Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

‘Seismic’ Verdicts: SF Transit System Must Pay Almost $8 Million to 6 Workers Fired for Refusing COVID Shots

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 25, 2024

The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) must pay about $7.8 million to six former employees who lost their jobs after the district denied their requests for accommodations for religious exemptions from BART’s COVID-19 mandate.

In the largest financial win yet for workers fired for failing to comply with COVID-19 vaccine mandates, a federal jury composed of entirely vaccinated jurors on Wednesday awarded the plaintiffs between approximately $1.2 million and $1.5 million each to compensate for economic losses and mental anguish.

The case is one of hundreds filed across the country since 2021, representing thousands of workers who say they lost their jobs when their employers illegally denied their requests for religious accommodation to the COVID-19 mandate.

“These verdicts are seismic — a 7.8 San Francisco legal earthquake,” Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which represented the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “This amazing outcome represents so much hard work by our team, perseverance by these clients, and fairness from our judicial system.”

The workers’ attorney, Kevin Snider, told The Defender that because of BART’s mandate, “The workers were forced to either deny their faith or lose their jobs.” He said they chose the latter, demonstrating the sincerity of their religious convictions.

The lawsuit began as three separate cases representing 35 employees fired by BART. The three cases were later consolidated into a single lawsuit. Twenty-nine of the plaintiffs settled with BART, but the remaining six went to trial this month.

“These workers lost their jobs and have struggled for more than two years,” Snider said. “It was a devastating disruption to their lives and to their families. Being able to settle or get a jury verdict helps them to put closure on this and for those who went to trial, they felt heard and understood by a jury, which can be important.”

This was the second time the case went to trial. The first trial ended in a mistrial in July when the jury could not reach a unanimous decision, as required in federal civil trials.

BART, which can appeal the decision, declined to comment. Bloomberg Law reported that BART filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law during the trial, which U.S. District Judge William Alsup said would be argued in December.

The motion argues that the plaintiffs have insufficient evidence to reasonably support their case, even if a jury finds otherwise. In response, the judge can allow the verdict to stand, order a new trial or overrule the jury’s verdict.

Religious objectors had option to comply, retire, resign or be terminated

The plaintiffs first sued BART in December 2022, alleging the agency violated their First Amendment rights to religious freedom and federal and state anti-discrimination laws.

The BART system, which operates in five counties across the San Francisco Bay area, issued a mandate on Oct. 14, 2021, requiring employees to be fully vaccinated as a condition of employment.

Employees could apply for a religious or medical exemption. If granted, BART determined whether to provide them reasonable accommodation. Between October 2021 and February 2022, 204 of Bart’s 4,000-plus employees sought an exemption.

Approximately 179 of those were for religious beliefs by people practicing a variety of religious faiths, including various forms of Christianity, Islam and Ruism, according to Snider.

BART granted 70 of the religious exemptions and denied the rest, according to the complaint.

But even the employees granted an exemption were denied reasonable accommodation so they could continue working. Although BART acknowledged their right to a religious exemption, the agency said it couldn’t reasonably make accommodations, like allowing them to work at home or do weekly testing.

However, 1 in 3 of the employees seeking medical exemption were granted exemption and given accommodation, according to the complaint.

Instead of proceeding on the assumption that the accommodation requests were based on sincerely held religious beliefs, the complaint alleges, BART launched a probe into the sincerity of the employees’ beliefs.

Employees’ claims were investigated using an interviewer template that asked for a detailed explanation of their beliefs and why taking the COVID-19 vaccine would violate them. The template included questions like, “What do you think will happen to you if you take the COVID-19 vaccine?”

BART proceeded to deny all requests for accommodation from religious objectors and gave them the option to comply with the mandate, retire if qualified, resign or be terminated.

All of the plaintiffs refused to comply and lost their jobs.

Over the next couple of years, many of those employees, working with the Pacific Justice Institute, sued BART and settled their cases. The cases that couldn’t reach a settlement proceeded to trial — which Snider said carried a serious risk, because “San Francisco is probably the most difficult venue in the entire country to have a vaccine case.”

The trial happened in two phases. First, the jury was asked to rule on whether BART could have granted the requested accommodations. They rejected the agency’s argument that it couldn’t reasonably accommodate the employees seeking religious exemptions without facing an undue hardship.

Then they heard testimony about the sincerity of the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs and the damages they suffered.

Sinder, whose firm represents plaintiffs alleging religious discrimination in more than a hundred vaccine mandate lawsuits across the country, said that he thought public opinion was slowly changing to favor workers.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

The impact of vaccine mandates to healthcare workers in Canada

By Eleftherios Gkioulekas | October 20, 2024

A recent paper by Professor Claudia Chaufan and colleagues reported the results of a cross-sectional survey of 468 Canadian healthcare workers examining the impact of COVID-19 vaccination decisions and the impacts of vaccine mandates. The sample used in the study is interesting because it consists predominantly of nurses and other supporting disciplines but very few medical doctors. The study provides only descriptive statistics; however, the reported results are astounding.

Here are some highlights: 75% of respondents that received the COVID-19 vaccine reported that the reason for taking the injectable product was employer vaccine mandates. Only 22% of vaccinated respondents reported no adverse events. Moderate adverse events were reported by 35.6% of respondents and severe adverse reactions were reported by 29.8% of respondents. Out of the 87 respondents that received the COVID-19 vaccine, 1 reported a life-threatening adverse reaction. Interestingly, only 4.3% of respondents were trained on how to report post-vaccination adverse events and only 4.5% of respondents reported that they were encouraged to report adverse events after vaccination.

From the entire sample of both vaccinated and unvaccinated healthcare workers, 74.6% reported anxiety and/or depression and 18.3% reported experiencing suicidal thoughts due to employer vaccination requirements (agree and strongly agree responses). Although 40% reported willingness to return to their previous role if vaccine mandates were dropped, another 42.5% reported an intention to leave their occupation or the healthcare industry as a result of their experience with vaccine mandates (agree and strongly agree responses). 85% reported that employers did not offer alternatives to vaccination to satisfy their vaccine mandate, with only 1 out of 468 respondents reporting that their employer was willing to accept proof of natural immunity, even though 75% of respondents reported that they worked with COVID-19 patients prior to the availability of the COVID-19 vaccines. Only 9.5% reported being offered regular testing as an alternative to vaccination.

