (For further details see Chossudovsky, 2017)
Below is the image of the 66 cities of the Soviet Union which had been envisaged as targets by the US War Department.
But back to Bird, who, in writing a piece about Oppenheimer’s “tragedy” and defending science, has also subtly defended a trinity of other matters: the government “science” on Covid, the transformative power coming from AI, and the U.S. propaganda about Russia and nuclear weapons. There is no mention of JFK’s call to abolish nuclear weapons. This is how the “paper of record” does its job.
I sit here now at the end of the day. Shadows are falling and I contemplate such trinities. I am stunned by the fact that we exist, but under a terrifying Shadow that many wish to ignore. Jung saw this shadow side as not just personal but social, and when it is ignored, the collective evils of modern societies can autonomously erupt.
Bird argues that nuclear weapons are the result of a scientific quest that is unstoppable. He writes that Oppenheimer “understood that you cannot stop curious human beings from discovering the physical world around them [and then making nuclear bombs or designer babies].”
This is the ideology of progress that brooks no opposition since it is declared inevitable. It is a philosophy that believes there should be no limits to human knowledge, which would include the knowledge of good and evil, but which can then be ignored since it and all thought and beliefs are considered a priori to be relative. The modern premise that everything is relative is of course a contradiction since it is an absolute statement. Many share this philosophy of despair disguised as progress as it has crept into everything today. It is tragic, for if people accept it, we are doomed to follow a Faustian pact with the devil and all hell will follow.
I think of Bob Dylan singing :
I just don’t see why I should even care
It’s not dark yet, but it’s gettin’ there
But I do care, and I wonder why. As night comes on, I sit here and wonder.
To say that RFK Jr. goes out of his way to avoid offending Jews would be an understatement. He presents himself as the world’s biggest friend of the Jewish people in general and the Jewish (supremacist) state of Israel in particular.
The first mainstream article that covered RFK’s presidential run with a positive spin was David Samuels’s piece in the Jewish magazine Tablet. But since then there hasn’t exactly been a groundswell of Kennedy support in the mainstream Jewish community. Aside from free-thinking outliers like Naomi Wolf and some of my radio guests (Josh Mitteldorf, Barry Kissin, Steve Brown, Ron Rattner) it seems that most of American Jewry, or at least its media wing, views RFK Jr.’s candidacy with trepidation.
That trepidation metamorphosed into hysterical denunciation last week, when the candidate’s off-the-record dinner-table remarks about ethnic-specific bioweapons and COVID-19 triggered the biggest two-minute anti-Semitism media hatefest since Kanye West went defcon 3. The New York Post broke the story with a lying headline: “RFK Jr. says COVID was ‘ethnically targeted’ to spare Jews.” What Kennedy actually said, in informal conversation, was:
COVID-19. There is an argument that it is ethnically targeted. COVID-19 attacks certain races disproportionately. COVID-19 is targeted to attack Caucasians and black people. The people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese…We don’t know whether it was deliberately targeted or not but there are papers out there that show the racial or ethnic differential and impact.”
The candidate could be fairly accused of hyperbole: The study he was citing did not indicate how disproportionally COVID affected different ethnicities, but only analyzed one genetic factor, which may or may not have had much real-world effect. But that study does say pretty much what RFK says it does. What it does not say, and what RFK Jr. did not say, is that COVID was a Jewish-Chinese bioweapon designed to kill white and black people.
But you wouldn’t know that from the media coverage. Nor would you know it from remarks of Congressional reps like Debbie Wasserman Schulz, who tried to censor Kennedy’s anti-censorship testimony, saying “Mr. Kennedy has repeatedly made despicable antisemitic and anti-Asian comments.”
The witch hunt, of course, was unsurprising. What was surprising was that RFK Jr. would say something that was begging to be misinterpreted as “anti-Semitic.” This is the guy, after all, who presents himself as the most pro-Jewish, pro-Israel candidate in the known universe. Why would he even bring up the “ethnic targeting” study, much less exaggerate it in such a way as to practically force the ADL and its friends to accuse him of blaming COVID on the Jews?
