I’m increasingly alarmed at how all the UK’s major political parties are committed to the Net Zero policy. If implemented, it will have appalling consequences for the economy and for most people, few of whom understand the quite simple issues involved. I have therefore put together a ‘briefing document’ which marshals three arguments that I hope may contribute to curtailing the policy before it’s too late.
1. It’sunachievable. Many vehicles and machines (used for example in agriculture, heavy transportation, commercial shipping and aviation, mining and construction) and products (eg concrete, steel, plastics, fertiliser, pharmaceuticals, lubricants, paints, adhesives and asphalt) essential to our lives and wellbeing require the combustion of fossil fuels or are made from oil derivatives, and there are no easily deployable, commercially viable alternatives. The complex engineering, reliability and cost challenges of establishing a Net Zero grid and the vast scale of what’s involved (immense amounts of material and space are required because the ‘energy density’ of wind and sun is so low) make it most unlikely that the UK could generate sufficient renewable electricity for current needs, let alone for the mandated electric vehicles and heat pumps. In any case, the UK doesn’t have enough technical managers, engineers, electricians, plumbers, mechanics and other tradespeople (probably over a million) to do the many tasks that would be essential to achieve Net Zero.
2. It would be socially and economicallydisastrous because: (a) the UK’s all-renewable energy project doesn’t include a fully costed engineering plan for the provision of comprehensive grid-scale back-up when there’s little or no wind or sun, so millions of people, especially the poor and vulnerable, would be put at serious personal risk (including death) from electricity blackouts; (b) our crippled economy would be tipped deeper into decline by enormous additional costs and energy unavailability, further blighting our poor industrial productivity; (c) China essentially controls the supply of materials (in particular so-called rare earths) needed for renewables, so the UK would increase its already dangerous dependence on it, putting our energy and overall security at serious risk, and (d) the vast mining and mineral processing operations required for renewables would have appalling environmental and human consequences affecting in particular fragile ecosystems and some of the world’s poorest people – not least as a result of Chinese human rights abuses.
3. Above all, it’spointless. Most major non-Western countries – the source of more than 75 per cent of CO2 emissions and home to 84 per cent of humanity – don’t regard emissions reduction as a priority and, either exempt from or ignoring any obligation to reduce their emissions, are focused instead on economic and social development, poverty eradication and energy security. As a result, global emissions are increasing and will continue to increase for the foreseeable future whatever the UK (the source of less than 1 per cent of global emissions) may or may not do. It therefore makes absolutely no sense for Britain to pursue this unachievable and disastrous policy.
Adams sees an inverse correlation between intelligence and an objective understanding of Covid-19 and climate change. Truth is found not at Davos, scene of the World Economic Forum’s annual conferences attended by the high and mighty, but in Walmart. Indeed, an alternative ‘Dumb Davos’ (by which he meant a gathering of people with no letters before or after their names) would be more enlightening than listening to the arrogant, self-serving class who regard themselves as the ‘elite’.
What to follow – rules or reality? One meaning of ‘observe’ is to adhere to ritualistic practice, as demonstrated by the religiously devout, and also by followers of political ideology. There is no need to think but act dutifully. The other meaning of the verb is to watch what is happening, in a focused rather than passing manner. This is the endeavour of scientists, artists, satirists and (at least in principle) journalists. It is what you would expect of intelligent people, but the Covid-19 regime has shown an incredible observational deficit.
The last three years have shown that a large grey mammal with tusks and trunk can stand incongruously in the room, and intellectual eyes and ears cannot see it. The authorities’ radical response to a purported coronavirus pandemic should have raised questions about the inevitable harm and dubious rational of lockdown, about the dehumanising and ecological damaging mask mandates, and about the experimental injections administered to most of the global populace. But the intelligentsia saw no problem with the draconian regime; indeed, many wanted harsher restrictions. The medical profession uncritically accepted the official narrative, denigrating any practitioner who spoke out.
At a rally outside the BBC headquarters last Saturday, a series of vaccine-injured people told the audience of their dual battle with debilitating symptoms and with unsympathetic doctors who deny the obvious cause. Of course, this event was not reported by the public broadcaster. Instead, the Sunday newspapers continued the campaign against dissidents. In theSunday Times, in response to Tory MP Andrew Bridgen coming out as a vaccine critic, Josh Glancy warned of a rise of conspiracy theorists peddling dangerous disinformation.