59% of respondents reported that they were not provided with any written information about the vaccines, necessary for informed consent, and only 2.4% of respondents were provided with the package insert from the vaccine manufacturer.

Finally, only 16.1% of vaccinated respondents reported being happy with their choice to get vaccinated, whereas 92.6% of unvaccinated respondents reported being happy with their decision to not get vaccinated (agree and strongly agree). Furthermore, 70.3% observed differential treatment of patients based on their vaccine status and only 4.1% report that they are confident that the current healthcare system will provide adequate and quality care while respecting personal preferences and values (agree and strongly agree).

For more details, you will have to read the paper.

Here’s the paper’s conclusion:

In 2021 the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) announced six evaluation criteria that jointly provide “a normative framework (…) to determine the merit or worth of an intervention”- a policy, a strategy, or an activity (42). The first criterion is “relevance”, i.e., to what extent a policy is responsive to beneficiaries, meaning those who “benefit directly or indirectly from the policy”. The second criterion is “coherence”, i.e., to what extent a policy is compatible with other policies in a given setting. The third is “effectiveness”, i.e., to what extent a policy has achieved or is expected to achieve its objectives. The fourth criterion is “efficiency”, to what extent a policy converts inputs into outputs in the “most cost-effective way possible, as compared to feasible alternatives in the context” and within a reasonable timeframe. The fifth criterion is “impact”, i.e., to what extent a policy “has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended or unintended”, effects. The sixth and last criterion is “sustainability”, i.e., whether benefits are likely to last (42).

If our findings indicate a trend in the health care sector in Ontario, Canada, they suggest that by these criteria the policy of mandated vaccination for HCWs in the province has failed in its purported goal of promoting safer healthcare environments and achieving better care. Concerning “relevance”, the intended beneficiaries, whether HCWs, patients, or communities at large, have been harmed by exacerbated staff shortages, intimidating work environments, and health professionals coerced into acting against their best clinical judgment. Concerning “coherence”, the policy has proven to be at odds with other policies within health settings, such as the imperative to maintain adequate staffing levels or to respect informed consent and bodily autonomy, not only for HCWs but for those patients who, for whatever reason, decline vaccination. As to “effectiveness”, there is no evidence that the policy has improved patient care-as suggested by our findings, it has likely worsened it.

Concerning “efficiency”, there is no evidence that the policy has been more cost-effective than comparable alternatives, such as relying on the superiority of naturally acquired immunity over artificial immunity (23,43-45), acquired by most HCWs during 2020 as they treated patients in critical need, and for this reason were celebrated as heroes by the media and the authorities (46,47). Notably, naturally acquired immunity, achieved through recovery from a prior infection, was not recognized by healthcare employers in Canada. In fact, there is no evidence that such (then unvaccinated) workers were deemed a threat to patient safety and disciplined for that reason. Concerning “impact”, our findings also suggest that the overall impact of the policy on the well-being of HCWs and the sustainability of health systems has also been negative. Finally, concerning “sustainability”, with close to half of our sample of highly trained and experienced HCWs intending to leave the health professions, we see no evidence for any net benefits, either current or future. We conclude that if, by the OECD criteria, the policy of mandated vaccination for HCWs has failed, this failure, along with the contested efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines, their negative impact on HCWs’ wellbeing, staffing levels, and patient care, and the threat that mandates represent to longstanding bioethical principles such as informed consent and bodily autonomy (48,49), negates any basis-policy, scientific, or ethical-to continue with the practice.

References

C. Chaufan and N. Hemsing and R. Moncrieffe, “COVID-19 vaccination decisions and impacts of vaccine mandates: a cross sectional survey of healthcare workers in Ontario, Canada”, Journal of Public Health and Emergency (2024), Online First, https://jphe.amegroups.org/article/view/10313

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | 1 Comment

5-Year-Old Develops Autism After Being Forced to Get 18 Vaccines in 1 Day

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 18, 2024

In 2016, David Ihben moved his wife and three children from Chicago to Jamestown, in rural Tennessee, with high hopes for a new and calmer life.

But the dream turned into a nightmare for David and his children in December 2019, when divorce proceedings and a subsequent custody battle resulted in the forced vaccination of the children — and changed the family’s fortunes forever.

Ihben said his ex-wife decided “this wasn’t the life she wanted.” So they were attempting to develop a parenting plan in family court — when Tennessee judge Todd Burnett “pulled up the vaccine issue” after discovering the couple’s children were unvaccinated — and forced the parents to vaccinate their children.

Ihben’s two oldest children — daughter Hannah and son Joseph — were spared significant adverse events following their vaccination.

But his youngest son, Isaac, wasn’t so fortunate. After receiving 18 vaccines in one day, Isaac developed severe regressive autism. Today, he requires around-the-clock care.

The children’s mother soon abandoned the children, leaving Ihben to raise them as a single parent — even though he is still obliged to pay child support.

Ihben shared his story with Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Vax-Unvax bus. In a subsequent interview with The Defender, he detailed the challenges he faces in caring for Isaac and the harassment he endured from officials in his community. Ihben shared documentation with The Defender verifying his story.

‘How can a judge force medical care without a doctor’s input?’

Ihben told The Defender his entire family was unvaccinated. “I’ve never had any. My dad was drafted by the Army in 1961, and he didn’t get any either. We’ve never vaccinated,” he said. “Our children had to sign religious exemptions for school.”

During divorce proceedings though, his wife’s attorney used the vaccination issue to drive a wedge between the parents.

“When we went to court, I guess her attorney knew that [Burnett] was a pro-vaccine judge and that’s something that they could get me on,” Ihben said.

According to Ihben, Burnett told the couple that it was his “personal opinion that not vaccinating your children is child abuse.” He then told the couple that whichever parent would be willing to vaccinate the children that same day would leave the courthouse with custody.

“I said, ‘Your Honor, we have rights. It’s between the mom and their father,’” Ihben recalled. “Her attorney whispered to her, and she goes, ‘I’ll take them down and vaccinate them today.’”