Some RFK supporters might wonder if their hero, like Trump before him, is playing 3D chess. Maybe RFK knows full well who really killed his father and uncle. In that case, his exaggerated philosemitic pro-Israel schtick would be a ruse. Like his father before him, who kept publicly quiet about the murder of his brother JFK in hopes of winning the presidency and undoing the coup, RFK Jr. could be blowing (pro-Zionist) smoke to camouflage the reality of his mission. Could he have deliberately provoked the hysterical attacks in order to garner free publicity and let the media and political establishment further discredit itself—the sort of thing that Trump has made a political career out of?
All things considered, the 3D chess scenario is unlikely. RFK is considerably smarter than Trump, but he is less manipulative. Unlike Trump, RFK is sincere. He is the what-you-see-is-what-you-get candidate. I don’t think he’s lying or being manipulative when he professes undying love for Israel, hatred for Nazi Germany, and concern about COVID affecting ethnicities differently in light of what we know about ethnic-specific bioweapon research.
But the question remains: Why is Kennedy so irrationally extremist in his support for Israel? And why did he intemperately exaggerate the COVID-ethnicity study in such a way as to invite attacks? Both his rabidly Likudnik Zionism and his ill-considered “anti-Semitic” bioweapon speculation seem, shall we say, immoderate, if not a little unhinged.
So let’s put RFK Jr. on Dr. Freud’s proverbial couch. Freud coined the term reaction formation: “a defense mechanism in which people express the opposite of their true feelings, sometimes to an exaggerated extent. For instance, a man who feels insecure about his masculinity might act overly aggressive. Or a woman with substance use disorder may extol the virtues of abstinence.” In many cases, the subjects are not even consciously aware of their true feelings. The peacenik who is so bellicose in his pacifism that he is always starting fights—I have known several—is generally unaware that his real motivation is not dedication to peace, but smoldering inner aggression. And then there are the greedy, ambitious, competitive, materialistic people who adopt leftist politics to conceal their real feelings about money and status. I’ve known more than a few of those too. And don’t get me started about the ranting anti-global-warming fanatics who seem to think their bloviations will save the world while your skepticism will destroy it, even as their excessively comfortable lifestyles emit far more carbon in week than you do in a month.
So reaction formations are quite common, and often a big driver of people’s political views. RFK Jr.’s grossly exaggerated, seemingly irrational pro-Israel extremism has all the hallmarks of a classic reaction formation. If such is the case, Kennedy would be hiding his repressed hostility to the Jewish state not only from others, but also from himself.
But why would Kennedy hate Israel, yet remain in deep denial of his real feelings? For the same reason that Hamlet hated his stepfather Claudius but couldn’t bring himself to act. Israel killed Kennedy’s father, just like Claudius killed Hamlet’s. But just as Hamlet grew up in Claudius’s household, vulnerable to Claudius’s despotic power, RFK Jr. grew up in post-Zionist-coup America, helpless and defenseless. Vulnerable people in the household of an abuser, especially children, have a tendency to engage in identification with the aggressor: “an unconscious mechanism in which an individual identifies with someone who poses a threat or with an opponent who cannot be mastered.” From RFK Jr.’s perspective, that would be the Zionists. He totally identifies with them, even with their most disgustingly vulgar mediocrities like Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, and hyperbolically deems himself the biggest Zionist of all.
But What About the Blurt-Out?
If a reaction formation explains RFK’s ultra-Zionism, then what explains his COVID-targeted-to-spare-Jews blurt-out? Paging Dr. Freud again!
Actually, you don’t really need serious psychoanalytic chops to figure this one out. RFK’s repressed, unconscious hostility to Zionists, kept under wraps by his hyper-Zionist reaction formation, found a way of expressing itself. So although RFK was never consciously aware that what he was saying sounded a whole lot like “COVID was targeted to spare the Jews,” his unconscious mind was all-too-aware, and indeed put those equivocal words right into his mouth.