In logical absurdity, people who took the vaccine and suffered as a result are smeared as ‘anti-vaxxers’, a weaponised term prepared in advance of the mass vaccination programme. Other absurdities abound, such as the vaccinated reacting to a subsequent illness and positive Covid-19 test as a sign that the vaccine is working (because without it, they would have needed hospital treatment). Highly intelligent people seem to have lost their critical marbles.
During a silent march from the BBC to Downing Street on Saturday, in respect for the dead and injured, the comments of shoppers ranged from supportive sentiment to bemusement and insults (‘nutters’, I heard). It is quite startling how many people have been so indoctrinated by Covid-19 that they cannot begin to empathise with unfortunate victims of the vaccine. Claims of injury, to them, are heresy.
‘More Democrats (83 per cent) than Republicans (65 per cent) or those not affiliated with either major party (58 per cent) have gotten the Covid-19 vaccine. While 80 per cent of Democrats believe Covid-19 vaccines are at least somewhat effective at preventing infection with the virus, only 40 per cent of Republicans and 45 per cent of the unaffiliated share that confidence. Similarly, only 43 per cent are at least somewhat concerned that Covid-19 vaccines may have major side effects, compared with 74 per cent of Republicans and 56 per cent of the unaffiliated.’
An important factor here is the politicisation of Covid-19 in American society. Linked to this is the generally higher education level of Democrats, who perceive their Republican opponents as callous, stupid and anti-science. A Democrat voter may have a strong suggestive effect from the shot, perceiving any bodily abnormality not as an adverse reaction but a sign that the vaccine is working. They may also have more political investment in their unquestioning compliance. By contrast, a Republican voter coerced by occupational mandate may be more likely to complain.
Or were more potent doses administered in red states? It sounds too sinister to believe, but there seems to be little doubt that vaccine strength varied. Mike Yeadon, former chief scientist at Pfizer, has highlighted the concentration of reported serious adverse events in about a tenth of the batches.
As pharmaceutical products are normally produced in a tightly controlled process, Yeadon suggested deliberate differentiation (though the vaccine industry is not without a history of contamination). Yeadon is not alone in voicing concerns about differences in quality. Leaked documents from the European Medicines Agency showed that regulators had serious concerns, finding low quantities of intact mRNA in commercial preparation.
Whatever the reason for polarisation in vaccine outcomes, we cannot rely on scientific expertise or authority for answers. As Scott Adams realises, the more intelligent the person, the more miseducated into conformity. ‘Anti-vaxxer’, intended as a slur, has become a badge of honour for the awakened.
Watching a Project Veritas undercover sting operation invariably leaves me with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m struck with admiration for yet another one of James O’Keefe’s bold strokes against the corrupt empire that now dominates our world. On the other hand, I’m shocked by the disclosure that the Empire is staffed by such moral and intellectual lightweights.
Here he is giddily talking about deliberately mutating SARS-CoV-2 by means of “directed evolution” in order to keep Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine gravy train going:
John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 26, 2023
This morning I woke up to conflicting messages about the true identity of Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker—a purported Pfizer executive who is the subject of Project Veritas’s latest sting. Some commentators have suggested that James O’Keefe failed to perform his due diligence—i.e., that instead of stinging a real Pfizer executive, a Project Veritas operative got a date with a drunk and boasting young man who grossly overstated his position and knowledge.
As I noted in my post of last night, it does seem incredible that a major corporation—one that has played a key role in perpetrating a global criminal fiasco—is staffed with an executive who seems to have been recruited at a frat party. On the other hand, the Pfizer internal documents tweeted by James O’Keefe appear to be authentic.
Additional documents were posted this morning by internet sleuth and fellow Substack author, Brian O’shea.
One of the strangest features of the Hall of Mirrors in which we now live is that the public facade of powerful institutions and corporations is staffed with people who seem stunningly incompetent and unserious. I’m thinking about Karine Jean-Pierre, Rochelle Walensky, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden.