“I was so surprised, because me and my ex-wife didn’t agree on much, but we did agree on that,” Ihben said, referring to their views on vaccination.

After the hearing, Ihben and his wife were granted joint custody of the children, with their mother as their primary guardian. Later that day, the children received their childhood vaccines — and Isaac immediately became sick.

“My daughter had previous allergies … so the doctor refused to give her all in one day. They split those … She didn’t have any side effects from what I can see,” Ihben said. “[Joseph] was in the ICU for a couple of days but seems to be okay. But [Isaac] spent 12 days in the ICU, eight days with a 106-degree fever.”

Isaac, who was 5 years old at the time, was “just a normal happy kid,” Ihben said.

Today, Isaac has severe regressive autism. Ihben told The Defender :

“He doesn’t talk. He wears a diaper. He eats out of a baby bottle 20-30 times a day, he has speech therapy and will require 24-hour care and supervision for the rest of his life.

“I haven’t had a full night’s sleep in four years. He has to be changed every two hours, or he will have an accident. If you have a child with regressive autism or know someone, you will understand what our days are like.”

Ihben didn’t learn about Isaac’s injuries right away, because the court initially slapped him with a six-month restraining order. When the six months were up, he finally made plans to pick up his children for “two-hour supervised visitation” at a local McDonald’s.

“My youngest comes walking out and I’m like, ‘What’s going on?’” He said his oldest children then told him about what happened to Isaac. “My children told me everything that’s going on. Basically, nobody’s given me information. I had to go off what 10- and 11-year-olds were telling me,” Ihben said.

Ihben tried to find out what happened to Isaac — but encountered more obstacles at Cookeville Regional Medical Center, his local hospital. “The judge had sealed the hospital records. I still cannot get them,” he said.

It wasn’t until he enrolled his daughter in high school that, while obtaining her records from the local health department, he had a chance to view Isaac’s records. That’s when he saw that Isaac had received 18 vaccines in one day.

“How can a judge force medical care without a doctor’s input?” Ihben asked. “I don’t think judges should be dictating medical treatment from the bench.”

According to Ihben, doctors at Vanderbilt University in Nashville said Isaac’s injuries “are a direct result from forced vaccination,” with one doctor telling Ihben that “she’s seen only one other kid that acts like Isaac does.”

Required to continue paying child support, despite mother’s disappearance

Soon after seeing his children for the first time after the custody battle, another surprise was in store for Ihben and his family: Ihben’s ex-wife called to say she and the children had been evicted.

After he kept the children for a week, their mother “got a free house, everything furnished and paid,” and the children were returned to her.

“Then she got evicted from there” in May 2020, Ihben said. He again picked up the children — but that was the last they saw of their mother. According to Ihben, after her second eviction, she left town without a trace.

“We haven’t heard from her or seen her,” Ihben said. “It’ll be five years in May.”

Ihben still pays child support to the state, even though he alone takes care of the children. He said the child support money, which remains uncollected, goes to a state fund — and, if it remains unclaimed, will be confiscated by the state when the children reach adulthood.

Ihben said that though he has gone to court to request full custody of his children or a reduction of his child support payments, he has faced a catch-22 situation.

“The judge said, I can’t do anything unless you get her here in front of me,” Ihben said. “I was like, ‘I’ve served her. Nobody knows where she is.’”

Ihben said he believes the children’s mother didn’t realize Isaac was going to be hurt so badly, and “she just can’t face it.” He added, “I just don’t understand, if she’s been gone almost five years, why she still has full custody, why I still have to pay child support.”

Tennessee laws, local officials pose challenges for raising Isaac

Ihben described the day-to-day realities of caring for Isaac, who will turn 11 next month and just started the fifth grade in a special education program. He said:

“Our lives have changed forever. I can’t have a regular job. I pick up stuff here and there … I have an alarm that goes off every two hours to change Isaac. He eats in the middle of the night … We live out in the country. There’s no bus, so I take him to school back and forth.

“He doesn’t talk, so you don’t know if he’s sick, if he’s upset, if he’s hungry, if he’s cold, if he has a stomach ache … I’ve got a mental list, and I just check it off and hopefully I hit the one that calms him and provides what he needs.”

State rules also pose obstacles. “You’re not allowed to have home healthcare for a disabled child unless you have no other children in the home under 18,” Ihben said.

Ihben noted that Tennessee ranks among the states with the lowest level of funding for autistic children, adding that autistic children are frequently mistreated.

“Our local school district has restraint chairs for autistic children. They are allowed to put Isaac in a chair, to pepper spray him, to tase him. Police departments have no training for dealing with autistic children,” Ihben said.

Ihben said state, county and town officials have attempted to intimidate him and his family.

According to Ihben, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) showed up at his home on Dec. 5, 2023. “Somebody starts beating on the door … there’s a truck at the end of the road, a truck at the end of the other road and two trucks in the driveway. They had assault weapons.”

Ihben said the officers claimed that a social worker wanted to speak with him, but that he refused to open his door for them. He submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the state to find out why his home was raided, but was told there are “no records of anything.”

The TBI raid took a toll on him. “I had a heart attack that night,” he said. “I couldn’t breathe.” He said the incident still affects him today. “I’m sure I have PTSD from it. I’m still under treatment,” Ihben said.

In June 2023, Ihben said he went to his county commission meeting to tell them about what happened to his family. The county commissioner, Jimmy Johnson, left him a voicemail warning him not to hold any rally or protest.

“The commissioner called the sheriff,” Ihben said, but ultimately “they backed off.”

In another incident, Ihben said he was banned from his local Walmart store after a store manager called the police because Isaac “was causing a disturbance.” This obliged Ihben to shop at another Walmart, an hour away from his home.

Ihben said it’s also difficult to find a lawyer to represent him and his family. “No attorney is willing to take on the judge.”

Local officials ‘tried to scare us’ into not doing Vax-Unvax bus interview

Ihben credited CHD and its Tennessee Chapter for helping him and his family. “We wouldn’t be here without CHD helping us out,” Ihben said. “The Tennessee Chapter has helped us out a lot.”

