It began with the strange decision of state media to elevate Christian Drosten at Berlin Charité to national prominence, by granting him the Coronavirus Update podcast on 26 February 2020. The WHO had just endorsed lockdowns two days before, and various countries were acquiring new Corona tsars – random virus wizards who would become the face of containment policy to panicking domestic audiences. Every day, Drosten’s banal podcast interviews were reported breathlessly across the German media, as if they meant anything.
It’s important to remember that Drosten is a virologist. He’s not a statistician, and for what it’s worth, he’s not a public health expert either. He studies how very small proteins work and how they interact with human cells. Nevertheless, Drosten had (or claimed to have) a wide range of opinions on matters outside of his field, including the question of whether closing schools would slow down SARS-2.
At first, Drosten said that he didn’t think this would accomplish very much. Like everyone else of his ilk, he had an early history of saying basically correct and sensible things before he went crazy. On 11 March 2020, he went home and read this paper on Nonpharmaceutical Interventions Implemented by US Cities During the 1918–1919 Influenza Pandemic. It wasn’t his field; his assessment of its analysis is worth no more than mine or yours. But after reading it, he decided that actually closing schools would be a great idea, especially when used in combination with other interventions, such as banning mass gatherings. This was wind in the sails of hystericists like Markus Söder, minister president of Bavaria. And so we closed our schools, and our kids endured months of social isolation and mental anguish, because Drosten read a thing and had a brilliant idea.
But, that’s only the official story. It may be vastly worse than that. I really doubt, for example, that Drosten’s ridiculous podcast was a spontaneous programming idea by Norddeutscher Rundfunk. I suspect, instead, that there’s a reason lockdowns and Corona tsars went together in those early days. Primary was the political or bureaucratic decision to do all this crazy stuff, in the absence of any evidence aside from some dodgy numbers out of Wuhan. Thus the genius smart guys who run our institutions had to find celebrity virus astrologers, who could become the public face of novel policies and provide a simulacrum of science for the politicians to pretend they were following. It’s even odds, whether Drosten really did change his mind because of a paper he read one night; or whether it was rather the political or bureaucratic faction behind Drosten that changed their minds and gave him a paper or two to read.
Science isn’t some objective reasonable force outside of politics. Scientists spend most of their careers chasing government grant funding, and fighting for appointments and promotions in government-funded university systems. Science follows politics, and nobody knows this as much as the disingenuous politicians who claim that their policies are subordinate to scientific findings.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) was founded in 1946 as a backwater quasi-governmental agency with a negligible budget and a handful of employees tasked with a simple mission: “prevent malaria from spreading across the nation.”
Seventy-five years later it has metastasized into a multi-billion dollar bureaucratic behemoth that oversees and controls virtually all aspects of public health programs, policies and practices across the United States.
The CDC is the primary US national public health agency tasked with“protecting America from health, safety and security threats” and advertises that it will “increase the health security of our nation.”
Guidelines and recommendations by the CDC set the standards for mainstream medicine in America and are considered the de facto rules by which public health departments and most institutions throughout the country must operate.
“be a diligent steward of the funds entrusted to our agency, base all public health decisions on the highest quality scientific data that is derived openly and objectively and place the benefits to society above the benefits to our institution.”
This high-minded mission statement gives the impression that the CDC will, above all else, work diligently and honestly to protect the health of all Americans. A careful review of the CDC’s history and current mode of operation indicate a stark contrast between these noble words and how the CDC actually functions.
OZ HAS SPOKEN
“The CDC has enormous credibility among physicians, in no small part because the agency is generally thought to be free of industry bias. Financial dealings with bio-pharmaceutical companies threaten that reputation.”
Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine
In the mainstream media vortex, questioning the state religion of CDC decrees and guidelines lands one firmly in the camp of the “conspiracy-minded,” accused of practicing sorcery or some manner of medieval medical quackery.
In the minds of many Americans the CDC represents the final word on “all matters health-related.” To question this omnipotent bureaucratic agency is to challenge sacred health commandments and cast doubt on the medical establishment itself.
The widely accepted belief about the CDC holds that it is a governmental agency which functions outside of health industry relationships and consequently operates free from the monied interests of the health management sector. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Despite this reputation, further scrutiny reveals that the CDC falls far short of its stated purpose. As the scope and budget of this agency has ballooned over the years, including a war chest of corporate contributions, we have to ask ourselves, “Does the CDC fulfill its mission statement of protecting public health or is it now just another bloated quasi-governmental agency that works on behalf of its donors?”
Contrary to its disclaimer that “the CDC does not accept commercial support”, the British Medical Journal (BMJ)reported, in 2015, that “the CDC does receive millions of dollars in industry gifts and funding, both directly and indirectly.”
A petition filed in 2019 by several watchdog groups contends that the CDC’s assertion that it is free from influence peddling and has “no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products” are “indisputably false.”
The petition goes a step further asserting that the CDC, “knows the claims are false, because it has procedures to address from whom and under what circumstances it accepts millions of dollars from contributors, including manufacturers of commercial products.”
This allegation is supported by multiple examples from the CDC’s own Active Program’s Report.
For instance, Pfizer Inc. contributed $3.435 million since 2016 to the CDC Foundation for a program on the prevention of Cryptococcal disease.
Programs like these became commonplace as early as 1983 largely due to Congressional authorization which allowed the CDC to accept “external” gifts:
made unconditionally… for the benefit of the [Public Health] Service or for the carrying out of any of its functions.”
Despite the caveat that these donations must be geared towards public health, the reality is these contributions come with strings attached. As noted earlier in the BMJ report, Pharma funds given to the CDC for specific projects return to Pharma pockets via marketing and sales.
The spigot of funding initiated through Congressional permission would open full blast a decade later, with the creation of the CDC Foundation.
THE CDC FOUNDATION
The CDC Foundation was created by Congress in 1992 and incorporated two years later to “mobilize philanthropic and private-sector resources.”
Once established, the CDC Foundation became the primary pass-through mechanism utilized by a cornucopia of corporate interests to exert influence over various aspects of the CDC. Large pharmaceutical companies contributed millions of dollars each year to the “separate, philanthropic CDC Foundation.“
The CDC Foundation would then “donate philanthropically” Big Pharma contributions to the CDC itself. This sleight of hand ensured the CDC could maintain they never accepted money directly from Big Pharma.