Consider the irony that one of the great idols of the West—Volodymyr Zelensky—was, just a few years ago, a TV actor “who played a high school history teacher who wins the presidential election after a viral video created by his pupils shows him ranting against government corruption in Ukraine.”
The show (Servant of the People) was so popular—and Zelensky so charming—that he was anointed by the oligarchs who run Ukraine to be the next President.
Igor Kolomoisky,the billionaire oligarch who owned 70% of the media company that created the hit show, has been indicted in the United States on charges of large-scale bank fraud. Kolomoisky’s personal attorney served as Zelensky’s campaign manager. Again, who is really making the decisions that now affect all of mankind?
Mission Statement
Investigate & expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions in order to achieve a more ethical & transparent society.
Core Values
MORAL COURAGE – Courage is the virtue that sustains all others. We choose to overcome our fears.
WE ARE ALL LEADERS – Turning people into leaders. Completed staff work. Ownership.
COLLABORATION – Best not to work in silos. No one individual is as smart as all of us.
RESILIENCE – Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. Never, ever, ever give up. We don’t let mistakes or setbacks discourage us. Pursue perfection, knowing full well you will never attain it.
MISSION DRIVEN – The best people are motivated by purpose. We are passionate and truly believe in our cause. We must be externally focused, not internally focused.
MAKE THE STATUS QUO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE – We move mountains. Failure is not an option. We do whatever it takes.
THE TIP OF THE SPEAR – We are a loss leader. We do not shy away from conflict or litigation.
Ethical Values
Rule #1 – Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the facts or the context. We do not “selectively edit.”
Rule #2 – We do not break the law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacy’s impact on our right to record.
Rule #3 – We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.
Rule #4 – The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of “vital public interest” and “profound importance.” The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, “… there’s no other way to get the story…” Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.
Rule #5 – We Protect the Innocent When Possible – Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens personal lives. We look for individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.
Rule #6 – Transparency. Our methods & tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the “Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder” rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law & ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.
Rule #7 – Verifying and Corroborate Stories – Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone.We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate & truthful. At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.)The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).
Rule #8 – Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release the “raw” video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.
Rule #9 – Subject Anonymity. We investigate & question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential sources.
Rule #10 – Being Accountable. Admit mistakes & correct them promptly.
Rule #11 – We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects’ mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit truth.
Rule #12 – With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.
Several new government – and industry – funded studies are underway to develop mRNA vaccines for livestock, part of the massive expansion of the animal vaccine industry projected to be worth $26.12 billion by 2030.
Researchers at Iowa State University are undertaking a project funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).
“Third generation vaccines,” including DNA, RNA and recombinant viral vector vaccines, are not only administered to livestock — but they also are being developed for companion animals and wild animals.
A peer-reviewed study in the journal Viruses last year reported, “The successful application of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 has further validated the platform and opened the floodgates to mRNA vaccine’s potential in infectious disease prevention, especially in the veterinary field.”
Citing the need for biosecurity, in September 2022, the New South Wales (NSW) government fast-tracked the world’s first mRNA vaccines for foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy-skin disease, in a five-year multimillion dollar deal with U.S. biotech company Tiba Biotech.
Announcing the deal, Deputy Premier and Minister for Regional NSW Paul Toole said:
“I have now written to vaccine manufacturers to take up my challenge to develop both vaccines ready for use and manufacture in NSW by August 1 next year.
“COVID-19 demonstrated to us that all possible avenues in developing vaccines must be explored and we will leave no stone unturned.”
Dugald Saunders, NSW minister for agriculture, emphasized how important it was to “protect [NSW’s] livestock sector” and said the agreement with Tiba Biotech to create mRNA vaccines, “would be a game-changer for the industry.”
“Not enough is known at this time if mRNA vaccines can generate any long-term effects on reproduction or lifespan of domestic farm stock.
“As livestock become part of the human and animal food chain, we need to be sure that no abnormal cellular or molecular changes to the animal could be induced by this type of vaccine.”
‘Good health starts with biosecurity’
According to a report published last year by Grand View Research, the market for animal vaccines is expected to grow at a 9.3% compounded annual growth rate, because “the growing incidence of food-borne zoonotic diseases and increasing animal husbandry are boosting the demand for vaccines.”