Ihben said he recently saw “Vaxxed 3” with members of the state’s CHD chapter. “What we have to live through every day is horrible, but it could be worse,” Ihben said, citing stories in the film of children who died post-vaccination.

According to Ihben, his efforts to promote CHD initiatives in his community, such as the visit of the Vax-Unvax bus earlier this year, have also been met with intimidation.

“We put a little flyer together [for the Vax-Unvax bus] and we started passing it out,” Ihben said. But on Feb. 1, the day of his bus interview, Ihben said his wife’s attorney, her husband — who is the attorney for the local school board — and Burnett, who mobilized the TBI, “tried to scare us into not doing the bus interview.”

Getting the word out, spreading the message is ‘the only weapon we have’

Isaac has recently shown some improvement, according to Ihben. “He’s doing better slowly … He’s in a lot of therapy. He’s starting to write some numbers and letters on his own. Teachers think he’s reading, but he’s still never said a word.”

Ihben said this has been a learning experience for his oldest children, who will “have to take care of Isaac every day” after his death. “That’s a lifetime commitment.”

Another silver lining, according to Ihben, is that Isaac’s story has become a learning experience for his family and many members of his local community.

“This hasn’t just got me learning. My kids are learning. Hannah and Joseph are learning about their government and their food and their environment. They’re teaching their friends about this.”

For Ihben, getting the word out and spreading the message is “the only weapon we have.” He said, “It’s powerful that my kids’ friends come up and say ‘we’re sorry for what happened to you, we’ve seen the [Vax-Unvax] interview.’”

Ihben said he hopes the message will help other children avoid Isaac’s fate. “I hope Isaac will be the last,” he said.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

‘Childish Temper Tantrums’ – Australian Councilor Fires Back at Pressure From Authorities

By Anatoly Donstov – Sputnik – 24.10.2024

Following his powerful interview with Sputnik, Adrian McRae, businessman and member of the Town of Port Hedland Council in Australia, has been urged to resign by Western Australia Premier Roger Cook in a desperate attempt to silence him.

“Earlier this week, before the Premier had heard I was in Russia, he suggested that the entire Town of Port Hedland Council should get back to “knitting” when we demanded him to show us evidence that the Covid-19 vaccines were safe… So, instead of acting like a true leader, … he attacks me personally and resorts to ad-hominem – the last refuge of a failed argument. I feel sorry for him actually. I don’t know what I’d do if I was in his shoes,” McRae told Sputnik, explaining Cook’s “contempt” towards him and “all West Australian Councilors.”

On Wednesday, the Premier called for the resignation of McRae, labeling him “an embarrassment” after his interview with Sputnik, ABC reported. In the interview, the businessman criticized Australian and Western media for biased coverage of Russia and challenged the narrative portraying Moscow as the enemy.

McRae warned that free speech is under threat in the West, while BRICS countries still offer hope for its protection. As an observer in the 2024 Russian presidential election, McRae praised the transparency of the process, drawing heavy criticism from Australian media.

“It’s simple. The Premier is using the boogeyman of Russia to attempt to ruin my character in hopes of people forgetting about the important questions my entire Council has asked him regarding the mRNA vaccine contamination. He is deflecting the subject to the best of his very limited ability and making an absolute fool of himself in the process,” McRae told Sputnik, explaining why Cook has gone to such lengths to smear him.

Despite the Premier’s desperate attempts to suppress the council member, McRae remains a strong voice against Western censorship and political corruption, with Sputnik delivering the uncensored truth that the West fears.

“Sadly for the Premier, I have truth and science on my side. He, on the other hand, has nothing but a dying prostitute media and a really poor scriptwriter. So no, I am not too concerned about the Premier and his childish temper tantrums,” McRae said confidently, undeterred by the threats from the Western Australia Premier.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Dark Money, Darker Motives: Why is Bill Gates Backing Kamala Harris Using Shady Super PAC?

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 23.10.2024

Tech billionaire, philanthropist and WEF cheerleader Bill Gates has given Kamala Harris’s campaign a $50 mln boost using dark money super PAC Future Forward. The donation was intended to remain secret, but was uncovered by NYT this week.

What’s Future Forward?

Set up in 2018 by former Obama campaign staffers and coming out of left field in the final weeks of the 2020 race to fund a massive pro-Biden media blitz, Future Forward is a super political action committee funded mostly by Big Tech and venture capital firms, including Meta, Google, disgraced crypto financier Sam Bankman-Fried, Bain Capital and Bridgewater Associates.

The super PAC has raised a whopping $700 mln for the 2024 election cycle, rolling out $75 mln in pro-Harris ads last week.

What’s Behind Gates’ Electoral ‘Generosity’?

2024 is at least the second election cycle where Gates has used a dark money vehicle to support the Democratic Party’s candidate. In 2020, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation contributed nearly $70 mln to the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit belonging to DC consultancy Arabella Advisors, which bankrolls the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a goliath of undisclosed donations for Democratic politicians and liberal causes which raised nearly $390 mln four years ago. Publicly, Gates and his now former wife also gave $500,000 to Biden’s inaugural committee.

Mr. Gates has been an active supporter of Democratic candidates since at least 2008, contributing financially to and praising the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Gates’ ties to the Clintons are deeply rooted, with the billionaire becoming a top donor to the Clinton Foundation, and forging partnerships with the organization for global projects since at least 2013.

In a telling interview in 2016 in which he explained his preference for Clinton, Gates said “there have been questions about vaccines in general where some of the candidates have shown that they’re not as up to date about vaccines in general, and that’s got to be a concern.”

“Science in general, whether it’s GMOs or vaccines, there’s a lot of people out there who don’t give science the benefit of the doubt. In terms of experience, Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton have more experience in global health,” Gates said at the time.

How has Gates profited off the Dems’ agenda?

With Harris’ presidential bid expected to broadly continue the Biden/Clinton line on foreign and domestic policy, it makes sense for Gates to throw his influence behind the VP, given the perceived threat of the Trump brand of red-pill MAGA Republicans and their anti-vax, anti-tech, and anti-interventionist leanings.

“This election is different, with unprecedented significance for Americans and the most vulnerable people around the world,” Gates said this week after info about his $50 mln donation leaked out.