Like the classic Freudian slip, this kind of blurt-out scenario illustrates how the unconscious mind can occasionally short-circuit the conscious mind and speak unspeakable truths. Translation: “Outrageous Jewish anti-goy conspiracies are not always imaginary.” So the paranoid reaction of people like Debby Wasserman Schulz is not quite as crazy as it sounds: Debby’s unconscious is getting the gist of what Bobby’s unconscious is saying, and she doesn’t like it.
Intergenerational Trauma
The psychiatric symptoms on both sides stem from deeply-rooted intergenerational trauma. RFK Jr., of course, grew up with the trauma of his president-uncle’s dastardly murder in 1963, and his father’s equally dastardly murder (presumably by the same parties) in 1968. A modern-day Hamlet, he spent his formative years under tremendous social pressure to refrain from challenging his fathers’ and uncles’ murderers. We could also speculate about the Kennedy family’s roots in the holocausted earth of Ireland—the Irish have suffered real genocide and persecution to more than rival the Jews’ mostly-mythical suffering at the hands of alleged anti-Semites who supposedly hate them for no reason whatsoever—but let’s not go there, lest some of my less-enlightened readers start succumbing to Irish Holocaust denial.
On Wasserman-Schulz’s side, the intergenerational trauma is apparently so horrific that it can only be cured by psychedelic drugs. In “Can We Cure Anti-Semitism with Molly?” the Jewish Daily Forward’s senior editor Rob Eshman opens with a question:
“If you learned that a single pill had led a neo-Nazi to renounce his hateful beliefs, would you:
Demand more research to find out if the pill really works
Ignore existing evidence and continue to outlaw the pill?
Eshman notes that Israel, the world’s MDMA capital, uses the “love drug” to treat PTSD. We may imagine that child-murdering IDF snipers like the “I shot 13 kids today” tweeter are gradually eased back into what passes for Israeli normalcy with the help of psychedelic sessions that rewire their brains for love (of fellow Zionist Jews at least) instead of drooling 24/7/365 hatred of Palestinian kids (“little snakes”) and the mothers who bear them.
But can MDMA cure Zionist Jewry of its 3000-year-old collective case of PTSD? To answer that question, we would need to know whether individual Jews really suffer the pain experienced by their persecuted ancestors. Scientists are working hard to convince us that they do.
An alternative explanation of why so many ultra-privileged Jews experience so much suffering from historical collective memories blames culture, not genetics. The film Defamation memorably shows Israeli children being horrifically traumatized by their elders, who drum it into their impressionable little heads that the goys all want to exterminate them.
And speaking of Jews traumatizing Jews, what about infant circumcision? Paging Dr. Bowlby!
Attachment studies have shown that very young children—babies, really—are extremely vulnerable to psychological trauma. A terrible experience at eight months of age or even earlier is likely to ruin your life in a way that a vastly worse experience at a later age might not. Traumatic experiences involving damage to the mother-child bond, in particular, seem to be responsible for much if not most of the world’s misery. (Moral: To form a happy and peaceful person, keep the baby in skin-to-skin contact with the mother, and breastfeed on demand, for the first two years of life, as many traditional cultures do.)
What you do NOT want to do is rip the baby out of the mother’s arms and inflict unspeakable torture by carving up the most sensitive part of its anatomy with a knife. This will wreck the mother-child bond due to the mother’s perceived betrayal of her child (and create overcompensation in the form of the Jewish mother syndrome) while forming an unconscious memory of a horrific attack by a terrifying outsider. Later in life, the child will be culturally conditioned to transfer its fear and loathing onto the imaginary figure of a new terrifying outsider: the evil goy who wants to kill us. It’s the perfect formula for creating a profoundly neurotic, powerfully ethnocentric group identity.
So to summarize: RFK Jr.’s dysfunctional relationship with Zionism—which stems from the willingness of traumatized Zionists like Ben Gurion to commit outrageous crimes in order to preserve the nuclear weapons they imagine they need to save their lives from the evil Jew-hating goys—is a complete mess. I doubt that even the best therapist, armed with all the MDMA in Israel, could effect a cure.
Because the COVID-19 vaccines load the body with the genetic code for the thrombogenic and lethal Wuhan Spike protein, those who take a vaccine are vulnerable to a catastrophe if they get infected with SARS-CoV-2 after recently taking one of the shots.