The paper pointed to the potential of the mRNA platform to treat diseases like African swine fever, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, foot-and-mouth disease virus, bovine viral diarrhea virus, lumpy skin disease virus, bovine leukemia virus and peste des petits ruminants virus, among others.
A recent white paper, “The Future of Livestock Vaccines,” by researchers at the Livestock Research Innovation Corporation, Ontario, Canada, summed up the shift in thinking about animal vaccines:
“New technologies (e.g. mRNA, artificial intelligence) will have dramatic impact on the availability and effectiveness of vaccines available to producers. …
“The current COVID-19 pandemic has taught us many lessons, including the fact that the development, mass production and approval process of vaccines could be shortened from several years (or decades) to 8-9 months.”
“Good health starts with biosecurity,” the authors stated.
Iowa State teams up with Merck — with help from the U.S. government
Iowa State University and Merck last year announced a four-year strategic alliance to research “emerging technologies” in animal health.
Their joint research project to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine RSV, as stated above, is funded in part by the U.S. government.
The study aims to develop a novel mRNA platform that is cost-efficient and thermostable in order to “open the door for vaccinating production animals with this technology.”
The project seeks to develop the platform for a bovine RSV vaccine “as a proof of principle for development of vaccines against this pathogen but also as a platform technology for other vaccines as well.”
The technology consists of creating electronic gene sequences for a given disease, synthesizing them into RNA, inserting them into the platform and injecting them into the animal. The RNA provides instructions to the immune cells to translate the sequence into proteins, which act as antigens.
Gates Foundation among funders of vaccines for livestock
For decades, concentrated animal feedlot operations, known as CAFOs, used antibiotics to help prevent bacterial infections from spreading through farm spaces densely packed with animals. The antibiotics also make animals grow faster.
That same year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began regulatory measures to prevent the use of livestock antibiotics for growth purposes and required farmers who wanted to use antibiotics to get them from veterinarians.
In an effort to reduce the use of publicly spurned antibiotics and to deal with the problem of viral infections common in industrial livestock production, meat producers turned to vaccines.
“Vaccines and other alternative products can help minimize the need for antibiotics by preventing and controlling infectious diseases in animal populations, and are central to the future success of animal agriculture,” according to a 2018 article in Veterinary Research.
According to a 2016 Bloomberg report, industry leaders like Elanco, Eli Lilly, Merck Animal Health and Zoetis began shifting billions of dollars of research investments from antibiotics to vaccines in advance of the 2017 FDA regulatory measures.
A 2022 report by Acumen showed that other major pharmaceutical companies, including Ceva, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Neogen Corporation, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Zoetis, Biogénesis Bagó and Pfizer are heavily investing in the animal vaccine industry.
“The future of our company is heavily grounded in vaccine development,” Dr. Rick Sibbel, a veterinarian who ran Merck’s technical services for cattle, poultry and swine, told Bloomberg.
The U.K.’s Department for International Development partnered with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to fund livestock vaccines around the world, the department tweeted in 2018.
That partnership included a $40 million grant in 2017 to develop new livestock vaccines. Gates Foundation funding to CGIAR, “global research partnership for a food-secure future dedicated to transforming food, land, and water systems in a climate crisis,” continues to focus on shifting livestock producers from using antibiotics to vaccines.
Just last month, Dr. Andrew Huff—former senior scientist and vice president at EcoHealth Alliance—published The Truth About Wuhan, in which he details how SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in a lab, and how its leak from the lab was covered up by EcoHealth Alliance president and CEO Dr. Peter Daszak in collaboration with NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci.
That SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a lab is no secret. Even the U.S. Senate acknowledged this reality last October. In 2015, Dr. Ralph Baric published a paper in which he plainly stated that he and his colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were performing gain of function work on bat coronaviruses in order to make them transmissible to humans.
It is surely one of most bizarre events in history that none of the men who developed SARS-CoV-2 are even the subject of an official investigation. On the contrary, they remain in business and continue to receive taxpayer money. As Rutgers University Professor, Richard H. Ebright recently tweeted, EcoHealth Alliance just got another $3 million Department of Defense Grant. For years, Dr. Ebright has been warning about the extreme danger of gain of function research. In 2017, he raised the alarm about lax security at the BSL-4 lab in Wuhan. No one in our government listened to him then, and it seems he continues to be ignored.