“I think it’s great to have somebody who’s younger, who can think about things like AI and how we shape that in the right way, and I certainly offer up my opinions to the politicians who are interested,” Gates said this summer after Biden dropped out and named Harris his successor.

The Gates Foundation’s fortunes got a big boost under Biden, with its endowment growing from $69 bln in 2020 to $75.2 bln in 2023.

Gates enjoyed a profits bonanza off mRNA coronavirus vaccines mandated by the Biden administration. In 2022, he sold off shares of BioNTech stocks he bought in 2019 as sales slowed. His foundation has also owned shares in Pfizer, CureVac and Vir Biotech going back to well before the pandemic.

The billionaire’s foundation supports the Global Virome Project – an ambitious initiative created in 2018 to predict pathogens that could trigger lethal pandemics, but accused of weaponizing viruses from a network of 150 biolabs worldwide.

Gates has also backed a broad array of World Economic Forum-affiliated initiatives, including projects to reduce emissions and create synthetic meat and dairy. In 2022, The Seattle Times revealed Gates’ secret lobbying to save Biden’s signature $2+ trln Build Back Better social and climate spending package.

Gates has also been a top backer of the Biden administration’s battle against media and online ‘misinformation’, with an explosive MintPress investigation from 2021 revealing that his foundation had bankrolled some $319 mln in media, including CNN, the BBC, Le Monde, the Financial Times, Der Spiegel and others to ensure favorable coverage of his agenda and that of his allies.

October 24, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Prostate Cancer: Over-Testing and Over-Treatment

By Bruce W. Davidson | Brownstone Institute | October 17, 2024

The excessive medical response to the Covid pandemic made one thing abundantly clear: Medical consumers really ought to do their own research into the health issues that impact them. Furthermore, it is no longer enough simply to seek out a “second opinion” or even a “third opinion” from doctors. They may well all be misinformed or biased. Furthermore, this problem appears to predate the Covid phenomenon.

A striking example of that can be found in the recent history of prostate cancer testing and treatment, which, for personal reasons, has become a subject of interest to me. In many ways, it strongly resembles the Covid calamity, where misuse of the PCR test resulted in harming the supposedly Covid-infected with destructive treatments.

Two excellent books on the subject illuminate the issues involved in prostate cancer. One is Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers by Dr. Mark Scholz and Ralph Blum. Dr. Scholtz is executive director of the Prostate Cancer Research Institute in California. The other is The Great Prostate Hoax by Richard Ablin and Ronald Piana. Richard Ablin is a pathologist who invented the PSA test but has become a vociferous critic of its widespread use as a diagnostic tool for prostate cancer.

Mandatory yearly PSA testing at many institutions opened up a gold mine for urologists, who were able to perform lucrative biopsies and prostatectomies on patients who had PSA test numbers above a certain level. However, Ablin has insisted that “routine PSA screening does far more harm to men than good.” Moreover, he maintains that the medical people involved in prostate screening and treatment represent “a self-perpetuating industry that has maimed millions of American men.”

Even during approval hearings for the PSA test, the FDA was well aware of the problems and dangers. For one thing, the test has a 78% false positive rate. An elevated PSA level can be caused by various factors besides cancer, so it is not really a test for prostate cancer. Moreover, a PSA test score can spur frightened men into getting unnecessary biopsies and harmful surgical procedures.

One person who understood the potential dangers of the test well was the chairman of the FDA’s committee, Dr. Harold Markovitz, who decided whether to approve it. He declared, “I’m afraid of this test. If it is approved, it comes out with the imprimatur of the committee… as pointed out, you can’t wash your hands of guilt … all this does is threaten a whole lot of men with prostate biopsy… it’s dangerous.”

In the end, the committee did not give unqualified approval to the PSA test but only approved it “with conditions.” However, subsequently, the conditions were ignored.

Nevertheless, the PSA test became celebrated as the route to salvation from prostate cancer. The Postal Service even circulated a stamp promoting yearly PSA tests in 1999. Quite a few people became wealthy and well-known at the Hybritech company, thanks to the Tandem-R PSA test, their most lucrative product.

In those days, the corrupting influence of the pharmaceutical companies on the medical device and drug approval process was already apparent. In an editorial for the Journal of the American Medical Association (quoted in Albin and Piana’s book), Dr. Marcia Angell wrote, “The pharmaceutical industry has gained unprecedented control over the evaluation of its products… there’s mounting evidence that they skew the research they sponsor to make their drugs look better and safer.” She also authored the book The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It.

A cancer diagnosis often causes great anxiety, but in actuality, prostate cancer develops very slowly compared to other cancers and does not often pose an imminent threat to life. A chart featured in Scholz and Blum’s book compares the average length of life of people whose cancer returns after surgery. In the case of colon cancer, they live on average two more years, but prostate cancer patients live another 18.5 years.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, prostate cancer patients do not die from it but rather from something else, whether they are treated for it or not. In a 2023 article about this issue titled “To Treat or Not to Treat,” the author reports the results of a 15-year study of prostate cancer patients in the New England Journal of Medicine. Only 3% of the men in the study died of prostate cancer, and getting radiation or surgery for it did not seem to offer much statistical benefit over “active surveillance.”

Dr. Scholz confirms this, writing that “studies indicate that these treatments [radiation and surgery] reduce mortality in men with Low and Intermediate-Risk disease by only 1% to 2% and by less than 10% in men with High-Risk disease.”

Nowadays prostate surgery is a dangerous treatment choice, but it is still widely recommended by doctors, especially in Japan. Sadly, it also seems to be unnecessary. One study cited in Ablin and Piana’s book concluded that “PSA mass screening resulted in a huge increase in the number of radical prostatectomies. There is little evidence for improved survival outcomes in the recent years…”

However, a number of urologists urge their patients not to wait to get prostate surgery, threatening them with imminent death if they do not. Ralph Blum, a prostate cancer patient, was told by one urologist, “Without surgery you’ll be dead in two years.” Many will recall that similar death threats were also a common feature of Covid mRNA-injection promotion.