Some have argued that once this avalanche of monied interests was unleashed, the agency itself was transformed into the primary marketing arm of the Pharmaceutical Industry creating a hornet’s nest of ethics violations, outright corruption and opened up a slew of questions as to who the CDC actually works for.
Was the CDC Foundation truly established as a philanthropic enterprise or as a way to conceal conflicts of interest?
Did this massive influx of corporate cash cede control of the CDC to the medical and pharmaceutical industry and their financiers, allowing them to control the direction of “public” health policy?
Would business oriented, for-profit medical programs, using the CDC’s imprimatur, come to dominate public health policy?
Those questions seemed to have their answer in the CDC Foundation’s donor list which reads like a ‘Who’s Who’ of pandemic profiteers and philanthropic mercenaries.
Major sources of cash for the Foundation include the GAVI Alliance, Bloomberg Philanthropies, Fidelity Investments, Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust, Microsoft Corporation, Imperial College London, Johns Hopkins University, Google, Facebook, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Johnson & Johnson Foundation and the omnipresent ‘do-gooders’ at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
INTERNAL PROBLEMS
In 2016 a group of concerned senior scientists from within the CDC wrote a letter to then CDC Chief of Staff Carmen Villar alleging that the CDC “is being influenced and shaped by outside parties… [and this] is becoming the norm and not the rare exception.”
The transgressions cited in that letter include: “questionable and unethical practices,” “cover up of inaccurate screening data” and “definitions changed and data cooked to make the results look better than they were.”
The scientists went on to note that the CDC, “essentially suppressed [findings] so media and/or Congressional staff would not become aware of the problems” and “CDC staff [went] out of their way to delay FOIAs and obstruct any inquiry.”
The indictment also claimed that CDC representatives had “irregular relationships” with corporate entities that suggested direct conflicts of interest.
While criticisms of the CDC have increased in recent years, a look back at their history reveals a long list of misconduct and questionable practices.
SCANDALS ‘R’ US
As far back as 1976 the CDC was creating mass medical terror campaigns in order to procure increased funding and justify mass vaccination programs. The infamous 1976 swine flu scandal sought to inoculate 213 million Americans for a pandemic that didn’t exist. By the time the program collapsed in late 1976, 46 million Americans were needlessly injected– despite the knowledge that neurological disorders were associated with the vaccines. This resulted in thousands of adverse events including hundreds of incidents of Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
At the onset of the mass vaccination program, Dr. David Sencer – then head of the CDC – when pushed on national TV, admitted there had only been “several [swine flu] cases reported worldwide and none confirmed.” When asked if he had encountered “any other outbreaks of swine flu anywhere in the world”, he bluntly answered, “No.”
The program moved forward.
In contrast to the CDC’s publicly stated position as “protector of public health,” this type of misconduct would become standard operating procedure and serve as the template for future invented pandemics.
A growing rap sheet of scandals would come to define the CDC’s existence.
In 1999 the CDC was accused of misspending $22.7 million appropriated for chronic fatigue syndrome. Government auditors said they could not determine what happened to $4.1 million of that money and the CDC could not explain where the money went.
In 2000, the agency essentially lied to Congress about how it spent $7.5 million that had been appropriated for research on the hantavirus. Instead the CDC diverted much of that money into other programs. “One official said the total diverted is almost impossible to trace because of CDC bookkeeping practices, but he estimated the diversions involved several million dollars.”
In 2010 Congress discovered that the CDC “knowingly endangered DC residents regarding lead in the drinking water.” A Congressional report found that the CDC did not properly warn residents of high levels of lead in the DC drinking water and “left the public health community with the dangerous and wrong impression that lead-contaminated water is safe for children to drink.”
In 2016 The Hill reported on two scandals at the CDC. One involved the “cover up” of “the poor performance of a women’s health program called WISEWOMAN.” The allegations asserted that within the program, “definitions were changed and data ‘cooked’ to make the results look better than they were” and the CDC actively suppressed this information.
The other scandal involved ties between Coca-Cola and two ‘high-ranking’ CDC officials. The two scientists were accused of manipulating studies about the safety of sugar laden soft drinks. Two days after these connections were revealed one of the accused CDC scientists retired.
These scandals were brought to light by the CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research, or CDC SPIDER.
As part of their statement these scientists remarked:
our mission is being influenced and shaped by outside parties and rogue interests…. What concerns us most, is that it is becoming the norm and not the rare exception.”
Their complaints were filed anonymously “for fear of retribution.”
Another dodgy, yet textbook, example of the incestuous nature of Big Pharma’s Revolving Door was the case of former CDC commander Julie Gerberding. As director of the CDC from 2002 to 2009 Gerberding, “shepherded Merck’s highly controversial and highly profitable Gardasil vaccine through the regulatory maze.”
Another in a series of collusion scandals hit the CDC in 2018 when director Brenda Fitzgerald was forced to resign as she was caught buying stock in cigarette and junk food companies, the very companies the CDC regulates.
THE CDC AND THE VACCINE INDUSTRY
Although the CDC does not regulate the pharmaceutical industry, the agency’s policies and recommendations have profound implications for drug makers. Nowhere is this more apparent than national vaccination policy- in particular the CDC Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule.
Despite pushing the world’s most aggressive vaccination campaign the facts on the ground show a decidedly different reality than CDC advertisements would lead us to believe on the efficacy of this campaign.
With the expanded vaccine schedule no demonstrable positive returns in children’s health outcomes have accompanied the windfalls to the pharmaceutical industry. Chronic disease in American children has skyrocketed from 6% to 54% in the past 40 years and the United States holds the lamentable distinction of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world.
Some point out that the CDC currently operates as chief vaccine sales and marketing agent for Big Pharma buying, selling and distributing vaccines even as the agency has direct conflicts of interest by holding multiple patents on vaccines and various aspects of vaccine technologies. Compounding this deceptive state of affairs, the CDC poses as a neutral scientific body that assesses vaccine safety while mandating increased vaccine doses to the American people.
