Russia not deliberately choking gas supplies to West – Bloomberg
RT | December 24, 2021
Russian energy giant Gazprom has already fulfilled its contractual obligations and is not manipulating European prices, Bloomberg has claimed.
Recent slumps in Russian gas deliveries to Europe are not because of price manipulation for political gain, the New York based finance bible reported on Wednesday.
Earlier this week, the Yamal-Europe pipeline, which brings gas from Russia to Germany through Poland and Belarus, halted shipments. As European energy prices soared, some officials in the West accused Moscow of playing politics with the gas supply, in order to push Germany towards approval of the new Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which has been completed for months but has yet to be officially approved.
However, Bloomberg reported that anonymous sources familiar with the matter had confided that the real cause of the halt in gas transit was that Western buyers under long-term deals had already hit their contractual limits for 2021.
Typically, Gazprom and its customers agree to an arrangement whereby the company will supply a certain volume of gas at a pre-set rate, which this year was less than market price. Beyond that volume, energy buyers would need to pay the market rate, and when several of them reached their volume cap this week, they elected not to purchase more gas.
The Russian state-owned energy giant and its clients, including Uniper SE and RWE AG, confirmed that the company had fulfilled its agreements this year, with the Russian firm stating that it delivers gas to Europe “fully in compliance with the current contract obligations.”
Gas prices in Europe rose about 20% this week, sparking fears of a winter energy crisis, and leading to heated rhetoric surrounding energy security and the role of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which will bring Russian gas to Germany through the Baltic Sea, bypassing transit countries such as Ukraine and Poland.
The controversial project, which was fully constructed in September, has met with staunch opposition from Kiev, Warsaw, and Washington, and Ukrainian officials have taken credit for working to delay its certification. However, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has insisted that it should not be used as political leverage against Moscow, saying, “The German authorities will decide this completely independent of politics. The process is moving along.”
At a press conference on Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin accused Western leaders of lying to make Moscow out to be responsible for the rising gas prices. “Gazprom is delivering the volume requested by its partners in full, in accordance with existing contracts,” he said.
34,337 Deaths 3,120,439 Injuries Following COVID Shots in European Database
UK Public Data Show 35 Deaths 213 Hospitalizations Among Booster Triple Vaccinated

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | December 22, 2021
The European (EEA and non-EEA countries) database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, verified by European Medicines Agency (EMA), and they are now reporting 32,649 fatalities, and 3,003,296 injuries following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:
- COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE MODERNA (CX-024414)
- COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE PFIZER-BIONTECH
- COVID-19 VACCINE ASTRAZENECA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19)
- COVID-19 VACCINE JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S)
From the total of injuries recorded, almost half of them (1,470,537) are serious injuries.
“Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”
A Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. It is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.
Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.*
Here is the summary data through December 18, 2021.
Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTech/ Pfizer: 15,788 deaths and 1,476,269 injuries to 18/12/2021
- 40,271 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 226 deaths
- 47,256 Cardiac disorders incl. 2,310 deaths
- 433 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 41 deaths
- 19,912 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 11 deaths
- 1,504 Endocrine disorders incl. 5 deaths
- 22,804 Eye disorders incl. 35 deaths
- 120,263 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 637 deaths
- 370,545 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 4,452 deaths
- 1,691 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 82 deaths
- 16,314 Immune system disorders incl. 84 deaths
- 61,494 Infections and infestations incl. 1,649 deaths
- 25,540 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 279 deaths
- 36,772 Investigations incl. 476 deaths
- 10,065 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 264 deaths
- 179,558 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 196 deaths
- 1,362 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 128 deaths
- 246,596 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,694 deaths
- 2,127 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 64 deaths
- 223 Product issues incl. 3 deaths
- 26,890 Psychiatric disorders incl. 191 deaths
- 5,314 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 249 deaths
- 55,551 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 5 deaths
- 63,512 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,742 deaths
- 68,837 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 134 deaths
- 3,257 Social circumstances incl. 21 deaths
- 10,192 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 122 deaths
- 37,986 Vascular disorders incl. 688 deaths
Total reactions for the mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273(CX-024414) from Moderna: 9,612 deaths and 431,805 injuries to 18/12/2021
- 9,176 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 106 deaths
- 14,538 Cardiac disorders incl. 1,000 deaths
- 174 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 8 deaths
- 5,244 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 4 deaths
- 409 Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
- 6,337 Eye disorders incl. 33 deaths
- 35,162 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 359 deaths
- 114,485 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 3,239 deaths