Weighing against prostate surgery are various risks, including death and long-term impairment, since it is a very difficult procedure, even with newer robotic technology. According to Dr. Scholz, about 1 in 600 prostate surgeries result in the death of the patient. Much higher percentages suffer from incontinence (15% to 20%) and impotence after surgery. The psychological impact of these side effects is not a minor problem for many men.

In light of the significant risks and little proven benefit of treatment, Dr. Scholz censures “the urology world’s persistent overtreatment mindset.” Clearly, excessive PSA screening led to inflicting unnecessary suffering on many men. More recently, the Covid phenomenon has been an even more dramatic case of medical overkill.

Ablin and Piana’s book makes an observation that also sheds a harsh light on the Covid medical response: “Isn’t cutting edge innovation that brings new medical technology to the market a good thing for health-care consumers? The answer is yes, but only if new technologies entering the market have proven benefit over the ones they replace.”

That last point especially applies to Japan right now, where people are being urged to receive the next-generation mRNA innovation–the self-amplifying mRNA Covid vaccine. Thankfully, a number seem to be resisting this time.

Bruce Davidson is professor of humanities at Hokusei Gakuen University in Sapporo, Japan.

October 20, 2024 Posted by | Book Review, Deception | , | 1 Comment

55 Undeclared Chemical Elements — Including Heavy Metals — Found in COVID Vaccines

By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | October 15, 2024

A group of Argentine scientists identified 55 chemical elements — not listed on package inserts — in the Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, CanSino, Sinopharm and Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccines, according to a study published last week in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research.

The chemical elements include 11 heavy metals — such as chromium, arsenic, nickel, aluminum, cobalt and copper — which scientists consider systemic toxicants known to be carcinogenic and to induce organ damage, even at low exposure levels.

The samples also contained 11 of the 15 lanthanides, or rare earth elements, that are heavier, silvery metals often used in manufacturing. These chemical elements, which include lanthanum, cerium and gadolinium, are lesser known to the general public than heavy metals but have also been shown to be highly toxic.

“The detection of multiple undeclared toxic elements, including heavy metals and lanthanides, in COVID-19 vaccines raises a dual and multiplied concern for human health,” James Lyons-Weiler, Ph.D., a member of the journal’s editorial board who was not involved in the research, told The Defender. “Individually, these chemicals are known to cause neurological, cardiovascular and immunological damage.”

“Together, their synergistic toxicity could exacerbate these risks far beyond what regulators and manufacturers have disclosed or studied,” Lyons-Weiler added.

The research builds on a series of studies conducted since 2021 using different analytic techniques to analyze COVID-19 vaccine vials from major manufacturers. Previous studies also identified significant numbers of chemical elements not listed on vaccine labels.

Research efforts included a 2022 study by a German working group, including the late pathologist Arne Burkhardt, submitted to the German government; a 2021 study by scientists in England; a 2022 study by Canadian Dr. Daniel Nagase; and a 2023 Romanian study by Dr. Geanina Hagimă.

Across those global studies, by the end of 2023, researchers had identified 24 undeclared chemical elements in the COVID-19 vaccine formulas.

Marcela Sangorrín, Ph.D., co-author of the Argentine study, told The Defender these different international studies are important because there is “a significant gap in the quality control of biological products by the national regulatory authorities of each country.”

“This situation is even more urgent and concerning when we consider the rapid advancements observed in cutting-edge biotechnological developments, the complexity of which requires a more thorough legislative and regulatory framework to ensure the safety of individuals who choose to use these therapies,” Sangorrín said.

CDC makes vaccine excipient information ‘almost impossible to find’

For the Argentine study, researchers aimed to corroborate the previous findings of undeclared elements and to detect and measure any elements not identified in those studies.

They analyzed 13 vials from different lots of six brands of the COVID-19 vaccines at a lab at the National University of Córdoba. They used a highly sensitive analytic technique — inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry — which makes it possible to measure elements at trace levels in biological fluids.

The researchers analyzed at least two vials of each vaccine, except for CanSino, a viral vector vaccine made in China, for which they analyzed only one vial.

Their paper included a long list of COVID-19 vaccine components declared by the manufacturers. The components vary by vaccine maker. The researchers obtained the lists through public information requests.

With the exception of Sputnik V and Sinopharm, manufacturers don’t declare the quantities of the named excipients in their vaccines, which the researchers flagged as a “very serious omission at the regulatory level.”

Vaccines often include excipients — additives used as preservatives, adjuvants, stabilizers or for other purposes. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), substances used in the manufacture of a vaccine but not listed in the contents of the final product should be listed somewhere in the package insert.

Listing excipients is important, researchers argue because excipients can include allergens and other “hidden dangers” for vaccine recipients.

OpenVAERS reports that the CDC has made publicly available vaccine excipient information “almost impossible to find.” OpenVAERS offers a comprehensive list of vaccine of excipients by type and by vaccine.

However, the OpenVAERS website also notes that independent tests of vaccine vials have found “contaminants that go well beyond those publicly disclosed by the manufacturers,” as identified in this study.

The researchers found the results of their chemical analysis varied by vaccine and also by vial tested. In some cases, the vials were subjected to repeated testing on different dates and produced slightly different results.

In one lot of the AstraZeneca vaccine, researchers identified 15 chemical elements, of which 14 were undeclared. In the other lot, they detected 21 elements of which 20 were undeclared. In the CanSino vial, they identified 22 elements, of which 20 were undeclared.

The three Pfizer vials contained 19, 16 and 21-23 undeclared elements respectively. The Moderna vials contained 21 and between 16-29 undeclared elements. The Sinopharm vials contained between 17-23 undeclared elements and the Sputnik V contained between 19-25 undetected elements.

82% of vaccines tested contained undeclared arsenic

Overall, researchers identified 55 different undeclared elements across the 17 samples analyzed.

All of the heavy metals detected are linked to toxic effects on human health, the researchers wrote. Although the metals occurred in different frequencies, many were present across multiple samples.

“There are undeclared chemical elements in common, such as boron, calcium, titanium, aluminum, arsenic, nickel, chromium, copper, gallium, strontium, niobium, molybdenum, barium and hafnium in all of the brands” of COVID-19 vaccines, the researchers wrote.