While the CDC does not sell vaccines directly, it does receive royalties from companies who acquire licenses to their technologies.
The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) plays a major role in this scheme. The 12 member ACIP Committee has extraordinary influence on the health of virtually all US citizens as it is the body tasked with “adding to and/or altering the national vaccine schedule.”
THE CDC AND COVID: THE ROAD TO COVID HELL IS PAVED WITH CDC OBFUSCATIONS
Besides, as the vilest Writer has his Readers, so the greatest Liar has his Believers; and it often happens, that if a Lie be believ’d only for an Hour, it has done its Work, and there is no farther occasion for it. Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect. – Jonathan Swift
As the central organization commissioned with “protecting America from health, safety and security threats,” the CDC was presented its most significant assignment in its controversial history when the Covid Crisis of 2020 spread to the shores of the United States.
The CDC would shift into hyperdrive offering up all manner of advice, guidelines, regulations, decrees and laws impacting virtually every aspect of life across the country. Most of these decrees represented radical departures from past epidemiological principles.
No stone was left un-micromanaged— even the mundane task of washing hands was transformed into a 4 page baroque ritual, video included, via CDC guidelines. It seemed the only thing notably omitted from CDC “expert guidelines” during this teachable moment was nutrition and exercise.
CHANGE WITH THE CHANGING SCIENCE™
This onslaught of edicts and definitions shifted on a weekly basis creating a climate of confusion and chaos. When questioned, the CDC would sternly proclaim “the science is settled.”
One of the more egregious examples of CDC duplicity occurred on March 24,2020 when the CDC changed well established protocols on ‘how cause of death’ would now be reported on death certificates, exclusively for COVID-19.
This seemingly benign modification became a watershed moment launching a process by which many deaths would be erroneously coded as U07.1 COVID-19. This led to massive COVID-19 death misattribution, was used to ramp up the fear and used as justification for the assemblage of draconian Covid policies.
Critics have called for a full audit of the CDC noting that, “These changes in data definition, collection, and analysis were made only for Covid” in violation of Federal guidelines. In a statement to Reuters, the CDC said:
it made adjustments to its COVID Data Tracker’s mortality data on March 14 because its algorithm was accidentally counting deaths that were not COVID-19-related.”
Two years after the problematic change in certification, the CDC would commence the process of removing tens of thousands from its “Covid death” toll.
THE COVID VACCINE
As the Covid crisis unfolded, all of the long and winding roads ended up in the same place: experimental mRNA gene therapies which were sold as ‘vaccines’ and advertised as a panacea to extricate the world from this ‘crisis.’ The CDC, as trusted go-to government body and chief marketing representative, was tasked with leading the country to safer shores and peddling Pharma’s latest cash cow to the American public.
To sell these experimental injections the CDC relied on the ever handy marketing mantra of “safe and effective”. Consistent with past maneuverings, CDC communiques on the mRNA injections were chaotic when not outright duplicitous.
Certain problems cropped up almost immediately as it was discovered that this sales pitch was dependent on flawed study designs and data that was clearly massaged and manipulated.
The very same CDC that originally touted Covid injections as being able to “stop transmission” took an abrupt U-Turn admitting they couldn’t.
Once the “vaccine” rollout was in full swing the CDC, true to form, ignored all warning signs.
As early as January 2021 safety signals pointed towards potential dangers of these controversial injections. Adverse reactions were either downplayed or completely ignored. Risk-benefit analysis was also kept off the table even as the data painted a not-so-rosy portrayal of “safe and effective.”
The CDC’s reputation took another hit when it was reported that large swaths of Covid data had been hidden from public scrutiny and independent analysis. This added to the pile of pandemic policy scandals and further tarnished the CDC’s veneer as a reliable public health agency.
POSTSCRIPT
The story of CDC kleptocracy parallels the story of contemporary US government institutions. From its humble beginnings as an agency with a mission to manage the swamp, it has degenerated into a bloated bureaucracy that has become a full fledged member of the swamp.
That the CDC isn’t telling the truth to Americans on important matters of public health is in plain sight. It is no surprise that polls show public confidence in the CDC plummeting and, in the mind’s of many, the agency’s once honorable bubble has burst.
Accusations of CDC corruption no longer exist exclusively in the skeptical minds of government critics; they have become commonplace denunciations backed by mountains of easy-to-access evidence. No conspiracy is needed as a litany of scandals have come to characterize ‘business as usual’ at the CDC.
“Can we trust the CDC?”
To find the answer ask a different question.
“Who owns the CDC?”
Michael Bryant is a freelance journalist/activist and researcher who presently focuses primarily on issues surrounding health freedom. His work has appeared on HealthFreedomDefense.org
Emergency calls for cardiac arrest and acute coronary syndrome in young people in Israel were significantly associated with the vaccine rollout, both first and second doses, spiking 25% higher than in earlier years, but not with COVID-19 prevalence, a study in the Nature journal Scientific Reports has found.
Using data from the Israel National Emergency Medical Services (EMS) from 2019 to 2021, the study looked at the volume of cardiac arrest and acute coronary syndrome EMS calls in the 16-39 year-old population. It found an increase of over 25% in both call types during January-May 2021, compared with 2019-2020, but no significant increase in calls correlating with COVID-19 infection rates.
The main finding of this study concerns with increases of over 25% in both the number of CA [cardiac arrest] calls and ACS [acute coronary syndrome] calls of people in the 16-39 age group during the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Israel (January-May, 2021), compared with the same period of time in prior years (2019 and 2020). Moreover, there is a robust and statistically significant association between the weekly CA and ACS call counts, and the rates of first and second vaccine doses administered to this age group. At the same time there is no observed statistically significant association between COVID-19 infection rates and the CA and ACS call counts. This result is aligned with previous findings which show increases in overall CA incidence were not always associated with higher COVID-19 infections rates at a population level, as well as the stability of hospitalisation rates related to myocardial infarction throughout the initial COVID-19 wave compared to pre-pandemic baselines in Israel. These results also are mirrored by a report of increased emergency department visits with cardiovascular complaints during the vaccination rollout in Germanyas well as increased EMS calls for cardiac incidents in Scotland.