- 693 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 47 deaths
- 4,314 Immune system disorders incl. 17 deaths
- 16,686 Infections and infestations incl. 907 deaths
- 8,851 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 180 deaths
- 8,917 Investigations incl. 263 deaths
- 4,138 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 231 deaths
- 51,645 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 193 deaths
- 595 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 76 deaths
- 72,360 Nervous system disorders incl. 919 deaths
- 785 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 6 deaths
- 91 Product issues incl. 4 deaths
- 7,887 Psychiatric disorders incl. 158 deaths
- 2,553 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 183 deaths
- 9,972 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 8 deaths
- 19,269 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 1,032 deaths
- 23,101 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 84 deaths
- 1,956 Social circumstances incl. 40 deaths
- 1,946 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 150 deaths
- 10,521 Vascular disorders incl. 361 deaths
Total reactions for the vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca: 6,862 deaths and 1,103,016 injuries to 18/12/2021
- 13,469 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 255 deaths
- 19,919 Cardiac disorders incl. 753 deaths
- 208 Congenital familial and genetic disorders incl. 7 deaths
- 13,018 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 5 deaths
- 642 Endocrine disorders incl. 4 deaths
- 19,414 Eye disorders incl. 30 deaths
- 104,504 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 370 deaths
- 289,568 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,614 deaths
- 985 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 63 deaths
- 5,105 Immune system disorders incl. 31 deaths
- 34,377 Infections and infestations incl. 471 deaths
- 12,816 Injury poisoning and procedural complications incl. 184 deaths
- 24,316 Investigations incl. 178 deaths
- 12,629 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 101 deaths
- 163,096 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 125 deaths
- 684 Neoplasms benign malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 29 deaths
- 226,199 Nervous system disorders incl. 1,047 deaths
- 558 Pregnancy puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 17 deaths
- 193 Product issues incl. 1 death
- 20,437 Psychiatric disorders incl. 62 deaths
- 4,164 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 66 deaths
- 15,992 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 2 deaths
- 39,444 Respiratory thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 880 deaths
- 50,458 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 54 deaths
- 1,563 Social circumstances incl. 6 deaths
- 1,611 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 29 deaths
- 27,647 Vascular disorders incl. 478 deaths
Total reactions for the COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson: 2,075 deaths and 109,349 injuries to 18/12/2021
- 1,068 Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 44 deaths
- 2,052 Cardiac disorders incl. 173 deaths
- 41 Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 1 death
- 1,146 Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 2 deaths
- 87 Endocrine disorders incl. 1 deaths
- 1,475 Eye disorders incl. 7 deaths
- 8,932 Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 84 deaths
- 28,855 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 559 deaths
- 138 Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 13 deaths
- 489 Immune system disorders incl. 10 deaths
- 5,092 Infections and infestations incl. 165 deaths
- 1,011 Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 21 deaths
- 5,043 Investigations incl. 115 deaths
- 687 Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 51 deaths
- 15,638 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 47 deaths
- 68 Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) incl. 6 deaths
- 21,175 Nervous system disorders incl. 224 deaths
- 46 Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
- 29 Product issues
- 1,551 Psychiatric disorders incl. 20 deaths
- 462 Renal and urinary disorders incl. 27 deaths
- 2,485 Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 6 deaths
- 3,937 Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 268 deaths
- 3,370 Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 9 deaths
- 358 Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
- 745 Surgical and medical procedures incl. 61 deaths
- 3,369 Vascular disorders incl. 156 deaths

*These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.
Meanwhile, The Exposé is reporting that public health data in the UK shows that the vast majority of deaths and hospitalizations in the UK are among those vaccinated, and now there are 35 deaths and 213 hospitalizations being reported among those who have received booster shots and are triple-vaccinated.
EU’s top court allows European firms to scrap Iran deals
Press TV – December 22, 2021
The EU’s supreme court has intervened to protect European companies against legal action by Iran for failing to fulfill their contractual obligations.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg has ruled that EU companies can end contracts with Iranian firms if upholding the deals would lead to “disproportionate economic loss” as a result of US sanctions.
The ruling was prompted by a lawsuit from the German branch of Iran’s Bank Melli against Deutsche Telekom after the telecommunications provider terminated a contract with the bank in 2018 prior to its expiry.
The decision effectively neutralizes a “blocking statute” that prohibited individuals and companies in the European Union from complying with US sanctions imposed in 2018 by then US president Donald Trump after he decided to withdraw unilaterally from the Iran nuclear deal.
As per their obligations under the nuclear deal, the Europeans issued the statute in order to keep Iran in the agreement, but companies in the bloc quickly severed ties rather than risk running afoul of the US.
Under the blocking statute, European firms must seek a legal exemption for withdrawing from Iran due to US sanctions and those failing to do so could be penalized by their governments. Firms, however, can twist the law if they claim that their withdrawal is a business decision.