Others, such as chromium and arsenic, which increase the risk of serious cancers and skin diseases, were present as undeclared elements in 100% and 82% of the samples respectively. The researchers also found the lanthanide cerium, which can damage the liver and cause lung embolisms, in 76% of the samples.

These chemical elements are just a few examples of the 62 undeclared chemical elements identified by this study and previous studies combined, the researchers wrote.

They concluded that given the “diversity and notable presence in all brands, along with the peculiar characteristics of the elements found,” is unlikely the findings are due to contamination or accidental adulteration.

‘Utmost urgency’ that governments investigate these products

The researchers, who said the exploratory study was limited by the small sample size, called for a broader analysis of a larger number of samples. They suggested the broader analysis would confirm the trends they identified.

Sangorrín said this should be the work of government researchers.

“It is of utmost urgency that governments around the world conduct relevant investigations into these products, as is typically done in response to quality complaints identified through pharmacovigilance,” she said.

Those seeking justice, she added, must call on the World Health Organization, the pharmaceutical companies and governments to take urgent action, “in accordance with the severity of the situation, given the rise in global mortality rates, recorded adverse effects and the clear demonstration that these products were not developed with the intention of providing immunity.”

The authors underscored the high rates of serious adverse events, including deaths, associated globally with the COVID-19 vaccines. They suggested the adverse events and deaths, which are likely substantially undercounted, could be linked to the toxins they identified.

Lyons-Weiler also called for regulatory action to protect public health.

“Regulatory agencies must take immediate action to halt the use of these vaccines, thoroughly investigate how these toxins were missed, and ensure that the full spectrum of ingredients is transparently declared and the public duly and fully warned,” he said.

“The public’s health can no longer be gambled with in the face of such profound uncertainties.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

October 19, 2024 Posted by | Deception | | 2 Comments

Fired for Free Speech: Alison Morrow’s Battle Against Government Censorship

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | October 19, 2024

Alison Morrow (formally Westover), an accomplished journalist, found herself in the throes of a legal battle over her right to free speech. Represented by the Silent Majority Foundation, Morrow has filed a lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and its top officials, citing wrongful termination after she was dismissed for airing an interview on her YouTube channel. The channel, a personal project crafted during her tenure as an environmental reporter at KING 5 in Seattle, became the subject of controversy following her post featuring a highly censored doctor, Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, and his views on COVID-19.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

Morrow’s career at KING 5, which spanned from 2013 to 2019, was marked by significant accolades, including two Emmy awards. Recognized for her independent journalism, DNR was fully aware of her YouTube activities when they recruited her as a communications specialist. Initially, her independent media pursuits were supported by DNR, but the tide turned with her decision to feature Dr. Kheriaty. DNR’s leadership warned Morrow that her continued interviews could lead to termination, a threat she met with a staunch refusal to abandon her First Amendment protections.

Determined to uphold her freedoms of speech, press, and association, Morrow chose to defy DNR’s directive to adhere to approved narratives. This act of resistance ultimately led to her dismissal, prompting her to seek legal assistance from the Silent Majority Foundation, which took up her case to safeguard these fundamental rights.

“The 1st Amendment is one of the most sacred rights of Americans. It is what differentiates our country from most others, that we have the freedom to question our government. It is also central to a free press. I was willing to lose my job – and all that it provided for our family – in order to stand up against the encroaching erosion of this right that I was witnessing at the time, not just in my case but in thousands of others across the country during the pandemic,” Morrow stated. “There was no way to do science or journalism, in the culture of censorship that was driven by our government at the time. That meant millions of people made decisions without informed consent. Given my commitment to seeking truth wherever it leads, I was unwilling to acquiesce to a demand that I remain silent.”

October 19, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

New Zealand’s “Disinformation Project” Shuts Down Amid Accusations of Silencing Opposition

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | October 18, 2024

The Disinformation Project, launched in early 2020 in New Zealand as a “disinformation research” group, but slammed by critics as seeking to usher in ideological censorship, is no more.

The project is the product of the Covid era, initially focused on what was at the time considered “disinformation” but then branching out to things like vaccine skepticism in general, climate change – and, apparently, even local politics.

The group, which coordinated with the New Zealand government, described its activities as research and analyses of all manner of “extreme conspiratorial beliefs” as well as their compatriots’ “descent” into those.

Critics, however, point out that silencing the opposition, including by supporting “hate speech” laws, was among the activities of the now-shut-down endeavor that was led by Kate Hannah.

These critics accuse the Disinformation Project of moving from being a handy tool for the New Zealand government to spread its narratives promoting COVID-19 measures (some of the most restrictive in the world), to becoming a political weapon promoting a certain agenda.

Back in April, some commentators were concerned about where the Disinformation Project’s shift from the “abandoned pandemic” to political influencing might lead.

We now know that it has led to the group’s demise – but it is only one of the many similar efforts that appeared during the Covid era around the world.

A specific accusation against this one comes from New Zealand-based journalist Chris Lynch, who claims that Hannah, along with Sanjana Hattotuwa, attempted to effectively manipulate the 2023 election in the country by influencing the media via “secretive briefings.”

This didn’t succeed in this instance because they got “called out” – but over the past four years, the Disinformation Project has been accused of getting increasingly desperate to stay relevant, and finding ways to do that, with the policies it pushed accepted without critical examination by the legacy media.

Lynch is optimistic that the demise of this project and the rise of some that challenge the established media-political narratives means that New Zealand has turned the corner when it comes to censorship disguised as concern for democracy and the fight against “disinformation.”

However, it’s equally possible that where one such outfit exits the scene, another, under a different name and leadership but with the same purpose, might take its place.

October 18, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

They Think You Are Stupid, Volume 12

Everything you need to know about our ruling class’s opinion of you

By Aaron Kheriaty, MD | Human Flourishing | October 14, 2024

October 14, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

German Government Cancels Review of Pandemic Response

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | October 13, 2024

If the last twenty-five years have taught us anything, it’s that people who work in the government are absolutely abysmal at quantifying and managing the risks of their own ambitious schemes. Already in 2020, Dr. McCullough and I intuitively sensed that the COVID-19 mass vaccination program was a major gamble that would probably end up blowing up in the faces of the people who so aggressively pushed it.