Nahab and coworkers from Emory analyzed a statewide database of COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Approximately 5 million adult Georgians received at least one COVID-19 vaccine between December 2020 and March 2022: 54% received BNT162b2, 41% received mRNA-1273, and 5% received Ad26.COV2.S. Those with concurrent COVID-19 infection within 21 days post-vaccination had an increased risk of ischemic (OR = 8.00, 95% CI: 4.18, 15.31) and hemorrhagic stroke (OR =5.23, 95% CI: 1.11, 24.64).
This analysis shows one of many great dangers present in rapid vaccine development and rollout without sufficient data safety and monitoring. Stroke is a devastating outcome and it appears that a large number of debilitating cases could have been avoided if the COVID-19 vaccines were taken off the market in January, 2021 for excess mortality. The patients in this study would have been spared stroke and disability.
These data highlight the need for Spike protein detoxification, in other words, methods to reduce the burden of Spike protein within the body. We have a widely anticipated manuscript in press featuring an ambulatory triple combination regimen of nattokinase, bromelain, and curcumin which works proteolytically clear Spike while providing a low level of thrombolysis and control over inflammation.
It is quite difficult to believe that the actuality included really did come from 2021, and was not compiled from footage from 1938. Nor is it (except for a short clip with John Hurt from the film 1984) from a film based on fiction. What I saw were not actors but politicians, public servants, broadcasters and the public. And yes, these people – Esther Rantzen, Iain Dale, Tony Blair, Edwina Currie, Boris Johnson, Nick Ferrari, Jonathan Van-Tam, Jeremy Vine and Andrew Neil – really did say and write these things.
What on earth made them so certain, so bombastically sure, so early on? What gave them the right to inflict fear on the nation? Such craven irresponsibility. In the age of ‘safetyism’, was there a risk assessment relating to the forcing of an untested chemical on people before they so firmly exhorted getting jabbed? One wonders if they took legal advice – what might happen if somebody issues a writ against LBC, the station Nick Ferrari broadcasts on, claiming damages for the death of a spouse courtesy of the jab, or against ITV – ‘My wife went to get the jab after Piers Morgan said she’d be a murderer and a social leper if she didn’t’?
Nothing will happen, because it was government policy, and because the courts are hobbled. We don’t know if these people genuinely believed in what they said, or whether they or their employers were in receipt of ‘sponsorship’ – either government or corporate – that demanded a certain line to take. What we do know for certain is that the government spent more than £800million on ‘advertising’ 2020-22, and that the Cabinet Office alone spent £586million in that period. An analysis published on TCW following a series of Freedom of Information requests found the government blitz totalled a billion pounds. Exactly how it was spent is set out in this article, one of the main beneficiaries being the media-buying company Manning Gottlieb, which managed 88 per cent of the government’s advertising spend. That the sum was several times more than the combined advertising spend of £196million by four major departments – Health, Education, Transport, Work & Pensions – should concern us all. Why was this very small arm of government able to spend such a colossal sum?
Whether paid or not Blair, Rantzen, Dale, Morgan, Ferrari and the rest engaged themselves to parrot a script prepared by an arm of our government, using their well-known personas to deliver a policy of fear while threatening the worst of sanctions against the non-compliant without any legal basis or democratic mandate. All done under emergency powers that were fraudulently invoked.
These characters dismissed our humanity, our individuality, our ability to reason for ourselves, and appointed themselves as infallible arbiters of scientific and societal matters. Anything that did not adopt their narrative was labelled ‘disinformation’. It mattered not if alternative views came from Nobel Prize-winning scientists and/or the most significant professors in various fields of medicine. Anything that the ‘commissar’ had not approved for broadcast was censored, scorned and condemned. It is still going on.
How the individuals involved have remained credible and accepted in our public discourse is both puzzling and worrying. How they can live with themselves is similarly baffling. They wilfully participated in frightening, threatening and discriminating against people, in at least some cases for money.
Will the ‘Covid Inquiry’ be touching upon this obscene behaviour?