For a long time I have suspected that the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex of international foundations and U.S. federal agencies is now operating outside of the law. The key players in this Complex are untouchable. No legislator or law enforcement officer has the heart to challenge their power. The latest Eco-Health Alliance grant is further evidence that “We the People” no longer count.
Moscow has cautioned western powers against supplying Ukraine with depleted uranium munitions and with long-range weaponry capable of striking at cities deep within Russian territory.
Supplying Ukraine with depleted uranium munitions for western military hardware would be regarded by Moscow as the use of “dirty bombs,” said Konstantin Gavrilov, head of the Russian delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control.
Speaking at a plenary meeting of the OSCE Forum for Security Cooperation, Gavrilov cautioned “western sponsors of Kiev’s war machine” against encouraging “nuclear provocations and blackmail.”
“We know that Leopard 2 tanks, as well as Bradley and Marder armored fighting vehicles, can use depleted uranium shells, which can contaminate terrain, just like it happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq,” he said. “If Kiev were to be supplied with such munitions for the use in western heavy military hardware, we would regard it as the use of ‘dirty nuclear bombs’ against Russia, with all the consequences that entails.”
Gavrilov also warned that Moscow will retaliate if the West were to supply Kiev with long-range weaponry to carry out strikes against Russian cities.
“If Washington and NATO countries provide Kiev with weapons for striking against the cities deep inside the Russian territory and for attempting to seize our constitutionally affirmed territories, it would force Moscow to undertake harsh retaliatory actions. Do not say that we did not warn you,” he remarked.
Previously, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned that any shipments containing weapons for Ukraine would become a lawful target for Russian forces, while Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that the flow of western weapons to Ukraine does not help potential negotiations between Moscow and Kiev.
Angela McArdle of the Libertarian Party and Nicholas Brana of the People’s Party join us today to discuss Rage Against the War Machine, an anti-war rally that will be held in Washington, D.C. on February 19th. We discuss the genesis of the rally, the demands of the protestors, what the organizers hope to accomplish and how those interested in attending or helping with the rally can get involved.
“For how long will I be in captivity? After so many years, where are the state and the people of Israel?” These were the words, uttered in Hebrew, of a person believed to be Avera Mengistu, an Israeli soldier of Ethiopian origin, who was captured and held in Gaza in 2014.
Footage of Mengistu, looking nervous but also somewhat defiant, calling on his countrymen to end his 9-year incarceration, mostly ended speculation in Israel on whether the soldier was alive or dead.
The timing of the release of the footage by Hamas was obvious, and is directly linked to the Palestinian group’s efforts aimed at conducting a prisoner exchange similar to the one carried out in 2011, which saw the release of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, in exchange for the release of over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners.
The main target audience of Hamas’ message is the new government and, specifically, the new military leadership. Israel now has a new army chief, Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi, who has replaced the departing chief, Aviv Kochavi. The latter seemed disinterested in Mengistu’s cause, while the new chief arrives with lofty promises about uniting the country behind its military and opening a new page where the army is no longer involved in everyday politics.
It may appear that Hamas and other Gaza groups are in a stronger position than the one they enjoyed during Shalit’s captivity, between 2006 and 2011. Not only are they militarily stronger but, instead of capturing one Israeli, they have four: aside from Mengistu, they also have Hisham Al-Sayed, and what is believed to be the remains of two other soldiers, Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul.
But this is when the story gets particularly complicated. Unlike Shalit, who is white and holds dual Israeli-French citizenship, Mengistu and Al-Sayed are Ethiopian Jew and Bedouin, respectively.
Racism based on colour and ethnicity is rife in Israel. Although no Israeli officials will admit to this openly, Israel is in no rush to rescue two men who are not members of the dominant Ashkenazi group, or even of the socially less privileged Sephardic or Mizrahi Jews.
Black Jews and Bedouins have always been placed at the bottom of Israel’s socio-economic indicators. In 2011, the Israeli newspaper The Jerusalem Post shared numbers from a disturbing report, which placed poverty among children of Ethiopian immigrants at a whopping 65 per cent. The number is particularly staggering when compared to the average poverty rate in Israel, of 21 per cent.