While several studies have found severe myocarditis to be a rare adverse effect of the vaccines, the study authors note that myocarditis is often missed, and in fact has been found to be likely responsible for 12-20% of unexpected deaths in adults under 40 in normal times.
Myocarditis is a particularly insidious disease with multiple reported manifestations. There is vast literature that highlights asymptomatic cases of myocarditis, which are often underdiagnosed, as well as cases in which myocarditis can possibly be misdiagnosed as acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Moreover, several comprehensive studies demonstrate that myocarditis is a major cause of sudden, unexpected deaths in adults less than 40 years of age, and assess that it is responsible for 12-20% of these deaths. Thus, it is a plausible concern that increased rates of myocarditis among young people could lead to an increase in other severe cardiovascular adverse events, such as cardiac arrest (CA) and ACS. Anecdotal evidence suggests that this might not be only a theoretical concern.
The results, shown visually in the following graphs, are unmistakable, with clear corresponding spikes in vaccination numbers and emergency calls.
The study does not look at death rates in the age group, but data elsewhere show a clear spike in deaths during the period.
Woodrow Wilson was America’s most imperial President. He believed in American superiority and using military force to unite the world under a League of Nations based in New York. From 1913 to 1920, Wilson dispatched American troops to Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Cuba, Panama, Honduras, Russia, and France. President Wilson saw an opportunity for another American crusade. He asked the United States Congress for the authority to establish a Mandate for Armenia on May 24, 1920 that would fund a huge American military expedition to Turkey.
I pulled some threads on Soros in Russia (USSR). I found fascinating stories & mind-blowing connections! If you’d like to send a gift of support, please go here: https://amazingpolly.net/contact-support.php THANK YOU, wonderful audience! … more below…
Video first half: Soros’ meddling in the collapse of the USSR (which oddly leads to a creepy story about a female serial killer)
Second Half: Backgrounds of people on Soros’ International Science Foundation – Eugenics, Genetics, NASA, & soviet/hollywood-style propaganda.
With the start of World War III by the United States “declaring” war against Russia by its actions in Ukraine, we have entered a time when the end of time has become very possible. I am speaking of nuclear annihilation.
I look down at my great-uncle’s gold Elgin pocket watch from the 19th century. His name was John Patrick Whalen, an Irish immigrant to the U.S. who fled England’s colonialist created famine in Ireland. It tells me it is 5:15 PM on April 21, 2022, a date, coincidentally, with a history. No doubt John looked at his watch on this date in 1898 when the United States, after the USS Maine exploded from within in Havana harbor (a possible false flag attack), declared war on Spain in order to confiscate Spanish territories – Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. One colonial power replaced another and then proceeded over the long decades to wage war and slaughter these island peoples. Imperialism never dies. It is timeless.
One hundred-and twenty-four years go by in a flash and it’s still the same old story. In 1898 the yellow press screamed Spanish devils and today it screams Russian devils. Then and now the press called for war. If the human race is still here in another 124 years, time and the corporate media will no doubt have told the same story – war and propaganda’s lies to an insouciant and ignorant population too hypnotized by propaganda to oppose them. This despite the apocalyptic sense that permeates our lives because of demonic technology and its use to transform humans into machines who can’t think clearly enough to perceive reality and realize the threat posed by that quintessential technological invention – nuclear weapons.
This is not uplifting, but it’s true. The nuclear weapons are primed and ready to fly. The U.S. insists on its first-strike right to launch them. It openly declares it is seeking the overthrow of the Russian government. Russia says it will use nuclear weapons only if its existence is threatened, which has become increasingly so because of U.S. provocations over a long time period and its current expanding arming of Ukraine’s government and its neo-Nazi forces.
The Russian President Vladimir Putin and its Foreign Secretary Sergei Lavrov have just warned the U.S. that such involvement has made nuclear war a “serious” and “real” risk, in Lavrov’s words “we must not underestimate it,” which is a mild form of diplomatic speech. Putin said that Russia has made all the preparations to respond if it senses a strategic threat to Russia and that response will be “instant, it will be quick.” The U.S. response is to shrug these statements off, just as it has done so for many years with Putin’s complaints about NATO forces moving up to its border. Incredibly, Biden has said, “For God’s sake, this man (Putin) cannot remain in power.”
Despite endless media/intelligence anti-Russian propaganda – “a vast tapestry of lies,” to use Harold Pinter’s phrase – many fine writers have provided the historical details to confirm the truth that the U.S. has purposely provoked the Russian war in Ukraine by its actions there and throughout Eastern Europe, which the mainstream media avoid completely. This U.S. aggressive history against Russia is part of a much larger history of imperial hubris extending back to the 19th century. I will therefore here follow Thoreau’s advice – “If you are acquainted with the principle, what do you care for a myriad instances and applications?” – since how many times do people need to hear lies such as “Iraq has weapons of mass destruction” in order to justify wars of aggression around the world. The historical facts are very clear, but facts and history don’t seem to matter to many people. Pinter again, in his Nobel Address, bluntly told the truth about the U.S.’s history of systematic and remorseless war crimes: “Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest.” Which is still the case.
So time is my focus, for the last days have arrived unless there occurs a radical awakening to the obvious truth that the U.S. government is pushing the world to the brink of disaster in full awareness of the consequences. Its actions are insane, yet insanity has become the norm. Insane leaders and a catatonic, hypnotized public lead to disaster.
I write these words with an old fountain pen, a high school graduation gift, to somehow comfort and remind myself that when we were this close once before in October 1962, Kennedy and Khrushchev miraculously found a solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis; and to find hope now, and that when my time is up and I join John Patrick in the other world, things will have changed for my children and grand-children. It is admittedly the hope of a desperado.
The last few years of the Covid-19 propaganda have served to further distort people’s sense of time, a distortion years in the making through the introduction of digital technology with its accompanying numerical time clicks and its severing of our natural sense of time that is tied to the rising and falling of the tides and the turning of the days and seasons, a feeling that is being lost. Such felt sense of time’s texture could be slow or faster, but it had limits. We now live in a world without limits, which, as the ancient Greeks knew, demands payback.