I am left feeling buoyed by my own fortitude and powers of discernment in resisting it; but also pretty hollow at the thought that this filthy propaganda was prepared and broadcast in my country.
Propagandist Joseph Goebbels was (rightly or wrongly) credited with making famous the “Big Lie”. That of repeating a lie often enough until it is accepted as truth. Such is the case with the origins of Covid-19.
For three years Americans have been repeatedly reminded by mainstream press reports, as well as independent news websites and bloggers, that Covid originated in Wuhan, China. Over and over again we were told that “It was a lab leak in Wuhan!” or “Covid came from a bat sold at a wet market in Wuhan” or “The Chinese government grounded all flights but those to the United States, proof that the Chinese government created Covid” etc, etc. But if we follow the money trail and paper trail we can unravel the true history behind the origins of Covid-19. And if we do, we may arrive at only one conclusion. That Covid-19 was MADE IN AMERICA!
We begin by searching the patent records of the CDC and Big Pharma. Investigative reporting by Dr. David Martin, CEO of MCAM, an intangible assets underwriter company, turned up patent evidence showing that SARS CoV2 was not a manifestation in nature. It was manufactured as early as 2003 by the CDC. And the patent application for the mRNA countermeasure was submitted only three days later!
CDC’s patent application No. 7220852 was submitted on April 25, 2003.
Pharmaceutical Company Sanofi submitted its patent application for the mRNA countermeasure on April 28, 2003, patent No. 7151163, was submitted only three days later. How could that be unless there was collusion between the CDC and Sanofi? Dr. Martin described it as a RICO case of racketeering. Sanofi was later purchased by Pfizer and the mRNA was never approved because it didn’t meet the requirements of the US Patent Office.
Dr. Martin’s findings revealed that the flu virus never left even though CDC reported a 95% reduction in reported flu cases. What happened to the flu? According to Dr. Martin, “Influenza was a failed decades-long influenza mandate that was desperately promoted by governments around the world. But they failed to get a response similar to the response to SARS CoV2 they had hoped for. Which was to get everybody injected against the flu. So they said, “let’s change the pathogen”. They can do this again a thousand times now that populations have responded the way they were induced to respond. Call it flu Pandemic 2.0, but now we are on to them, said Dr. Martin.
In 2008, CDC’s SARS CoV2 patent 7220852 was approved. But Sanofi now Pfizer saw its patent for the mRNA turned down. This was also the year the DoD took an interest in the SARS virus as a potential bioweapon.
The paper trail of US funding for Gain-of-Function research into creating a bioweapon under DoD’s category of “COMBATING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION” begins almost 15 years ago.
If we look at the Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Grants we find when the Department of Defense began issuing grants to ECO-HEALTH ALLIANCE. Eco-Health is owned by Veterinarian, Peter Daszik.
Peter Daszak and Eco-Health Alliance are intertwined with all the players involved in this crime. The DoD, NIH, Fauci’s NIAID, UNC-Chapel Hill, the Wuhan Lab et al. The gain-of-function development of Covid-19 as a bioweapon that went on for almost two decades has Peter Daszak and Anthony Fauci’s names all over it.
Grants Awarded by the Department of Defense to Eco-Health Alliance pertaining to research on Covid-19 bioweapon.
2013… 2014… 2015 Award id HDTRA113C0029 issued in the Amts of $1,371,611.00 $957,145.00 and $103,622.00
2015… 2016 Award id HDTRA115C0041 issued in the Amts of $2,217,037.00 and $2,262.641.00. Both of these payments came under CFDA No. 12.351. Scientific Research – Combating WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
2014… 2015… 2016… 2017… 2018 Award id HDTRA11410029 in the Amts of $992,699.00, $978,784.00, $970,536.00, $996,147.00 and $998,193.00.
2020 Award id HDTRA12010016 in the Amt of $4,912,818.00.
2017… 2018… 2019… 2020 Award id HDTRA11710064 in the Amts of $782,330.00, $2,203,917.00, $1,995,247.00, and $1,509,531.00.