Things have not improved much since then. The Israeli Justice Ministry’s annual report on racism complaints shows that 24 per cent of all complaints are filed by Ethiopians. This racism covers most aspects of public life, from education to services to police mistreatment.
Not even enlisting in the military – Israel’s most revered institution – is enough to change Ethiopians’ position in Israeli society.
The famous story of Demas Fikadey in 2015 is a case in point. Then only 21, the Ethiopian soldier was beaten up severely by two Israeli police officers in a Tel Aviv suburb for no reason at all. The whole episode was caught on camera, leading to mass protests and even violent clashes. For Ethiopian Jews, the humiliation and violence carried out against Fikadey was a representation of years of suffering, racism and discrimination.
Many believe that the government’s lacklustre response to Mengistu’s prolonged capture is directly linked to the fact that he is black.
Israel’s discriminatory behaviour against African asylum seekers, which often leads to forceful deportation following humiliating treatment, is well known. Amnesty International described this in a report in 2018 as “a cruel and misguided abandonment of responsibility”.
But discriminating against a black soldier, who, by Israel’s own estimation, is believed to suffer from mental illness, is a whole different kind of ‘abandonment’.
A former Israeli army official, Col. Moshe Tal, did not mince words in a recent national radio interview when he said that Mengistu and Al-Sayed are a low priority for the public “on the account of their race”, Haaretz reported.
“If we were speaking about two other citizens from other backgrounds and socio-economic statuses … the amount of interest would be different,” Tal said. In contrast to Shalit’s story, the government’s “attention to the affair (and) the media pulse, is close to zero.”
Israel’s Ethiopian Jews number around 170,000, hardly an important political constituency in a remarkably divided and polarised society. Most of them are immigrants or descendants of immigrants who arrived in Israel between 1980 and 1992. Though they are still known as the Falasha, they are sometimes referred to by the more dignified name of ‘Beta Israel’, or ‘House of Israel’.
Superficial language alterations aside, their struggle is evident in everyday Israel. The plight of Mengistu, as expressed in his own question, “where are the State and the people of Israel?” sums up the sense of collective loss and alienation this community has felt for nearly two generations.
When Mengistu arrived with his family at the age of 5 in Israel, escaping a bloody civil war in Ethiopia and historic discrimination there, the family, like most Ethiopians, hardly knew that discrimination would follow them, even in the supposed land of ‘milk and honey’.
And, most likely, they also knew little about the plight of Palestinians, the native inhabitants of that historic land, who are victims of terrible violence, racism and much more.
Palestinians know well why Israel has done little to free the black soldier; Mengistu and his Ethiopian community also understand how race is an important factor in Israeli politics. Although a prisoner exchange could potentially free Mengistu and an unspecified number of Palestinian prisoners held in Israel, the suffering of the Palestinians at the hands of Israel and discrimination against Ethiopian Jews will carry on for much longer.
While Palestinians are resisting Israel’s military Occupation and apartheid, Ethiopian Jews should mount their own resistance for greater rights. Their resistance must be predicated on the understanding that Palestinians and Arabs are not the enemy but potential allies in a joint fight against racism, apartheid and socio-economic marginalisation.
Former ethics researcher at the W.H.O, Astrid Stuckelburger, PhD, sheds light on how our top world health agencies have used the COVID-19 pandemic to push a dangerous globalist agenda.
I just had a nice chat with Federal Air Surgeon Dr. Susan E. Northrup. By the end, she no longer can say, “I didn’t know.” If she doesn’t act now, she should be prosecuted for jeopardizing pilot lives.
Executive summary
At 10:15am on Saturday Jan 21, 2023, I made a call to the private cell phone of the Federal Air Surgeon of the FAA Dr. Susan Northrup. The call lasted 2 minutes.
In the call, I referred to the news article where she basically said that she had seen no evidence that the COVID vaccines have incapacitated pilots.
At first I thought she was lying, but it turns out she was telling the truth. She’s seen no evidence because even though she admitted on the call that she knew about Bob Snow, nobody at the FAA ever bothered to call him. Ever!!! So they’ve never seen the evidence because they deliberately refused to look at the evidence!! Get it? That’s how science works.