For years before Covid-19, the sense of speed time was dominant, supported by the politically-introduced state of a constant emergency after September 11, 2001 with the urgency to hurry and keep up or one would fall behind. Keep up with what was never explained. Hurry why? Fast and faster was the rule with constant busyness that served the very useful social function of leaving no time for thinking, which was the point, but it made many feel as though they were engaged. And constantly alert for “terrorists” to come knocking. Thus the long wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc., all of which continue via various subterfuges.
Then, presto, all this frenzied time sense came to a stop with the 2020 lockdowns, when time got very slow, but not slow in the natural sense but an enforced slowness. People were locked up. Not only was it stupefying but stultifying and an existential drag. This went on for two years with the prisoners allowed short respites only to be rounded back up and locked down again. Jabbed and jolted was the plan. When will it ever end? was the common cry, as despair and depression spread and scrambled minds led to suicides and mindless screen entertainment. This was planned education for a trans-human future in which the cell phone will be central to totalitarian control if people do not rebel.
Those behind the Covid-19 and war propaganda are fanatical technocrats who seek total control of the world’s population through digital technology. Now they have temporarily let the people out of one type of cell and dramatically sped up time with frantic war propaganda against Russia. The great English writer John Berger said it perfectly:
Every ruling minority needs to numb, and, if possible, to kill the time-sense of those whom it exploits. This is the authoritarian secret of all methods of imprisonment.
Everyone is now doing time while scrolling messages on the walls of their cell phones. A twisted, convoluted, distorted, mechanical time in which it seems that there is no history and the future is an endless road of more of the same.
Some say we have all the time in the world. I say no, that we have entered a new time, perhaps the end-time, when the world’s end is a very real possibility. Hypnotized people can agree to anything, even mass-suicide, unless they snap out of it. This can only happen with a return to slowness in the old sense, when people once felt time in their hearts rhythms attuned to the rising and falling of nature’s reality. Time to think and contemplate the fate of the earth when nuclear war is contemplated. Yes, “We must not underestimate it.”
The World Health Organization has already begun drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness. What form will it take? What teeth will it have? How will it further the globalists in cementing the biosecurity grid into place? James breaks it down in today’s episode of The Corbett Report podcast.
In his classic dystopian novel 1984, George Orwell famously wrote, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.” This striking image served as a potent symbol for totalitarianism in the 20th Century. But as Caylan Ford recently observed, with the advent of digital health passports in the emerging biomedical security state, the new symbol of totalitarian repression is “not a boot, but an algorithm in the cloud: emotionless, impervious to appeal, silently shaping the biomass.” The new forms of repression will be no less real for being virtual rather than physical.
These new digital surveillance and control mechanisms will be no less oppressive for being virtual rather than physical. Contact tracing apps, for example, have proliferated with at least 120 different apps in used in 71 different states, and 60 other digital contact-tracing measures have been used across 38 countries. There is currently no evidence that contact tracing apps or other methods of digital surveillance have helped to slow the spread of covid; but as with so many of our pandemic policies, this does not seem to have deterred their use.
Other advanced technologies were deployed in what one writer has called, with a nod to Orwell, “the stomp reflex,” to describe governments’ propensity to abuse emergency powers. Twenty-two countries used surveillance drones to monitor their populations for covid rule-breakers, others deployed facial recognition technologies, twenty-eight countries used internet censorship and thirteen countries resorted to internet shutdowns to manage populations during covid. A total of thirty-two countries have used militaries or military ordnances to enforce rules, which has included casualties. In Angola, for example, police shot and killed several citizens while imposing a lockdown.
John Lauritsen — author, scholar, gay historian and critic of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s HIV/AIDS empire — has passed away. He is believed to have died on his birthday, March 5, at his home in Dorchester, Massachusetts at the age of 83.
He was in good health, and his death was unexpected.
Here’s a recent tribute video made by Jamie Dlux, just weeks before Lauritsen’s death:
“In my time I’ve been an antiwar activist, a gay liberationist, an AIDS dissident, a publisher, and an all-around freethinker,” Lauritsen wrote at Pagan Press, the publishing imprint he founded in 1982.
“I’ve spoken out when people with common sense kept their mouth shut. I’ve exposed fraud, punctured group fantasies and blasphemed against the prevailing superstitions.”
Though he wrote books on a wide range of esoteric subjects, Lauritsen was best known for his works that demolished the AIDS drug azidothymidine (AZT), including “Poison By Prescription.”
Links to several of John’s AZT articles and documents can be found here.
A Harvard-educated market research executive and analyst and member of Mensa, Lauritsen grew up in Nebraska. His father, an attorney, instilled in him a deep aversion to fraud that would run counter to the HIV/AIDS narrative, about which no questions were to be asked.
Lauritsen said about his HIV/AIDS books:
“I want them to stand for the record, so that no one, when the truth finally prevails, can pretend that there were no AIDS critics, or that we didn’t speak out.
“The terrible suffering, loss of life, propaganda, censorship, rumors, hysteria, profiteering, espionage and sabotage …. I maintain that AIDS reporters should be regarded as war correspondents … and that the salient characteristics of war coverage are also those of AIDS coverage.”
Lauritsen devoted his scholarship to aspects of gay history, but never went along with the revolutionary dictates ushered in by Larry Kramer’s ACT UP in the 1980s — beginning with Kramer’s demand that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approve a drug to treat AIDS fast, with no concern for safety or efficacy studies.
Lauritsen documented, meticulously and in a wry, distinctive voice, the bedrock of fraud that gave rise to AZT’s meteoric rise in the late 1980s. He did not mince words.
“I don’t think ‘murder ‘is too strong a word to use when you have a drug like AZT, approved on the basis of fraudulent research,” he said in an interview.
About Kramer’s ACT UP, he said simply: “The group as a whole was a shill for Big Pharma.”
Lauritsen’s searing exposés on HIV/AIDS and AZT appeared frequently as cover stories in The New York Native, a biweekly gay periodical founded by Charles Ortleb in 1980 that went on to publish more than 50 of his articles.