The court on Tuesday paid lip service to the EU blocking statute in its ruling, saying “the prohibition imposed by EU law on complying with secondary sanctions laid down by the United States against Iran may be relied on in civil proceedings”.
But the judges also said the rules of the blocking statute “cannot infringe the freedom to conduct a business by leading to disproportionate economic loss”.
The Higher Regional Court in Hamburg will have to decide whether upholding the contract with Bank Melli would expose Deutsche Telekom to such a disproportionate economic loss.
Observers believe the decision is a foregone conclusion, given that Deutsche Telekom makes about half of its turnover with its US business.
The ECJ said the Hamburg judges must take into account that Deutsche Telekom did not apply for an exemption from the EU blocking statute’s rules.
Other European measures taken to maintain open trade channels with Iran have equally proven to be empty shells.
For example, Iranians have got almost nothing from the Swiss Humanitarian Trade Agreement (SHTA) since it was launched in January 2020 with the support and consent of the US.
The Swiss trade channel much publicized by Washington as a purportedly secure way of delivering humanitarian assistance to Iran at a time of sanctions has failed to process even a single deal on Iranian medicine imports.
The channel was meant to find a way around the US sanctions to use Iranian funds deposited abroad to buy food and medicine for the country via the Swiss bank BCP.
However, companies seeking to participate in the scheme have found it very difficult to comply with the criteria set by the US government to avoid violating the general rules governing the sanctions, said the report.
Fabian Maienfisch, a spokesman for Switzerland’s State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), which oversees the channel, has admitted in the past that the initiative had effectively failed to meet its objectives.
Such failures and the ECJ’s ruling prove statements by the Iranian government that the Europeans are disingenuous in dealing with the Islamic Republic.
The ruling comes as Iran and the Europeans continue negotiations in Vienna to find a way to remove the US sanctions.
A possible revival of the agreement would require the European companies to return to Iran and fulfill their obligations, but the EU court decision appears to be intentionally timed to provide them a leeway for further violations.
“Do Not Discriminate” Against the Unvaccinated, Japanese Government Tells Citizens
By Noah Carl | The Daily Sceptic | December 21, 2021
At this point, almost all Western countries have introduced some form of vaccine passport or vaccine mandate. Despite repeated assurances from the Vaccines Minister that this wouldn’t happen here, Britain is no exception.
Things may go further in some European countries. Austria is set to make vaccination mandatory from 1st February next year. And beginning in January, Greece will impose a monthly fine of €100 on all over 60s who remain unvaccinated.
Even the United States – supposedly the ‘land of the free’ – has not bucked the trend toward use of passports and mandates. Several states have introduced them, including some of the biggest like New York, California and Virginia. Healthcare workers with natural immunity have already been fired for refusing to comply.
You might conclude that introducing passports and mandates is just something that all advanced countries do. But that isn’t true, as there’s one major exception: Japan.
Nobody can doubt Japan’s credentials as an advanced country. It’s a member of the ‘Group of Seven’, along with the U.K., U.S., Canada, France, Italy and Germany. And it boasts the world’s third largest economy overall. Japan is known for its technologically advanced society, where the high-speed trains never run more than a few minutes late.
So what is the country’s stance on passports and mandates? So far, it’s completely eschewed them. Not only that, but the Government and Prime Minister have explicitly told citizens not to discriminate against the unvaccinated.
The following notice appears on the website for the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare:
Although we encourage all citizens to receive the COVID-19 vaccination, it is not compulsory or mandatory. Vaccination will be given only with the consent of the person to be vaccinated after the information provided. Please get vaccinated of your own decision, understanding both the effectiveness in preventing infectious diseases and the risk of side effects. No vaccination will be given without consent. Please do not force anyone in your workplace or those who around you to be vaccinated, and do not discriminate against those who have not been vaccinated.
And a similar notice appears on the website for the Prime Minister:
Vaccines will never be administered without the recipient’s consent. We urge the public never to coerce vaccinations at the workplace or upon others around them, and never to treat those who have not received the vaccine in a discriminatory manner.
Western countries still claim to be the foremost defenders of civil liberties. But in the era of Covid safetyism, it seems that mantle has passed to Japan. Perhaps the country will send a delegation of human rights experts to teach the West about individual freedom.
Digital Surveillance — the Real Motive Behind Push to Vaccinate Kids
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | December 15, 2021
COVID-19 may have caught much of the planet by surprise in late 2019 and early 2020, but much of the groundwork for the technology now widely used as a “response” to the pandemic was conceptualized and developed years prior.