So I asked Dr. Northrup if she was interested in speaking with pilots who have been disabled by the COVID vaccine. She indicated she was. After all, what could she say at that point? She had to say “yes.”
It’s troubling she hasn’t talked to Bob Snow. I have talked to Bob Snow. I interviewed him for my Rumble channel even though it isn’t my job to investigate these incidents. Check out my interview with Josh Yoder and my interview with Bob Snow.
In other words, I’ve done more to investigate this incident than the FAA.
Captain Snow narrowly averted crashing the plane, but she never talked to him to assess whether the vax might have been involved. Seriously?!?! I offered to put her in touch with Captain Snow and she accepted.
So I emailed her (using her official work email at the FAA) a list of pilots, their phone numbers. She now has the contact info for these pilots:
Josh Yoder (head of US Freedom Flyers who is in touch with dozens of vaccine injured pilots)
Bob Snow (American Airlines)
Kevin Stillwagon (Delta Airlines)
Cody Flint (4 doctors have determined he was incapacitated in flight due to the COVID vaccine)
John C. Lamb (66 yr old commercial aviator with no previous heart problems. On Jan 6, his first class medical was deferred, due to 2nd AB block, Mobitz type 2. His wife had a heart attack 8 days after her Moderna shot. See this story for more details).
More importantly, in that email, I also invited her to host a public roundtable at the FAA inviting people on both sides of the “safe and effective” narrative so that the FAA could learn the truth. I just talked to Senator Ron Johnson and I can assure you that he’d be DELIGHTED to help her assemble a roundtable of doctors on both sides of the narrative to brief top FAA officials on the risks of these vaccines.
And I offered to publish her revised statement to the public so we can get the truth out that the vaccines are NOT safe and are disabling pilots.
Here’s the kicker. The corruption at the FAA runs deep. Did you know that nobody at the FAA has ever called Bob Snow? How can the FAA investigate this incident without ever even talking to the pilot?
Susan is going to have to reveal to the American public what exactly the FAA did to investigate the Bob Snow incident which happened on April 9, 2022. How is it that in 9 months nobody at the FAA (or from any other government organization) has reached out to Captain Snow? WTF? We need some transparency here on how these vaccine incidents are being investigated!
But Susan knew about Snow and she must have known that nobody reached out to call him. In other words, everyone knew they had a vaccine injured pilot and deliberately chose to NOT investigate. I have asked Susan for an explanation. If I don’t receive an explanation in 24 hours, I will call for her to resign.
I am calling for this since nobody in Congress is (other than Senator Johnson). None of them want to know. Heck, when I call members of Congress, they ignore me. Neither does the mainstream media. It appears that the responsibility for investigating these incidents falls on Steve Kirsch’s Substack (which has a full-time staff of just me) to hold these people accountable.
Susan is also going to have to talk about why there was a 300% increase in long-term disability claims filed at American Airlines (Jan – July 2022) and what investigation the FAA made into what was disabling those pilots.
We have a pilot shortage in America. What did Susan find when the FAA investigated why the disability claims skyrocketed? Or did they do nothing to investigate? If they didn’t do anything, why didn’t they? I’d like to know. The New York Times and CNN …. well, not so much.
Finally, did you know that Susan’s husband, John Hyle, is a pilot. John refused to take the COVID vaccine due to safety concerns. So it’s not just a few “anti-vaxxers” spreading “misinformation.” Susan clearly realizes that intelligent people she clearly respects have legitimate concerns that cause them to refuse to take the shot.
The narrative is falling apart.
We need public transparency on all of the things above. And we need it now before lives are lost.
We’ve had a couple of close calls. The FAA needs to be proactive about this, not REACTIVE after a crash happens.
If you’ve never seen this entire episode, I urge you to do so.
Note that in Buffalo, the more things change the more, etc. Also note the hopeful ending.
Amusing to think the propaganda in this is more accurate than the putrid stuff they serve us today. Yes, it’s another indication of decline. But then it had to be more accurate. … Full article
Swiss chemical giant Syngenta and Chevron USA for decades covered up research showing long-term exposure to the weedkiller paraquat could cause the incurable brain ailment known as Parkinson’s disease, internal documents reveal.