2020 Award id HDTRA12010018 in the Amt of $4,995,106.00
Eco-Health also received grants from the Uniform Services University of the Health Sciences (DoD). This university laboratory is located in Melbourne, Florida under the direction of Dr. Christopher Broder who specializes in infectious diseases.
2020 Award ID HU00012010031 Amt. $1,360,002.00.
2020 Award id HDTRA12010029 Amt. $2,956.309.
Eco-Health was acting as if it were a de facto proprietary of the DoD. But Eco-Health also received millions from the Dept of Health and Human Services HHS, the National Institute of Health, and Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIAID. From 2008 to 2020 Peter Daszak’s Eco-Health Alliance received $11,862,575 from these three institutions.
The National Science Foundation also contributed to Eco-Health awarding approximately $1,794,179, between 2010 and 2014.
USAID, known for its proprietary relationship to the CIA, awarded Eco-Health two awards in 2013 and 2016. Both awards came under ID AID486A1300005. The first award was for $1,999,203.00 in 2013, and $499,944.00 in 2016.
DHS awarded $2.2 million to Eco-Health Alliance, id 70RSAT18CB0031001 from 2017 to 2019.
Peter Daszak partnered with Anthony Fauci to facilitate the development of the coronavirus and to an even greater degree the mRNA. Because that too was how the money would come from the government. In 2017 Daszak explained it to a medical science magazine this way, “We need to increase public understanding of the need for a medical countermeasure such as a pan coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process. That countermeasure turned out to be the mRNA that Pfizer and Moderna had been unsuccessfully working on for two decades. The mRNA for covid was never patented and for good reason. It too is a killer!
Coronaviruses are endemic among some animal populations like dogs or bats. Patents cannot be issued on a thing that is from nature. Only work involving synthetic research is allowed a patent. It makes all the stories we’ve heard out to be patently false. The coronavirus that became Covid-19 was laboriously manufactured in US laboratories. Most likely the finished product came from the lab on the campus of UNC-Chapel Hill. The gain-of-function research at UNC-Chapel Hill was under the direction of Ralph Baric. Remdesivir was also produced in Baric’s lab.
While Ralph Baric denies he created a supervirus, he believes such research is essential to the development of vaccines and other countermeasures against emerging viruses, a project he has been engaged in for more than 20 years. That work has made him the country’s foremost expert on coronaviruses, and his high-security UNC lab has been a center of the US response to the pandemic, testing numerous drug candidates for other labs that lack the biosafety clearance or the expertise. Yet that did little to quell questions about the role Baric’s research may have played in furthering scientists’ ability to modify coronaviruses in potentially dangerous ways. Such questions have dogged Baric since 2014, when he became the reluctant spokesperson for gain-of-function research after the NIH declared a moratorium on such experiments until their safety could be assessed, temporarily halting his work.
Baric said his work with the Wuhan lab was minimal. Records show that is not true. Work at his lab by Chinese researchers from Wuhan’s Institute of Virology began in 2016 and continued right up to 2020. Bats from China were brought to the UNC lab for use in gain-of-function research.
Gain-of-function research in which scientists engineer new properties into existing viruses took place in several US labs including Ralph Baric’s. But Baric refuses to call it gain-of-function. He released a statement clarifying that according to the NIH, the research in question did not qualify as gain-of-function.
Call it what he will, the DoD thought it important enough to provide Baric’s lab millions of tax dollars that would result in creating a bioweapon. But after the virus was released in Wuhan, all fingers pointed at China and the Wuhan virology lab. While in the United States, there was almost complete silence about what had been going on for two decades in US laboratories. Tens of millions were spent on coronavirus research in the US over the past two decades leaving a paper trail a mile long and a money trail even longer. It’s not hard to surmise that something important was being worked on. As it turns out it was a bioweapon.
After being released the bioweapon Covid-19 did in effect destabilize and depopulate nations, including our own. Therefore we must assume that it was the intent of those involved to use the bioweapon to achieve the same objective but for different reasons.