The New York Native was the first periodical anywhere in the world to report on the then-new disease called AIDS, in 1981 — months before The New York Times.
It was also the first to publish an interview (by Lauritsen) of University of California, Berkeley virologist Peter Duesberg, Ph.D., as early as July of 1987 — the same year Duesberg’s seminal and controversial paper came out in Cancer Research dispatching HIV as the cause of AIDS, and retroviruses as causes of cancer.
The New York Native also was the first to publish Larry Kramer’s historic 1983 tirade, 1,112 and Counting, at the same time as Lauritsen published his first warnings to the gay community about the potentially lethal toxicities of amyl nitrites, or “poppers.”
Lauritsen compellingly documented the key role poppers played in the etiology of Kaposi sarcoma and immune collapse among gay men, and the nefarious role Fauci played in downplaying this association.
The principal manufacturer of poppers was AZT distributor Burroughs Wellcome, the company that, with Fauci’s help, became a primary beneficiary of the AIDS crisis.
Lauritsen and Kramer would stake out diametrically opposed positions on the post-AIDS gay political map.
Lauritsen was far better equipped to analyze and assess the growing, utterly dysfunctional field of HIV research and therapeutics, yet Kramer was the one who, despite his extreme temper, grew an immense and iconic reputation, leading to the formation of Gay Men’s Health Crisis and ACT UP.
The mainstream, red-ribbon and AZT-adherent dominant gay community grew increasingly furious with The New York Native, especially over Lauritsen’s “HIV denial” and AZT criticism.
They urged a community-wide boycott of the paper, which led to its demise on Jan. 13, 1997.
The AZT crusade thus became the hill Ortleb, Lauritsen and The New York Native died on, many years before it was called “cancel culture.”
“‘Cancel culture’ is too mild a term,” Lauritsen said in an interview. “These sanctimonious savages are culture destroyers.”
The tragic irony is this: In everything Lauritsen wrote about AZT, he was vindicated and proven correct, as documented in “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
It is estimated some 300,000 gay men perished directly from exposure to high-dose AZT at the initial high doses given — anywhere between 1200 mg and 1800 mg.
In an interview with Tony Brown on PBS, Lauritsen said:
“What these drugs do — ACT and DDI and d4T — is very terrible. They take what’s called DNA synthesis, which is a process the body goes through whenever a new cell forms or when cells grow.
“It’s basically the life process. And these drugs terminate it. In other words, they believe that by stopping the life process they will stop HIV from replicating. And in fact, HIV is not replicating, no. So the theory behind it is crazy and the toxicities are deadly.”
AIDS itself he referred to as a “phony construct” and he despaired of the use of the word “queer” to describe gay men.
“John was funny, coolly intelligent, detached and yet passionate, a brilliant writer and journalist who saw through the illusions spun around the ‘AIDS epidemic’ right from the start,” Neville Hodgkinson, former science editor of the Sunday Times of London and veteran critic of HIV science, told The Defender.
It is impossible today to describe what an act of sustained courage and nerves of steel it took for Lauritsen to publish such stark critiques of AZT during those feverish years when it was billed as, and understood as, a life-saving drug — one that conferred sainthood upon ACT UP and the role it played in the lightning-fast FDA approval.
The U.K. documentary team Meditel, under the auspices of Joan Shenton, interviewed Lauritsen many times over the years, in several countries. Those interviews can be seen at Immunity Resource Foundation.
Lauritsen recently reflected, on Facebook, on history repeating itself:
“Re-reading ‘The AIDS War’s’ digital proof, I was struck by the horrors of the AIDS era that we’ve lived through — the ruthlessness and dishonesty of the AIDS Establishment — the comparisons with the COVID-19 horrors that we are going through now. May Truth finally prevail!”
Celia Farber is an investigative reporter who chronicled Anthony Fauci and Dark Pharma’s war on science and biology for various magazines since the late 80s, bringing wrath upon her name.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin has lashed out at the EU and US for criticizing its domestic and foreign policies. Wang singled out the US, accusing Washington of war crimes in the Middle East, economic coercion, betraying its allies and spreading disinformation.
“The US purports to maintain the centrality of the UN Charter, but it is clear to anyone that the US is doing quite the opposite,” Wang told reporters at a press conference on Monday. Citing the US’ military interventions in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, Wang stated that Washington “brushed the UN aside and waged wars on sovereign states in wanton interference.”
“The US claims to respect human rights, but the wars of aggression launched by the US and its allies … killed over 300,000 civilians and made over 26 million people refugees,” he continued. “Yet, no one is held accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The US even announced sanctions on the International Criminal Court who would investigate the war crimes of the US military.”
In addition to sanctioning a number of top International Criminal Court officials in 2020, the US maintains the ‘Hague Invasion Act’, giving its military permission to invade the Netherlands to free any American held at the court.
Wang then accused the US of using its economic might to coerce countries “whether they are big or small, faraway or nearby, friend or foe,” citing five decades of US sanctions on Cuba and four decades of such measures on Iran.
“When it comes to stabbing its allies such as the EU and Japan in the back, the US has never hesitated, as we have seen repeatedly,” he added, likely referring foremost to the US’ recent decision to undermine a nuclear submarine deal between France and Australia to further its ‘AUKUS’ alliance with the UK and Australia. China has repeatedly condemned this alliance as an American effort to build an “Asia-Pacific version of NATO.”
“Facts have proven that the US is the biggest spreader of disinformation, culprit of coercive diplomacy and saboteur of world peace and stability,” Wang declared. “From the US-EU dialogue to the AUKUS trilateral security partnership, the Quad and the Five Eyes Alliance, the US is using democracy, human rights, rules and order as a pretext to cover up its shady activities of creating division [and] stoking confrontation.”
Wang’s accusations, while incendiary, were not made out of the blue. Last week, US and EU officials held their third ‘Dialogue on China’, after which they issued a joint press release accusing Beijing of “repeated information manipulation” regarding the conflict in Ukraine, “recent incidents of economic coercion,” and alleged human rights abuses against the Uighur people in Xinjiang, all of which China denies.