In the U.S. and throughout the world, there has been a recent push to implement a variety of “vaccine passport” regimes, many of which rely on digital technologies such as mobile applications to carry a record of — so far, at least — one’s COVID-19 vaccination records.
These “tools” are presented by public officials and significant sections of the media in recent weeks and months as an inevitability of sorts, a technological progression as natural as breathing.
They are also presented as a “new” response to an unprecedented crisis.
These technological applications are touted as a means of keeping businesses open and ensuring “peace of mind” for members of the public who remain wary about entering public spaces.
But just how new is this “new” technology? And will the use of technology be limited to COVID vaccinations, or for purposes of “health?”
International ‘alliances’ backing the melding of ‘Big Tech’ and ‘Big Health’
It was the beginning of the preceding decade, January 2010, when Bill Gates, via the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, proclaimed “[w]e must make this the decade of vaccines,” adding that “innovation will make it possible to save more children than ever before.”
In launching this so-called “Decade of Vaccines,” the Gates Foundation pledged $10 billion in funding. But Gates wasn’t the only actor behind this initiative.
For instance, the “Decade of Vaccines” program used a model originating from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health to project the potential impact of vaccines on childhood deaths throughout the decade to come.
And the announcement for the “Decade of Vaccines” initiative was made at that year’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF).
These same actors — the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the WEF — organized the now-notorious Event 201 pandemic simulation exercise, in October 2019, just before COVID entered our lives.
Moreover, in 2010, a “Global Vaccine Action Plan” was announced as part of this initiative. It was a collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), with Dr. Anthony Fauci serving on the leadership council.
As the Gates Foundation stated at the time:
“The Global Vaccine Action Plan will enable greater coordination across all stakeholder groups — national governments, multilateral organizations, civil society, the private sector and philanthropic organizations — and will identify critical policy, resource and other gaps that must be addressed to realize the life-saving potential of vaccines.”
The steering committee for the “Global Vaccine Action Plan” included a member from the GAVI Alliance. Notably, the initial announcement for the “Decade of Vaccines” was made in the presence of Julian Lob-Levyt, then-CEO of the GAVI Alliance.
What, or who, is the GAVI Alliance? Also known as the “Vaccine Alliance,” it proclaims a mission to “save lives and protect people’s health,” and states it “helps vaccinate almost half the world’s children against deadly and debilitating infectious diseases.”
GAVI goes on to describe its core partnership with various international organizations, including names that are by now familiar: the WHO, UNICEF, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Bank. (Far from helping the world’s poor, the World Bank has been described by a former insider, John Perkins, as an organization that uses “economic hit men” to subjugate financially crippled countries).
In 2018, GAVI, through its INFUSE (innovation for update, scale and equity in immunization) Initiative, put forth the following “food for thought”:
“Imagine a future in which all children have access to life-saving vaccines no matter where they live — a future in which parents and health workers ensure their timely vaccination, a future in which they have their own digitally stored health record that cannot be lost or stolen, a future in which, regardless of gender, economic or social standing, this record allows each child (and parents) to have access to a bank account, go to school, access services and ultimately build a prosperous life.
“This future is possible today. With the latest advances in digital technologies that enable more effective ways to register, identify births and issue proof of identity and authentication for access to services — we are on the brink of building a healthier and more prosperous future for the world’s most vulnerable children.”
This would be accomplished, according to GAVI, through the INFUSE initiative, specifically by “calling for innovations that leverage new technologies to modernize the process of identifying and registering the children who are most in need of life-saving vaccines.”
As described by investigative reporter Leo Hohmann:
“Don’t be confused by the bit about ‘building a healthier and more prosperous future.’ That’s just window dressing. This is all about data collection and has nothing to do with health.
“The real purpose behind the historic, unprecedented push to vaccinate the very young, even against diseases like COVID that do not pose a threat to them, is to fold the current generation of children into the blossoming global digital identity system.”
GAVI itself confirmed the above statement, as it has described potential uses of these “new technologies” as going beyond the issuance of a “digital child health card” toward encompassing “access to other services,” including the broadly defined “financial services.”
Limitations on “access” to such “other services” are already apparent in jurisdictions where COVID passports restrict access to businesses, banks and other private spaces for the non-vaccinated
The GAVI Alliance also closely collaborates with the ID2020 Alliance, founded in 2016, which claims to advocate in favor of “ethical, privacy-protecting approaches to digital ID,” adding that “doing digital ID right means protecting civil liberties.
Unsurprisingly, there is no clarification provided regarding the potential loss of civil liberties for individuals who choose, for any reason, not to be vaccinated and who are therefore excluded from large swaths of society in areas where COVID passports have been implemented and enforced.