“It’s jaw-dropping information because at the same time, the companies were saying publicly the opposite — that this chemical did not get into the brain,” investigative journalist Carey Gillam told Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman and chief litigation counsel for Children’s Health Defense, during an episode of “RFK Jr. The Defender Podcast.”
Gillam, author of “The Monsanto Papers: Deadly Secrets, Corporate Corruption, and One Man’s Search for Justice,” has more than 30 years of experience reporting on corporate America and food and agricultural policies
Introduced in the 1960s, paraquat is a highly toxic herbicide that was banned in the EU in 2007 but is still widely used today by U.S. farmers.
Syngenta manufactures paraquat, Chevron USA distributes it in the U.S.
Since “almost day one,” Gillam said, the companies knew the chemical crossed the blood-brain barrier and entered the brain, and that it could have chronic effects on the central nervous system.
“And you see in the 1970s, how the evidence is continuing to mount and how the companies are discussing internally — their scientists and others are discussing amongst themselves — how worrisome it is that all of this evidence of an impact on the brain, a chronic long-term impact on the brain from Parkinson’s, is starting to get stronger and stronger,” Gillam said.
Despite “abundant evidence,” the companies adamantly claimed publicly that the chemical did not cross the blood-brain barrier and continued to sell it.
The use of paraquat has expanded “pretty dramatically” over the last 20 years, partly because glyphosate — the active ingredient in Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup — has become less effective, so more farmers are using paraquat again to control weeds, Gillam said.
Meanwhile, the prevalence of Parkinson’s has more than doubled from 1990 to 2015, and is expected to continue to expand rapidly, she noted.
“It’s a terrible and tragic disease,” Gillam said.
Farmers who professionally apply paraquat — more than regular consumers — are the most vulnerable to the long-term health risks, Gillam said.
A familiar playbook
Kennedy and Gillam discussed the “playbook” of obfuscation tactics used by the chemical companies in the 1970s to “mislead the public and mislead regulators” about the evidence of paraquat’s effects on the brain.
Gillam said company toxicologists who knew in 1975 about the chemical’s possible chronic effects internally discussed how a “plan” could be made to conduct a study that would counter all the information that was coming out.
Kennedy said he had seen similar tactics by other chemical companies, including Monsanto. They “hire a class of scientists — we call them biostitutes — who will gin up or ghostwrite the studies and then pay legitimate scientists to sign them to give the imprimatur of legitimacy.”
In the case of Monsanto, Kennedy added, the scientific studies that ostensibly exonerated glyphosate were “ginned up by corrupted regulators.”
It’s the same playbook, said Gillam:
“You see them put up a website that puts out information that is contradictory to what they’re saying internally to each other.
“You see them talk about, ‘We need to enlist academics around the world. We can provide some funding for them. We can collaborate with them and they can carry out our positive message that our product doesn’t cause Parkinson’s disease.’”
“It’s really yet just another example of how frail our regulatory system is and how it misses these real dangers to human health,” Gillam said, “when they rely so heavily on companies to communicate the science to them.”
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication.
UNESCO says it is seriously concerned about the increase in “disinformation” and “conspiracy theories”. And they plan to put an end to it through a network of informants.
“Conspiracy theories can be dangerous,” the UN agency warned. “Often they ignore scientific evidence and polarize society with dire consequences. This has to stop.”
Unesco’s director-general warned that “conspiracy theories” could cause damage to people as well as to their health. “They reinforce misconceptions about the pandemic, reinforcing stereotypes that can fuel violence and violent, extremist ideologies,” said Audrey Azoulay.
The UN agency has launched a campaign to help people identify, debunk and report “conspiracy theories” to prevent them from spreading further.
This campaign is being carried out in collaboration with the European Commission, Twitter and the World Jewish Congress. The UN has created a toolkit to “debunk” such theories and smear anyone who dares to claim that governments are not fair and transparent.
The UN also warned that George Soros, the Rothschilds and Israel should not be linked to “alleged conspiracies”.
World events “are not secretly manipulated behind the scenes by powerful players with malicious intent,” the UN agency maintained.
And if anyone therefore comes across someone who believes that the world elite is plotting to consolidate power or direct events, then that person needs to take action. According to the UN agency, when meeting a “conspiracy theorist”, under no circumstances should one enter into a discussion. … 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.
Aletho News