The statement also called on China to peacefully resolve its disputes with Taiwan in accordance with the UN charter, and not to circumvent the US and EU sanctions on Russia. That’s despite the fact that those restrictions were imposed by the West unilaterally and have nothing to do with UN mechanisms put in place for such measures, leading Moscow to brand the move “illegal.”
In the 19th century, improvements in quality-of-life fundamentals such as drinking water, sanitation, housing and nutrition helped launch the public health profession.
The revolution in sanitation was one of the critical milestones that enabled Victorian-era Britain to dramatically reduce rates of sickness and death.
And in the 20th-century U.S., rising standards of living, including improvements in nutrition and sanitation, deserve the lion’s share of the credit for health improvements — not vaccination or other medical interventions.
The significant decline in mortality from illnesses such as measles, pertussis and influenza — today dubbed “vaccine-preventable” despite ample evidence of vaccine failure — occurred well before the development of any vaccines for those diseases.
U.S. data also reveal comparable declines in mortality for other conditions for which there was never a vaccine program.
Ignoring this unambiguous historical record, officials nonetheless turned vaccination into the centerpiece of U.S. (and global) public health policy, cementing the formation of a relentless medical-pharmaceutical-government juggernaut that — thanks to compromised legislators, regulators, scientists and private-sector players — brooks no questioning.
Now, in a rare departure from vaccine-centric public health dogma, a study published in The BMJ reminds us that old-fashioned public health interventions not only matter but can make a difference in a very short time frame.
Using data from India, researchers from the University of California, Irvine (UCI) modestly propose that sanitation improvements “may play a role in strengthening [young] children’s immune response” and reducing their disease burden.
Reading between the lines, the study’s results also suggest vaccination programs, for all their professed benefits, cannot come close to making the same claims.
Putting sanitation back on the map
Intrigued by the relationship between sanitation and childhood illness, the UCI team looked at the incidence in Indian children of four “vaccine-preventable” diseases (VPDs) — measles, diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus — before and after the government’s implementation of an ambitious program to achieve universal sanitation coverage.
India launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (SBM) or “Clean India Campaign” in 2014, to tackle the problem of open defecation (the depositing of human stool in open spaces and waterways).
Although India is the world’s fifth-largest economy and has achieved impressive reductions in poverty, it accounts for 60% of the global population practicing open defecation. Within the country, this translates to somewhere between 26% and 48% of Indians.
Open defecation is a major cause of diarrheal disease in children. Even without diarrhea, fecal-oral contamination can also set in motion environmental enteropathy and a cascade of negative effects, including intestinal inflammation, malnutrition due to “significantly deranged” intestinal absorption, immune dysfunction and altered gut bacteria.
Standout results for measles
The UCI researchers admitted it would have made sense to evaluate the impact of sanitation improvements on the occurrence of the conditions that account for the majority of diarrheal disease episodes in India: cholera, salmonella, hepatitis A and rotavirus.
Surprisingly, however, there are no “nationally representative, publicly available data sets” that would permit such analyses.
The researchers’ rationale for punting to the four above-listed VPDs has to do with the high incidence of those conditions — relative to other countries — in Indian children under age 5.
For example:
Average measles incidence in that age group is estimated at 32.8 cases per 100,000, placing India among the top 10 countries worldwide. Global measles incidence as of 2019 was 12 per 100,000.
The estimated incidence of pertussis for India’s children under 5 (31.1 per 100,000) is 10 to 15 times higher than in other large countries such as Brazil, even in the context of rising incidence globally.
Similar patterns hold true for diphtheria and tetanus, with India’s incidence outpacing the global average.
What did the UCI team find when it examined disease incidence pre- and post-SBM?
“Rapid improvements in ambient sanitation through increased toilet availability correspond with a reduction in the annual incidence of measles” in children under 5.
Their findings also pinpointed the role of nutritional variables, such as vitamin A supplementation (long recognized as beneficial for reducing measles morbidity and mortality) and improved nutrition measured through the proxy of decreased childhood stunting.
Although they detected no impact of sanitation on the other three VPDs, they suggest this could be accounted for by underdiagnosis and underreporting due to a more ambiguous symptom profile.
‘Low vaccine effectiveness’
India has one of the largest vaccination programs in the world. Even in 2013 — the study’s baseline year — coverage for measles and diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) vaccination for children under age 1 was already around 80%.
Fond of big-splash public health campaigns, the government of India declared, one year previously in 2012, a “year of intensification of routine immunization,” announcing several additions to its childhood vaccine schedule, and its intent to aggressively pursue “full immunization coverage … particularly in remote, backward and inaccessible areas and urban slums.”
Typically, Indian children receive one measles shot around 9 to 12 months of age, followed by a second dose at 16 to 24 months, as well as five DPT doses, in the form of problematic DPT-containing combination vaccines and DPT boosters.
Additionally, the National Immunization Schedule promotes not one but two tetanus shots for women during pregnancy.
Against this backdrop, the UCI authors argue, “India’s abysmal global [VPD] ranking raises questions about low vaccine effectiveness.”
To explain vaccine “underperformance,” the UCI researchers cite literature suggesting environmental enteropathy and related gut dysfunction and undernutrition interfere with vaccine effectiveness — even though those findings largely pertain to orally administered rather than injected vaccines.
Other features of India’s childhood vaccination program might also have something to do with the higher-than-average under-5 mortality blamed on VPDs.
Consider the following:
India has been at the forefront of the global rollout of five-in-one and six-in-one combination vaccines, the latter of which contain components for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b and polio.Studies and manufacturer data link these potent concoctions to infant deaths. (Vaxelis, a six-in-one vaccine containing a “double whammy” of untested aluminum adjuvant, is now being given to American infants.)
India’s children receive multiple doses of oral polio vaccine (OPV) — so-called “pulse polio” vaccination — and inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), either alone or in combination vaccines. In 2018, Indian researchers linked OPV pulsing to hundreds of thousands of cases of pediatric paralysis, also noting the paralyzed children died at twice the rate compared to mortality caused by wild polio.
India’s national vaccination program requires children in about 25% of the country’s districts to receive two doses of Japanese encephalitis (JE) vaccine in their first two years of life. Case reports and manufacturer inserts associate JE injections with sudden death, fatal myocarditis and life-threatening allergic reactions in children and young adults.