As governments were bum-rushed into locking down their people while spending billions on the mRNA jab, it served three purposes. It facilitated Big Pharma’s bank accounts with billions of profits from federal governments around the world purchasing the mRNA vaccine. Second, it gave license to federal and state governments to abort civil liberties and the US Constitution and enact population control without so much as declaring Martial Law. And thirdly, it satisfied private donors like the Bill and Melinda Gates and Rockefeller Bros Foundations, who each gave millions towards Covid-19’s development because it would contribute to depopulation.
The final chapter of this story hasn’t been written yet because those responsible for this crime against humanity haven’t been brought to justice. But for justice to prevail the population must demand it. If the true story behind this tragedy ever escapes the darkness of suppression, watch out!
In a move that defies all regulatory convention, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a supplemental new drug application (sNDA) for the use of Veklury® (remdesivir) in COVID-19 patients with severe renal impairment, including those on dialysis. With this approval, Veklury is now the first and only approved antiviral COVID-19 treatment that can be used across all stages of renal disease but has no efficacy data to support its administration.
The phase 3 REDPINE trial failed to recruit sufficient subjects to assess efficacy. Instead of properly rejecting the application, the FDA went ahead and approved the drug with insufficient safety and efficacy data. The drug has struggled in recent years as patients commonly decline the antiviral since the November, 2020, WHO warning against inpatient use. Remdesivir can cause both kidney injury and liver damage, thus with no mortality benefit, many believe it should not be used.
The FDA approval action defies logic and will be added to a long list of acts that will be considered malfeasance and will be up for review when the commissioner and agency is finally called to justice.
As studies have pointed to the potential for Pfizer’s COVID shot to down regulate recipient’s immune systems, we look at pneumonia through that lens and find possible evidence of a problem. Plus, a new case study may be the first to demonstrate ‘turbo cancer’ after a Pfizer booster in a mouse model.
A new unredacted email from Fauci sees the former NIAID head admitting to gain-of-function research in Wuhan. What about other biosafety labs around the world? The media is now in fear mode over a new tick-borne illness being called the ‘greatest public health threat.’ Does this have lab-tinkering fingerprints on it?
Ukraine’s drone attack on the Kerch Bridge was most likely planned by former British military intelligence agents who signed a contract with Kiev in 2022, the independent outlet Grayzone has reported citing leaked documents.
A “cabal of British military-intelligence freelancers” led by Chris Donnelly has worked with the Odessa office of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) since April last year, Grayzone said in a report published Wednesday evening. The outlet had published leaked documents proving their partnership in October 2022, after the first attack on the Crimean Bridge.
“A review of leaked files previously revealed by The Grayzone provides a solid basis for again blaming Donnelly’s cabal,” the outlet noted in reference to Monday’s drone attack that killed two civilians and orphaned a 14-year-old girl.
Donnelly is described as “a senior intelligence operative and former high ranking NATO advisor.” He is allegedly using a “transnational nexus” involving companies such as Prevail Partners and Thomas in Winslow, to manage “London’s contribution to the proxy war at arm’s length.”
The two companies signed a “technical support” agreement with the Odessa branch of the SBU in April 2022, according to Grayzone, which included the use of surveillance drones to “monitor coastline and Russian movement” and access to satellite imagery to assist military and black operations.
A “geospatial intelligence” specialist at Prevail provided the SBU with a presentation titled “Kerch Bridge info pack,” which laid out various plans to blow up the bridge built in 2018 to connect Crimea to the Krasnodar Region on the Russian mainland.
“One speculative plot involved detonating a vessel containing ammonia nitrate directly under the bridge,” according to Grayzone. The proposal “approvingly cited as an example to emulate” the August 2020 explosion in Beirut, which killed at least 214 people and devastated the Lebanese capital.
According to Grayzone, the British advisers have also provided Kiev with assistance in targeting alleged “Russian collaborators” in territories under Ukraine’s control. Anton Gerashchenko, an advisor to the Ukrainian Interior Ministry, boasted to Western media in October 2022 that intelligence services were “shooting them like pigs.”