Such rhetoric on the part of ID2020 is reminiscent of the public statements put forth by the European Union (EU) as it was preparing to launch its so-called “Green Pass” earlier this year.
EU officials, such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen — who recently called for a “discussion” on mandatory vaccinations in the EU — went to great lengths to stress how individuals’ privacy would be protected.
In a manner which some may consider tone-deaf, they further emphasized that such a digital pass would enable people to “move safely” for “work or tourism,” as if such free movement is a new concept that only a digital pass could make possible.
Again, restrictions on the unvaccinated, including those involving “work or tourism,” were entirely absent from the public rhetoric surrounding this new measure.
Highlighting the possibilities that the GAVI-ID2020 collaboration could bring, the INFUSE call for innovation states:
“According to the ID2020 Alliance — a public-private partnership that includes Gavi — the use of digital health cards for children could directly improve coverage rates by ensuring a verifiable, accurate record and by prompting parents to bring their children in for a subsequent dose.
“From the parents’ perspective, digital records can make it convenient to track a child’s vaccines and eliminate unnecessary paperwork.
“And as children grow, their digital health card can be used to access secondary services, such as primary school, or ease the process of obtaining alternative credentials. Effectively, the digital health card could, depending on country needs and readiness, potentially become the first step in establishing a legal, broadly recognized identity.”
All of these proposals and initiatives appear, in turn, to be closely aligned with the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, and in particular, Goal 16.9, which calls for the provision of a digital legal identity for all, including newborns, by 2030.
To this end, the UN established the UN Legal Identity Agenda Task Force in 2018. In May 2021, this task force, alongside the United Nations Development Programme and a variety of private sector actors, organized the “Future of Technology and Institutional Governance in Identity Management” roundtable sessions.
The final report from these sessions indicates, among other things, a desire from the stakeholders for the expansion of public-private partnerships for the further development and implementation of digital ID regimes worldwide, including in the Global South.
One of the stakeholders present, the not-for-profit Secure Identity Alliance, touts its support for “the provision of legal, trusted identity for all and driving the development of inclusive digital services necessary for sustainable, worldwide economic growth and prosperity.”
A paper published in July by the Security Identity Alliance discusses “making health certificates a workable reality.”
One of the five principles the paper puts forth for such health passports is that they are “futureproofed,” by offering “multi-purpose functionality” in order to “ensure ongoing value beyond today’s current crisis.”
The Secure Identity Alliance counts among its observers governmental authorities from countries such as Germany, The Netherlands, Estonia, Slovenia, the United Arab Emirates, Nigeria and Guinea.
Moreover, one of its founding members and current board members is the Thales Group, a private company involved in aerospace, defense and security — in short, a defense contractor.
On its website, the Thales Group proudly promotes its “smart health card” and Digital ID Wallet technology. Amidst utopian language claiming “we’re ready for change” and “putting citizens in control,” the Digital ID Wallet promises the public the ability to “access the rights and services to which we are entitled.”
Indeed, the documents that would be available via this Digital ID Wallet go beyond “health credentials” and include national identification cards, driver’s licenses and any number of other items of official documentation.
Numerous countries worldwide, including the U.S., currently find themselves in varying stages of implementing exactly this sort of “digital wallet.”
Taking ‘health passports’ a step (or more) further: digital wallet regimes take shape
The U.S. House of Representatives on Nov. 30 passed H.R. 550, the Immunization Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2021.
If passed by Congress, this law would provide $400 million in funding to expand vaccine-tracking systems at the state and local level, enabling state health officials to monitor the vaccination status of American citizens and to provide this information to the federal government.
Vaccine passports and no-fly lists for the unvaccinated — a concept for which Fauci expressed his support — could be created under the law.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Annie Kuster (NH-02), passed the U.S. House of Representatives with 294 votes, including all Democrats and 80 Republicans. It is now before the Senate, where it is being reviewed by the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Since being passed by the House, the bill has garnered a fair amount of attention — other recent digital identification developments in the U.S., however, seem to have remained relatively under the radar.
In September, for instance, Apple announced a partnership with eight states — Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma and Utah — to make those respective states’ driver’s licenses available in digital form via the Apple Wallet platform.
Meanwhile, several states, including New York (via its “Excelsior Pass”) and Connecticut introduced their own digital COVID vaccination certificate.
Similar to how the EU has promoted vaccine passports, these state-level initiatives in the U.S. are touted as a means of “safely” reopening the economy and encouraging travel and movement.
Indeed, New York went so far as to make a “blueprint” of its vaccine pass platform available, “as a guide to assist other states, territories, and entities in the expansion of compatible COVID-19 vaccine credential systems to advance economic development efforts nationwide.”