Public health myopia
For the most part, timeless and unglamorous basics such as sanitation, when mentioned at all, are disparagingly referred to as “old public health.”
The UCI study shows the memory-holing of such measures is short-sighted.
Other researchers agree that water, sanitation, hygiene and nutrition interventions constitute a public health “blind spot.”
Even UNICEF, hardly a neutral party in pushing vaccines as “the world’s safest method to protect children from life-threatening diseases,” concedes the “sanitation-nutrition nexus” deserves “far greater attention by policy-makers, practitioners and researchers.”
In 2015, Indian researchers questioned their country’s rigid JE vaccination policy, calling for an urgent reappraisal and telling policymakers to “tread with caution!”
Noting that JE accounts for a minority of India’s brain-swelling cases, they described enteroviruses — illnesses associated with polio and meningitis and linked to lax conditions of sanitation — as “coming in a big way as far as the encephalitis group of illnesses. . . is concerned.”
Their conclusion: “Public health efforts should not focus on vaccination alone.”
These types of observations, together with the UCI results, are reminders that it’s past time to reorient public health toward interventions that, unlike vaccines, not only do no harm but make a lasting difference.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has brought to the forefront the NATO treaty to which the United States is a party. President Biden and the Pentagon have steadfastly maintained that a Russian attack on any NATO member automatically obligates the United States to go to war against Russia. That, of course, would necessarily mean the virtual certainly of all-out nuclear war between Russia and the United States, a war that would, needless to say, end up destroying both countries and killing hundreds of millions of people in the process.
There is one big problem with the Biden/Pentagon position: It’s a lie. In fact, the NATO treaty does not obligate the United States to automatically come to the defense of any NATO member in the event Russia attacks that particular country. That’s because the NATO treaty does not operate to amend the U.S. Constitution.
The Constitution is the document that the American people used to call the federal government into existence. The Constitution established a federal government of limited powers. The government was divided into three branches — executive, legislative, and judicial — with enumerated powers being delegated to each branch of government.
With respect to war, the Framers delegated the power to declare war to Congress and the power to wage war to the president. What that meant was that the president is prohibited from waging war against another nation without first securing a declaration of war from Congress.
When the U.S. government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state after World War II, a fourth branch was effectively added to the federal government: the national-security branch, consisting of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA.
While it has been said that these entities are actually part of the executive branch, as Michael Glennon has pointed out in his excellent book National Security and Double Government (which I cannot recommend too highly), the national-security section of the federal government, owing to its overwhelming power, is actually the part that is running the show, with the other parts of the federal government operating deferentially in support.
The Constitution provides for the specific ways to amend the Constitution. Quoting whitehouse.gov: “An amendment may be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, or, if two-thirds of the States request one, by a convention called for that purpose. The amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures, or three-fourths of conventions called in each State for ratification.”
Notice something important: The Constitution does not provide that it can be amended by treaty. The Framers did not want federal officials to have the power to amend the Constitution by simply entering into treaties with other nations that changed the terms and conditions of the Constitution.
Therefore, the NATO treaty cannot operate to amend the constitutional provision that requires a congressional declaration of war before the president can legally wage war. Thus, if Russia attacks, say, NATO member Poland, the Constitution requires the president to secure a declaration of war from Congress against Russia before the president, the Pentagon, and the CIA can wage war against Russia.
Now, take a look at an article entitled “The NATO Treaty Does Not Give Congress a Bye on World War III” by Michael Glennon, who I mentioned above. It’s posted at a website entitled lawfareblog.com. This is one of the most important articles that you will read in your lifetime. I cannot emphasize too highly why you should read this article and, equally important, share it with everyone you know and, equally important, ask them to share it with everyone they know.
Glennon is professor of international law at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. From 1977-1980, he served as counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. You can read more about his credentials on Wikipedia by clicking here.
Glennon’s article makes the scholarly but easily readable case that the NATO treaty does not — and cannot — automatically obligate the United States to go to war in the event Russia (or any other nation) attacks a NATO member.
Of course, there is a much more fundamental question that Americans must confront: Why is the United States in NATO at all? NATO was established after World War II to ostensibly protect Western Europe from an attack by the Soviet Union, notwithstanding the fact that there was never any real likelihood that the Soviet Union, which was totally devastated in World War II, had any interest in going to war with Western Europe (and a nuclear-armed United States).
Regardless of whether NATO was necessary or whether it was just part of the Cold War racket, one thing is crystal clear: Once the Soviet Union dismantled, NATO’s mission became moot. At that point, this Cold War dinosaur should have been dismantled and sent into extinction.
Instead, what the NATO bureaucrats did was keep this dinosauric entity in existence and, even worse, began using it to absorb former members of the Soviet Union, which enabled the Pentagon to establish its nuclear missiles ever closer to Russia’s borders. It was when the Pentagon, operating through NATO, announced an intention to absorb Ukraine that Russia decided to invade Ukraine, as the Pentagon knew it would, in order to prevent the Pentagon from establishing its nuclear missiles (and military bases, troops, tanks, and other weaponry) on Russia’s border.
Thus, one of the keys to getting America back on the right track — toward liberty, peace, prosperity, and harmony with the people of the world — is to immediately withdraw from NATO, which would bring the immediate dissolution of this Cold War dinosauric entity, as well as bring U.S. troops home from Europe (and everywhere else). It is U.S. foreign interventionism that is a root cause of the loss of liberty and prosperity in America as well as America’s disharmony with the people of the world.
In the meantime, it is in the interest of every American to understand the nature of the NATO lie, a lie that holds that the NATO treaty automatically obligates the U.S. government to go to war against Russia in the event of an attack by Russia on another member of NATO. That’s why, again, I highly recommend reading Michael Glennon’s article and sharing it with everyone you know and asking them to share it with everyone they know.
By Lisa Pease | Consortium News | September 16, 2013
More than a half century ago, just after midnight on Sept. 18, 1961, the plane carrying UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld and 15 others went down in a plane crash over Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia). All 16 died, but the facts of the crash were provocatively mysterious. … 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
Aletho News 