Prior to my vaccine injury I’d had short-lived dalliances with The Fear. For instance when I found a lump in my breast I called my GP surgery and they arranged a same-day appointment. The GP I saw was very kind. He confirmed that I did indeed have a lump, that he would refer me for an urgent appointment, and that I would be seen very quickly, so to try not to worry. He took it very seriously and I felt safe that the NHS would do whatever was needed to help me.
After a few nerve-racking days of waiting, my referral came through for the same week and I had a scan, and was told during my appointment that the lump was a cyst. Phew!
In the weird twilight zone between finding the lump and being told it was benign, the fear of dying reared its ugly head, but it was only for a short window, so I managed to keep it at bay by focusing on the next step in the reassuringly proactive clinical pathway.
Since my vaccine injury, fear of dying has become a more regular feature of my life. It’s always waiting in the wings, ready to pounce when I go downhill, or new research shows more information about the havoc that the spike protein can wreak, or I have terrifying symptoms (the heart symptoms are particularly frightening and I have thought I was a goner more than once).
I can’t hold the fear at bay for a short time until I get test results, like when I found the lump, because there are no tests to alleviate my fears. There is no ‘two-week wait’; in fact there is no clinical pathway for vaccine injury. There are no specialists keen to support me to get to the bottom of my complex multi-system issues (more than 50 symptoms) and find a way to cure me; there is no one and nothing to reassure me that it will be ok.
The medical safety net of our health service that has caught me so many times throughout my life is not in place now that I am vaccine-injured.
My experience has been the opposite of feeling safe. I have been gaslit, lied to, shouted at abusively. Some people don’t believe/acknowledge that vaccine injury is a phenomenon. And the caring specialists are limited in how much they can help because it’s novel: the research and equipment are not in place yet for them to test, diagnose and treat me. I’ve lost trust in medication, after all Big Pharma is the reason I got injured, and their unwillingness to acknowledge vaccine injury is the reason we’ve suffered so much abuse and continue to struggle to get help. There is no one, and nothing, in place to catch me when I fall.
So in this abyss that is being vaccine-injured, I’ve learned to co-exist with the fear. Instead of keeping it at bay, whenever I am strong enough, I face up to it. I have written letters to my husband and son, updated my will, and told my closest friends that I love them. I joined a wonderful group of other vaccine-injured, and I research ways to help myself. I acknowledge that we all die some time, and I allow myself to be scared. I’ve learned that I’m not scared for me, even though I love my life, especially the people; I am scared for my son who needs his mum.
I also feel angry. For the way we have been knowingly abandoned to fend for ourselves, and for the abuse we receive from both the pro- and anti-vaxxers (we don’t please either camp! Anti think we’re covidiots and pro think we’re liars, and both can be quick to tell us!)
But also, when I’m not too foggy, I try to take more notice, to feel more, to cherish and be grateful more, to be kinder, to appreciate the few wonderful specialists who care to do what little they can to understand our issues more, to empathise with other injured, to recognise the kind souls who empathise with us, and I now see the world in colours and detail that I never saw before. It has also helped me to realise what really matters to me; put things in perspective. On the better days, I can see these things as a gift; at these times the fear doesn’t have control of me.
My son recently told me he’s scared I’m going to die from my injury – he asked me outright. I was honest as always. I said ‘Everyone dies at some point; some know for a long time that they’re ill, and some die suddenly. I don’t know when that time will be for me, but I can promise you that I am doing absolutely everything I can to get better, and I always will, so I can be with you as long as possible (he’s young enough to still want to be with his mum lol). And while we are together let’s always try to make the best of it, have the most fun we can!’
Take that, The Fear.
For anyone similarly affected, the support group UK CV Family https://www.ukcvfamily.org/about works hard to help and be a voice for the Covid Vaccine injured
After a year and a half of seeking but not finding SARS-2 in any wildlife anywhere (apart from domesticated or zoo animals that appear to have caught it from humans) is it time to say, yes, it didn’t just escape from a lab. It was created, built, assembled in a lab. Or many labs
Coronavirus scientists have been constructing new viruses out of bits and pieces of other viruses for a long time.
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.
• The Attack on Pea… 
Aletho News
Aletho News 