Looking at the EU, one of the bloc’s priorities as part of its 2019-2024 five-year plan is to create a “digital identity for all Europeans.” Namely, each EU citizen and resident would have access to a “personal digital wallet” under this initiative.
This “personal digital wallet” could include documentation such as national ID cards, birth certificates, medical certificates and driver’s licenses.
The EU subsequently presented its plans for the “European Digital Decade,” where under the EU’s “Digital Compass,” 100% of key public services will be available digitally, with a target of 80% uptake of digital identification documents.
Already, several EU member states are getting into the act.
Germany, which had electronic national ID cards (via biometric chips) since 2010, introduced digital versions of these ID cards this past fall, via the AusweisApp2. The same app makes German driver’s licenses available digitally.
Germany and Spain also recently signed an agreement to launch a cross-border program for digital identification, which would entail mutual recognition of each other’s official digital documents
France also recently announced its intention to integrate its national identification card with smartphones.
Greece received praise from the global press when it introduced particularly draconian digital tools during its two COVID lockdowns, such as a government SMS platform to which residents would have to send a text message in order to circulate in public for a limited set of “reasons.”
More recently, Greece announced the forthcoming creation of a digital wallet that will contain documents such as one’s national ID card, driver’s license and health documentation.
Estonia, viewed as a world leader in introducing digital e-governance and which has had digital identification cards in place since 2002, is preparing its own digital wallet system while expressing support for the EU’s “Digital Compass.”
Outside of Europe, several other countries also have expanded their digital identification regimes in various ways.
In Australia, for instance, states such as New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland introduced or trialed digital driver’s licenses.
It is in India, though, where such digital documents appear to have generated the greatest degree of controversy thus far.
The Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission was announced in 2020 and launched as a pilot program in six regions of India in 2021. It is an app that provides a unique digital health ID to each citizen and is linked to their personal health records.
Its establishment comes on the footsteps of the development of Aadhaar, India’s national digital identification card system.
Aadhaar generated controversy over the government’s plans to link it to the national voter database, while it has also been the target of hackers.
Questions arise as more digital platforms rolled out for ‘official purposes’
The rollout of digital platforms gives rise to questions about the safety of individuals’ data on these digital platforms, despite government reassurances to the contrary regarding privacy.
Moreover, it remains unclear how long “COVID passports,” whether in digital or paper form, will remain enforced, or if governments plan to make such a regime permanent.
A recent article in The Atlantic, “Why Aren’t We Even Talking About Easing COVID Restrictions?” questioned why vaccine passport mandates in the U.S. have no sunset date.
Indeed, if the proclamation of the Secure Identity Alliance regarding the need to “futureproof” such digital documents is any indication, it may be the case that governments have no intention to scrap vaccine passports.
Even if such specific uses of digital “passports” eventually go away, the range of ways in which digital wallets can potentially be utilized is staggering, including, for instance, via the tracking of “personal carbon allowances,” as previously reported by The Defender.
Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.
© 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
Austria is only a few months or even weeks ahead of France and the rest of Europe
TCW Defending Freedom | December 12, 2021
MEPs against compulsory vaccination
Christine Anderson, MdEP | December 10, 2021
At the 4th Intergroup Press Conference this week, I met again with my colleagues and we made it clear once more:
– No to compulsory vaccination
– No to social division
– No to political/medial scaremongering
– No to the state-fueled dismantling of freedom and democracy.
See in my speech why I will defend the freedom of our children with claws and teeth and call on the administration:
“Come on, government! Let’s see what you’ve got. I’m not afraid of you!”
Unvaxxed in Austria Could be Imprisoned For a Year
New amendment increases sentence for non-payment of fines
By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | December 10, 2021
People in Austria who remain unvaccinated could find themselves imprisoned for a year, according to critics of an amendment to an administrative law.
Susanne Fürst of the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ), which voted against the amendment, warned that it could be used to punish the unjabbed with much harsher sentences.
The amendment raises fines from €726 (£617/$818) to €2,000 (£1,701/$2,255) and increases prison time for those who refuse to pay from four weeks to up to a year.
Given that Austrians who don’t get vaccinated by February face fines of up to €7,200 ($8,000) for non-compliance, those who refuse to pay would also face a 12 month jail sentence.
The amendment also orders people who are jailed to pay for their own imprisonment.
“If detention is carried out by the courts, the associated costs shall be recovered by the courts from the obligated party in accordance with the provisions existing for the recovery of the costs of enforcing judicial penalties,” it states.
Despite Fürst protesting that the amendment could be used to further punish the unvaccinated, the measure was approved anyway.
At the time it was announced, then Chancellor Alexander Schallenberg vowed to hit the unvaccinated with “penalties” if they still refused to get the jab, while asserting that they should “suffer.”
Given that some technocrats are asserting that the vaccination program will never end, the initial one year prison sentence for vaccine refusniks could be just the beginning.
Fossil Fuel Restriction Dam Starting To Break
By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | December 4, 2021
Somewhere a couple of decades or so ago, the rich parts of the world embarked on a program of replacing energy from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas) with energy from intermittent “renewables” (mainly wind and solar). In trendy academic, journalistic, and otherwise progressive circles, the idea took hold that this was the way to “save the planet.” This program was undertaken without any detailed engineering study of how or whether it might actually work, or how much it might cost to fully implement. In the trendy circles, there took hold a blind faith in the complete ability of the government, by dispensing taxpayer funds, to order up whatever innovation might be needed to move us forward to this energy utopia.
The latest UN-orchestrated effort to implement the renewable energy program, known as COP 26, has just broken up. To read the verbiage emanating from the affair, all is on track, if a bit slower than one might have hoped.
But I have long predicted that this program would come to an end when (absent some miraculous innovation that nobody has yet conceived) the usage of the renewables got to a sufficient level that their costs and unworkability could not be covered up any longer. Until very recently the pressure of elite groupthink has been able to maintain a united front of lip service to the cause. But consider a few developments from the past few weeks, just since the end of COP 26:
Japan
Japan tends to keep its head down in international affairs, and at COP 26 signed on to the happy talk group communiqués without raising any particular issues. But there is no getting around that Japan has the third largest economy in the world — after the U.S. and China, and larger than any European country — so its actions in energy policy are inherently significant. Also, Japan has relatively little energy production of its own, is heavily dependent on imports, has harsh winters, and has a growing Chinese military and economic threat right on its doorstep. Is Japan really going to trust its fate to intermittent wind and solar energy?
On December 1 Bloomberg reported: “Japan Is Backing Oil and Gas Even After COP26 Climate Talks.” It seems that this rather significant country may be seriously re-thinking the move away from fossil fuels. Excerpt:
Government officials have been quietly urging trading houses, refiners and utilities to slow down their move away from fossil fuels, and even encouraging new investments in oil-and-gas projects, according to people within the Japanese government and industry, who requested anonymity as the talks are private.
What is motivating Japan to break from the world groupthink? According to the Bloomberg piece, the main motivator is security of energy supply — which wind and solar obviously cannot provide:
The officials are concerned about the long-term supply of traditional fuels as the world doubles down on renewable energy, the people said. The import-dependent nation wants to avoid a potential shortage of fuel this winter, as well as during future cold spells, after a deficit last year sparked fears of nationwide blackouts. . . . Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry declined to comment directly on whether it is encouraging industries to boost investment in upstream energy supply, and instead pointed to a strategic energy plan approved by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s cabinet on October 22. That plan says “no compromise is acceptable to ensure energy security, and it is the obligation of a nation to continue securing necessary resources.”
(Emphasis added.). Well, if “no compromise is acceptable” on “energy security,” that pretty much rules out principal reliance on wind and solar for powering the Japanese economy, at least until some magical new inventions come along.
United States
In the U.S., Republicans have only very gradually caught on to the idea that fossil fuel restrictions in the name of “climate” are becoming a political liability for the Democrats. Up to now, there have been some politicians willing to speak out in opposition to such restrictions, but little in the way of concrete steps taken in opposition. Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues to move forward with initiatives at the SEC, Treasury Department and Federal Reserve to pressure banks and other financial institutions to reduce their participation in the fossil fuel industries.
So this is a big development: On November 22, a coalition of state treasurers sent a letter to large financial institutions threatening to end relationships, including the deposit of state and pension funds, with institutions that cut off financing for the coal, oil and natural gas industries. National Review reports in a November 22 piece headlined “Fifteen States Respond to ‘Woke Capitalism,’ Threaten to Cut Off Banks That Refuse to Service Coal, Oil Industries.” Excerpt:
A coalition of financial officers from 15 states sent a letter to the U.S. banking industry on Monday warning they plan to take “collective action” against banks that adopt corporate policies to cut off financing for the coal, oil, and natural gas industries. . . . The letter puts the financial institutions that have “adopted policies aimed at diminishing a large portion of our states’ revenue” on notice, saying the banks have “a major conflict of interest against holding, maintaining, or managing those funds.”
According to the NR piece, the state treasurers signing on to the letter include those from West Virginia, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming, Alabama, Texas and Kentucky. Recipients of the letter included JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, and Goldman Sachs. Between the states’ own accounts and their pension funds, the amounts at issue would be well into the multiple hundreds of billions of dollars, if not approaching a trillion.
Meanwhile, over in Europe . . .
Another Bloomberg piece, this one from November 28, describes the sense of impending doom hanging over Europe with the combination of low natural gas supplies, price spikes, and complete inability to coax more production out of proliferating and essentially useless wind and solar generators. The headline is “Europe’s energy crisis is about to get worse as winter arrives.” Excerpt:
The situation is already so dire this early in the winter season because of a blistering rally in natural gas prices. Stores of the fuel, used to heat homes and to generate electricity, are lower than usual and are being depleted quickly. Analysts have warned that gas stores could drop to zero this winter if cold weather boosts demand. Rolling blackouts are a possibility, warned Jeremy Weir, chief executive officer of Trafigura Group, a Swiss commodity trading house on Nov. 16.
And then there’s this comment:
“If the weather gets cold in Europe there’s not going to be an easy supply solution, it’s going to need a demand solution,” said Adam Lewis, partner at trading house Hartree Partners LP.
I think that a “demand solution” means some combination of either blackouts or intentionally cutting people off and, I guess, leaving them to freeze. The “supply solution” mentioned by Lewis would be allowing fracking in the extensive shale formations underlying Western Europe. Such fracking is currently banned. Even if those bans were lifted today, it would be way too late for this winter. … Full article
The case for compulsory vaccinations is dead… Omicron just killed it.
By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | December 2, 2021
Yesterday, Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, held a press conference where she talked at length about her “concerns” over the EU’s low vaccination rate, and how best to “fix” it.
When asked about making vaccines mandatory, she said:
It is understandable and appropriate to lead this discussion now – how we can encourage and potentially think about mandatory vaccination within the European Union. This needs discussion, this needs a common approach, but I think it’s a discussion that has to be led.”
Adding:
Two or three years ago, I would have never thought to witness what we see right now, that we have this horrible pandemic, we have the life-saving vaccines but they are not being used adequately everywhere. And thus this is an enormous health cost,”
Of course, the idea that the EU nations are going to “debate” mandatory vaccinations is a joke, they are more likely to enforce them no matter what.
But any real, rational debate was over as soon as the EU and the vaccine manufacturers both admitted that the vaccines do not work.
By any pre-2021 definition, the Covid “vaccines” are not actually vaccines. From the beginning, it has been widely admitted that they don’t stop you getting the disease, and they don’t stop you spreading it.
Every day we hear about some famous person or other testing positive “despite being vaccinated”.
The EU has already hinted that their vaccination passes (which, ironically enough, they appear to have been planning for “two or three years” despite von der Leyen claiming they never saw the pandemic coming), will expire in nine months.
Why will they expire?
Because the “protection” allegedly conferred by the vaccine wears off.
How fast does it wear off?
The alleged emergence of the Omicron variant makes the situation even worse, from the establishment point of view. Indeed, it could be argued the first real casualty of the Omicron outbreak was narrative cohesion.
Experts are already warning that the Omicron variant may be resistant to the vaccines, and the CEO of Moderna added his voice to this chorus yesterday, saying:
I think it’s going to be a material drop [in vaccine effectiveness]. I just don’t know how much because we need to wait for the data. But all the scientists I’ve talked to…are like ‘this is not going to be good’.”
Even if these warnings prove incorrect, and the mainstream suddenly backtracks and starts reporting that the vaccines work “better than expected” to combat Omicron, that’s irrelevant.
They have just admitted that the “vaccines” could stop working the moment there is a new mutation. And viruses mutate a lot.
So, they know the vaccine’s don’t work very well, they know they will wear off, and they know any new mutations could stop them working completely.
The only thing they don’t know is what the long term side effects of the vaccines are, a fact admitted by Pfizer themselves in their supply contracts:
the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known
Now, here’s the all-purpose disclaimer: This is not admitting that Covid19 is dangerous, the pandemic real or in any other way endorsing the narrative. Rather, and this is important, it’s pointing out that even on their own terms the establishment’s plan for compulsory vaccination does not make any sense at all.
The current narrative is that:
- The vaccines do not confer immunity or prevent transmission.
- What beneficial effect they do have wears off, they don’t know when.
- They probably don’t protect against new variants or mutations.
- The vaccines have unknown longterm side effects.
These are not fringe ideas or baseless theories, they are the self-contradictory supposed “facts” of the schizophrenic covid story.
Going entirely by the mainstream’s own words, and completely on their own terms, any possible case for mandatory vaccinations is dead.
The “Omicron variant” killed it, even if it never killed anything else.