To be sure, it would only eventually blow up in their faces if they allowed the truth of the matter to come out. For at least two years now, we have been in the cover-up phase of this criminal misadventure—not only in the United States, but also in the UK, Europe, and Australia.

C.J. Hopkins—an insanely persecuted American ex-pat author in Berlin—just mentioned on his Substack an extraordinary commentary in the Berliner Zeitung.

Please check out (below) my translation of this excellent essay.

Traffic light coalition cancels Corona investigation: Who would have thought?

Back in September, Lauterbach said, “Anyone who doesn’t review things seems like they have something to hide.” Is anyone surprised by the cancellation of this review? A commentary.

Ruth Schneeberger

“We need this review. I have called for it myself on several occasions,” said Karl Lauterbach less than a month ago in the ARD Report from Berlin. “If we don’t do it,” continued the SPD health minister, “then the impression will simply arise that we have something to hide. Therefore, such a review is necessary and should take place.”

Lauterbach would certainly have liked to have had a reappraisal carried out.

Lauterbach’s own coalition government has now denied him this wish. Some say to protect him.

Lauterbach himself has not exactly been at the forefront of the reappraisal process. In March, on the ZDF morning magazine, he rejected an inquiry commission because this type of reappraisal was “politically charged” and “right-wing groups” would turn the issue into an “ideological battle.”

Then came the RKI [Robert Koch Institute] protocols and the health minister changed his publicly stated opinion surprisingly quickly—not only with regard to their assessment, but also regarding purported “interference by foreign powers.”

At that point, he offered an assurance that he would have the protocols de-redacted as soon as possible—something that has not officially happened during his term of office to date. So now [we are told] he is in favor of a review of Corona policy.

However, the majority of his colleagues apparently do not want such a review. This week, the “traffic light” coalition agreed that there can be no political review of the pandemic in the current legislative period because they cannot agree on what form such a review would take.

This means that there will not be a review of the corona pandemic in this country before 2026, because there will be new elections in September 2025, and after that they will need to resuscitate the issue.

Review á la Citizens’ Council may therefore be discarded

Why is the government refusing to review the situation?

The SPD’s justification is that the FDP refused to hold a Citizens’ Council. Well, what a surprise. Citizens’ Councils have recently produced such groundbreaking results. In other words, this political issue is simply too hot for the SPD. The actors who voted in favor of the compulsory vaccination are still in office.

Lately it’s become fashionable to reinterpret one’s own role in the pandemic, but in politics, this is more difficult to do than in other domains. Politicians’ votes from this period are public record unless they were secret votes. During the big debate in the Bundestag in April 2022 about compulsory vaccination, the voting behavior of the parties was recorded and is still circulating on the internet.

This is yet another reason why it is still vividly remembered that the SPD and the Greens voted almost unanimously in favor of compulsory vaccination, while everyone else almost entirely voted against. And so, is anyone really surprised that the SPD—which is already having a hard time—is calling off the political review of the pandemic?

There is so much to review—including the vaccination campaign

The voting behavior on compulsory vaccination is also such a popular meme because it shows the extent to which politicians were prepared to put the supposed common good above the possible well-being of the individual. Compulsory vaccination remains an intervention in the body over which the individual can no longer decide.

The fact that vaccination—contrary to all assurances at the time—can go horribly wrong is evidenced by countless vaccine victims, whose fate Karl Lauterbach now says he is touched by. Nevertheless, this does not really prompt him and his colleagues to take action.

To this day, we do not know exactly how many vaccine injured there are, and how they can be helped. We do know, however, that around 20 times more suspected cases were reported to the Paul Ehrlich Institute for corona vaccinations than for other vaccines.

We made it through the pandemic alright in Germany—everything is okay, right? Wrong. The bad consequences are merely poorly concealed. Trust in government, politics and institutions has been permanently damaged; some no longer even trust their own doctors.

The next pandemic is supposedly just around the corner?

A thorough review would also be very important because there are warnings everywhere about new pandemics that are certain to come, sooner or later. The World Health Summit in Berlin will be hotly discussing this prospect over the next three days.

It is ridiculous that the coalition would cancel the review under these circumstances, and the decision could potentially cost them their jobs. Their decision is also negligent.

October 14, 2024 Posted by | Deception | , , | 5 Comments

Slovakia Defies Global Covid Agenda: Moves to Ban mRNA Vaccines Amid Rising Dissent

By Amy Mek | Exposing the Darkness | October 9, 2024

Slovak government commissioner for pandemic research Peter Kotlar considers mRNA vaccines dangerous and calls for a ban. He also questions the COVID pandemic itself. In Slovakia, Health Minister Zuzana Dolinkova has resigned, and Kotlar’s report on the investigation into the COVID pandemic, which he presented a week ago, may have been the decisive factor in her decision.

Kotlar’s findings, supported by Prime Minister Robert Fico, reflect a growing concern about the safety of these experimental vaccines, particularly the mRNA formulations developed by Western companies such as Pfizer and Moderna. In his report, Kotlar goes beyond questioning the safety of the vaccines—he challenges the very foundation of the COVID pandemic, calling it a “fabricated operation” designed to manipulate and control the global population.

Prime Minister Fico, long a critic of the vaccines, has taken a firm stand in support of Kotlar’s call for a ban. “These experimental injections have caused significant harm to many, and it’s time we acknowledge the dangers they pose,” Fico stated. His government has already taken bold steps by cutting ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) on COVID-related matters, signaling Slovakia’s departure from global consensus on pandemic management.

Fico’s leadership reflects a commitment to protecting the health and safety of Slovakians, even in the face of international criticism. While health officials and scientists across the world continue to praise mRNA technology, Fico’s administration prioritizes caution and skepticism, ensuring that Slovakia does not fall victim to corporate interests that have pushed these vaccines without fully understanding their long-term consequences.

As the Fico government pushes forward with its investigation into the financial dealings surrounding the procurement of vaccines, Slovakia stands out as a nation willing to challenge the dominant narrative and protect its citizens from dangerous medical experimentation.

October 12, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , | 2 Comments

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »