Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

World leaders sign new censorship declaration at UN event as Secretary-General Guterres pushes for increased online censorship

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 1, 2024

A new UN-driven censorship declaration has been signed by a number of world leaders during an event in Portugal – the Cascais Declaration at the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) Global Forum.

We obtained a copy of the final declaration for you here.

The gathering was addressed by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who once again reiterated his commitment to censoring online speech, bringing up the usual set of “arguments” in favor of moving in this direction.

During the address, Guterres spoke about “unchecked digital platforms and AI” and accused them of allowing “hate speech to proliferate like never before” – and did not miss the opportunity to mention “misinformation and deepfakes” in the same context.

Guterres wants Big Tech, advertisers, and media – that is, along with some governments and organizations like the UN, among the most egregious offenders when it comes to online censorship – to double down.

“Taking responsibility for their role” in spreading hate speech, deepfakes, etc., was how he phrased it.

Guterres also again pushed a UN initiative that critics say introduces algorithmic censorship and demonetization under the stated “anti-misinformation and hate speech” scope – the UN’s Global Principles for Information Integrity.

According to Guterres, these recommendations allow for “a more humane information ecosystem.”

Meanwhile, the Cascais Declaration states that the leaders who signed it are “alarmed” at what is described as a global spread, online and offline, of “disinformation, misinformation and hate speech.”

The signatories also want those to be combated while at the same time strengthening “information integrity” (without going into what that means, and how it is supposed to be achieved.)

Another of the many controversial UN schemes, the Pact for the Future, is “noted” in the declaration, and framed as recognizing the role of “reinvigorated multilateralism” and religious organization promoting a culture of peace.

However, those opposed to the Pact see yet another mechanism to usher in more censorship and surveillance.

These points about the supposed greater-than-ever dangers of AI, misinformation, etc., are nestled inside the declaration’s overall message of the need to protect a variety of human rights and cultural diversity.

Among them is the mention of “monitoring antisemitism,” but also “combating Islamophobia” – including by appointing a special UN envoy to deal with the latter task.

December 1, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

The voice of family members of detainees in Israeli jails

International Solidarity Movement | December 1, 2024

On Monday 25 November, about eighty women, mothers, sisters and wives, gathered in Nablus, in the West Bank, to demonstrate in solidarity with the nearly 100 women detained in Israeli jails, along with around 12,000 men, to demand their release and an end to the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Their family members have been in Israeli jails for months or years, yet nothing has been heard from them since 7 October last year.

“We want to live in a free country! Out with the occupation forces! They burn Gaza with phosphorus bombs, and tomorrow it’s our turn,” they chanted in one of the city’s main squares while clutching pictures of their loved ones imprisoned.

And again: “We will not tire; they are the occupiers and the criminals. They kill the children of Palestine, men and women rise up against this.”

“My son has been in prison for two and a half years,” says Hanan, holding a photo of a smiling young man in his 30s. She has not heard from him for more than a year. “The situation in prison is very bad now,” she says. “We don’t know anything anymore because we have no chance to communicate with them in any way. No institution, red cross or human rights association, no lawyer can reach them to tell us how they are. We are very worried about our sons.” She adds: “I hope my voice will reach the whole world, and that someone will help us.”

There are many, too many stories. Their families brave the risks of arrest and detention to take to the streets, sometimes weekly, to demand the release of their loved ones and demand news.

“My son Samir has been in prison for eight months in administrative detention,” says another woman, a photo of the young man in her arms. “Every time his detention period ends, they renew it for him. The Israeli administration refuses permission to the lawyer and anyone else to visit him. We only hear from him when someone is released from the same prison.

“My son is sick, and he has no treatment. They don’t give him medicine. They don’t send people for treatment.”

Also in Tulkarem, where every Tuesday dozens of people gather outside the headquarters of the International Red Cross in the hope that their voices will be heard outside the country. A band of young boys with drums and musical instruments set the rhythm for the chants, while family members and representatives of local human rights associations pass the microphone around. “With soul and blood, we will defend our prisoners! Raise your voice for those who have sacrificed their freedom,” they shout together.

“Conditions in prisons since October 7 are completely different. The number of prisoners has more than doubled,” says Ibrahim Nemer, one of the representatives of the Palestinian Prisoners Club of Tulkarem. “There are more than 12,00 political prisoners in jails now.”

According to Addameer, leading Palestinian human rights organisation on prisoners rights, before Oct. 7 there were 5,000 political prisoners. The number of administrative detentions has also increased tremendously. There are almost 3,400 people in administrative detention, whereas before it was 1,200.

Administrative detention means that a suspect is arrested and held in jail potentially indefinitely, without being told the reasons for the arrest and without the Israeli authorities being required to present evidence against him. Thus, with no possibility of defence.

“There are no longer humane living conditions in the prisons. Everything that the prisoners’ movement had conquered has been taken away,” Ibrahim continues. “TV, books, and there are no more visits for relatives. They don’t give enough food or water … Most of the prisoners have lost dozens of pounds.”

Prisoners are forced to keep the same clothes for weeks, and despite the cold they are not given the necessary blankets. Even shampoo and soap are not provided.

“It’s torture. There is no other way to describe it.”

Ibrahim describes horrific conditions in Israeli jails over the last year. “Most of the prisoners have scabies. They used to go outside two hours a day, now no outside hours are allowed in most prisons. Obviously, this is contrary to human rights.”

A further problem is their legal status. The West Bank has been occupied by the Israeli army since 1967. This would make its detainees prisoners of war, or political prisoners. “Instead, Israel does not recognize this status, but considers them common prisoners, delinquents. If it considered them political prisoners, or prisoners of war, it would have to treat them differently in accordance with international law,” explains Ibrahim.

“The military is always invading the cells where they are detained with dogs, beating them. Many prisoners have been killed in prison, the number has increased a lot since October 7, many have died because of torture and the absence of medical care. The conditions are not conducive to life … so that prisoners are just thinking about how to survive …”

According to the Palestinian Prisoner’s Society, at least forty prisoners have died in Israeli custody since Oct. 7. But it could be many more. At least 25 bodies have not yet been returned to their families.

“We are back to the prison-system of hundreds of years ago. We know that many people internationally are with us, but that is not enough. Because all governments are supporting Israel with weapons, money, and even soldiers. We need to put more pressure on governments to stop aid and support for Israel and free all political prisoners who are being held,” continues Ibrahim.

He has two sons in prison, and a brother. One son with a one-year sentence; one with a three-year sentence. And the brother with a 21-year prison sentence.

“We are like everyone, yani, like all Palestinian families … but the difficult conditions the prisoners are suffering make families worry about the very lives of their loved ones in prison. The problem is not only that they are detained and the time they have to wait for them to be released, but today every day we fear for their lives.”

December 1, 2024 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture | , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s Picks for Surgeon General and Top Posts at FDA, CDC Earn Mixed Reviews

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 25, 2024

President-elect Donald Trump’s nominees to lead three key federal public health agencies “would help the incoming president shift the priorities of agencies that are linchpins in public health” — but they’re also “controversial,” according to NPR.

Trump tapped Dr. Marty Makary to head the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Dr. Dave Weldon to lead the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and physician Dr. Janette Nesheiwat for surgeon general.

“The roles will be key to helping to enact Trump’s second term health agenda, which could include agency reform and changes to public health policies,” Axios reported.

The three agencies report to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Earlier this month, Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr., founder of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), to lead HHS.

Weldon previously criticized COVID-19 vaccines and restrictions. Makary and Nesheiwat first expressed support for vaccines and other pandemic-related policies but have become more critical in recent years.

Kim Witczak, a drug safety advocate who has worked with the FDA as a consumer representative, addressed mainstream criticism of the nominations. She told The Defender that “the pharmaceutical and medical-industrial complex is very worried.”

She added:

“The pharmaceutical and food industries have faced little resistance from regulators and Congress. The strong pushback we’re seeing now suggests they fear what might happen under an administration willing to challenge the status quo.”

Dr. Joseph Varon, president of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, told The Defender, “Leadership in these agencies is critical for fostering trust in public health and ensuring evidence-based policies. We hope the nominees are committed to transparency, innovation and addressing the ongoing challenges in healthcare, particularly the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Makary: U.S. government the ‘greatest perpetrator of misinformation’

Makary, a public health researcher and surgeon at Johns Hopkins University, developed the surgical safety checklist, adopted by the World Health Organization and credited with saving many lives. Makary worked with the first Trump administration, including on surprise medical billing, NPR reported.

Earlier this year, Makary published “Blind Spots: When Medicine Gets it Wrong, and What It Means for Our Health.” The book highlighted evidence that many modern-day health crises in the U.S. were caused or hastened by the medical establishment.

According to The Gateway Pundit, “Makary was initially an advocate for the COVID vaccine but changed his perspective as more data became available.” NPR noted that Makary “voiced support for lockdowns early in the pandemic and encouraged universal masking” but later “became increasingly outspoken” against such policies.

In 2021, Makary called the Biden administration’s CDC “the most political CDC in history” for not being forthcoming with the public about COVID-19 and the vaccines. According to the New York Post, he criticized the CDC and Biden administration for their “unsupported claims” about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.

Makary has also been vocal about the potency of natural immunity to COVID-19, criticizing the medical establishment’s “complete dismissal of natural immunity.”

In May, he criticized The New York Times for being slow to report on the thousands of people injured by the COVID-19 vaccines.

Last year, Makary said during congressional testimony that “public health officials have made many tragic mistakes during the pandemic.” Those mistakes included ignoring natural immunity, dismissing the possibility of COVID-19 originating from a lab leak, closing schools, masking toddlers and “pushing boosters for young people.”

In September, Makary appeared alongside Kennedy at a congressional roundtable hosted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on the chronic disease epidemic. During the roundtable, Makary said, “The greatest perpetrator of misinformation has been the United States government.”

In his announcement, Trump said Makary would work with Kennedy to “properly evaluate harmful chemicals poisoning our Nation’s food supply and drugs and biologics being given to our Nation’s youth, so that we can finally address the Childhood Chronic Disease Epidemic.”

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., CHD’s chief scientific officer, told The Defender Makary has a “steep learning curve regarding vaccines in general” but has taken “encouraging stances late in the pandemic about the COVID vaccine and countermeasures.”

Scott C. Tips, president of the National Health Federation, said Makary represents “a mixed bag of mainstream medicine and outside-the-box thinking.” He credited Makary for opposing “mandatory COVID-19 injection boosters” and criticizing the FDA’s rejection of natural immunity.

Epidemiologist and public health research scientist M. Nathaniel Mead praised Makary’s nomination. “You’d be hard-pressed to find a physician with a deeper understanding of what ails our healthcare system and what’s needed to restore integrity to the FDA after six decades of regulatory capture.”

“Makary seems uniquely positioned to bring meaningful change,” Witczak said. “He understands the systemic harm caused by overmedicalization and the corporate capture of healthcare. His history of challenging mainstream narratives during COVID shows he isn’t afraid to speak out.”

Weldon sponsored bill to ban mercury from vaccines

Dr. Dave Weldon is an Army veteran who served as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives between 1995 and 2009.

In a statement, Kennedy praised Weldon’s experience, saying he “will bring the truth and transparency needed to restore the public’s confidence” in the CDC.

In 2007, Weldon sponsored a bill that would have banned mercury from vaccines, expressing concern about “an enormous inherent conflict of interest within the CDC,” because the agency promotes vaccination while assessing their safety.

According to Politico, Weldon also “raised concerns about the safety of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and Gardasil, Merck’s papillomavirus virus, or HPV vaccine.

While in Congress, Weldon also introduced legislation outlawing human cloning and helped secure a deal that banned patents on human organisms, including genetically engineered embryos, according to The Associated Press.

According to NPR, Trump said Weldon would “proudly restore the CDC to its true purpose, and will work to end the Chronic Disease Epidemic,” and “prioritize Transparency, Competence, and High Standards.”

John Gilmore, executive director of the Autism Action Network, said Weldon “was sounding the alarm on failures in the vaccine system 20 years ago.” He said Weldon attended conferences like Defeat Autism Now and listened to mothers of vaccine-injured children, which is “not a behavior many doctors are inclined to do.”

Hooker said he was “very encouraged” by Weldon’s nomination, and that he’d like to know more about Weldon’s position on “the bloated vaccine schedule as well as COVID-19 countermeasures.”

He credited Weldon with helping independent thimerosal researchers gain access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink, a collaborative project that monitors vaccine safety and conducts studies on vaccine side effects.

Hooker, who participated in that project, said “Our access to the VSD was rescinded months later because [the CDC] didn’t like our results, which included a definitive link between thimerosal and autism. Weldon indeed will need to implement myriad changes to the flawed and fraudulent process.”

Weldon is the first nominee for CDC director who will face a Senate confirmation process, due to legislation passed in 2022, NPR reported.

Nesheiwat: ‘egregious unethical & harmful’ to add COVID shots to childhood schedule

Nesheiwat, Trump’s nominee for surgeon general, is a medical contributor to Fox News and medical director at CityMD, a network of urgent care centers in New York and New Jersey.

Nesheiwat previously promoted the benefits of getting vaccinated against COVID-19 and other infectious diseases, NPR reported. According to The Gateway Pundit, Nesheiwat has since changed her position and her “recent statements indicate a significant shift in her perspective.”

In October 2022, Nesheiwat tweeted, “If CDC approves a COVID vaccine addition to the routine schedule of vax for kids, it will mark the most egregious unethical & harmful decision to children. No mandates. Especially for a vax that can’t prevent disease.”

Nesheiwat has also questioned the efficacy of the COVID shots, tweeting in February 2023, “Covid vax does not prevent disease like we once thought it did per the cdc /Pfizer etc.,” and has tweeted in support of natural immunity.

In a statement, Trump called Nesheiwat an advocate for preventive medicine and praised her “commitment to saving and treating thousands of American lives.”

Mead said Nesheiwat’s about-face on vaccines “shows she has the ability to think critically,” which could help her “serve as a bridge builder at a time of deep division.”

A ‘historic opportunity to shake up the establishment’

Calling healthcare in the U.S. “horribly broken,” Hooker said the three nominees will face several challenges if confirmed because federal public health agencies require reforms.

Hooker said:

“Corporate influence, including the corporate capture of these agencies, is the biggest problem to be tackled. First and foremost, we need to protect children … from the highly flawed policies of these agencies.

“All influences from Big Pharma, Big Food and Big Ag need to be completely rooted out and the whole edifice should be rebuilt brick-by-brick to include only those policies that help and never harm children.”

Gilmore said public health agencies should publicize “all the data they have available.” He also called for a ban on vaccine mandates. “We have to be able to sue in a real court for vaccine injuries,” he added.

Varon called for independent clinical trials and for “independent scientific inquiry and reducing undue influence from corporate or political pressures.” He also called for promoting early treatment protocols for emerging diseases and giving physicians “the flexibility to treat patients with evidence-based approaches.”

“This moment represents a historic opportunity to shake up the establishment,” Witczak said. “After years of feeling like leaders were paying lip service — or working against the public — I finally see hope for meaningful reform. It’s time to restore these agencies’ missions to serve the public, prioritize safety, and act with integrity.”

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.

November 30, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Haavara to Hague: Germany’s stance on ICC arrest warrants unmasks deep Zionist ties

By Musa Iqbal | Press TV | November 29, 2024

International Criminal Court’s (ICC) landmark decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli regime leaders Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gollant has sparked outrage from Western leaders, who have for decades used the Hague-based tribunal for political agendas.

Though the arrest warrants are riddled with glaring contradictions, such as describing Hamas military leader Mohammed Deif as a “war criminal” and equating Hamas resistance leaders with war criminals in Tel Aviv, the warrants are still significant because even the institutions founded by the Western world are unable to dismiss the criminality of the Zionist regime.

But now comes the true test: are the states that are signatories to the Rome Statute, which recognizes the authority of the Hague-based international tribunal, willing to follow through with their pledge?

Many countries have reluctantly expressed their willingness to accept the decision – such as Canada, Italy, and the Netherlands, just to name a few. However, some have been more reluctant, retreating to “analyze” the verdict issued by the ICC.

Perhaps the case that deserves the most attention is that of Germany, a Rome Statute signatory and one of the biggest allies of the child-murdering Tel Aviv regime that has been deeply complicit in the Gaza genocide.

A German government spokesperson, Steffen Hebestreit, said he “finds it hard to imagine” that they would make arrests “on this basis,” questioning the authority and decision of the Court entirely.

Naturally, these statements have caused a stir, and have journalists pressing German officials on what their stance actually will be on ICC arrest warrant, which took more than six months to make headway.

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, when pressed on the enforcement of the warrants, retreated.

“As I said, we abide by the law and legislation nationally, at the European level and internationally, and that is why we are now examining exactly what that means for us for implementation in Germany,” he said.

She made no comments regarding whether Germany would follow through with the arrest warrants, despite being obligated as a signatory of the Rome Statute – something Hebestreit mentioned himself.

Germany has been one of the most staunch European supporters of the Zionist entity, particularly amid the ongoing genocidal war on Gaza, refusing persistent calls to halt arms sales to the Tel Aviv regime.

Time and time again – throughout the decades – Germany has attributed its ironclad and unconditional support for the Israeli occupation to its own Nazi-era crimes against Jewish people in the 1930s and 40s.

Germany claims it is motivated to support the Zionist regime because of its own guilt.

But this is a complete distortion of the truth. The fact of the matter is, the German Nazi regime was a direct collaborator with the Zionist movement from the early days of Nazi party rule in Germany.

In fact, while most Jewish organizations were banned, the lone organization permitted to legally exist was the German Zionist movement, under different initiatives.

To the uninitiated, an alliance between the Zionist movement and the Nazi regime seems completely contradictory. But when looking at the material desires of both the Zionist movement and that of Nazi Germany, the motivations become quite clear and obvious, and manifested in the infamous Haavara Agreement, signed by the Zionistische Vereinigung für Deutschland (Zionist Federation of Germany) and the German Reich Ministry of Economics in August 1933.

The agreement is quite simple: in exchange for Jewish immigrants (particularly, those loyal to the Zionist doctrine, and some of the most wealthiest – indicating it was never about moralism but rather preserving class interests within Zionism) to safely leave Germany, the Nazi regime would help transfer the Jewish population themselves to Palestinian territories, accelerating the removal of indigenous Palestinians from a territory where they were already persecuted by a growing Zionist population and British colonialism.

The Nazi regime received tremendous material benefits for this. Jewish organizations were enacting worldwide boycotts of the German regime at the time, on the grounds of the Nazi laws persecuting the Jewish population in Germany.

The Nazi regime saw this as a major threat, as it created grounds for economic isolation in a post-World War I world. The open collaboration with the Zionist movement allowed the Nazi regime to dodge the accusations of antisemitism, and further dangerously conflated anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, a defense the Zionist regime would use to the modern day.

Furthermore, the German government was able to enact further economic deals under Haavara, which resulted in a new German market in the British-occupied Palestinian land.

The agreement materially improved a heavily boycotted Nazi regime while laying further groundwork for the Zionist colonization of Palestine. The transfer of wealth was often cited and met with glee in Zionist-controlled media in occupied Palestine.

Fast forward 91 years. The German government, which has enacted laws that criticism of the Israeli regime is “anti-semitic” in nature, is yet again making a callback to its Nazi roots.

Hebestreit, quoted in The Telegraph, states that “it is a consequence of German history that we share unique relations and great responsibility with Israel.”

This is completely true, but not in the context in which they are using to deceive the public. Germany is not defying the ICC arrest warrants because of any shame to its Nazi crimes. Rather, functionally speaking, it is the same dedication to the Zionist movement Germany declared in 1933, in order to not only evade allegations of anti-Semitism, but continue making billions of dollars from exports to the Zionist occupation.

Refusing to enforce the ICC warrants means that Germany can continue its arms shipments to the Zionist occupation. Just last month, Germany approved a sale of over $100,000,000 worth of arms to the Israeli regime. Some researchers suggest that Germany exports nearly 30 percent of the arms sent to the occupation regime.

Germany is in a particularly debased state of affairs, due to its close allegiance to the United States. The American insistence to cut off energy imports from Russia as well as the US involvement in bombing the Nord Stream II pipeline has drastically impacted the German economy.

The economic peril due to this commitment the led the German government to collapse earlier this month. However, the US encourages its allies (rather, proxies) to continue arming the Israeli occupation.

The road ahead indeed goes both ways. German purchases of Israeli surveillance and military equipment, recently and most notably the Arrow 3 ballistic defense systems raised eyebrows to Palestinian solidarity organizations. There is also documentation that German police have purchased Israel’s infamous Pegasus software to be used for spying on its own citizens.

Acknowledging the ICC arrest warrants means that the imports and exports of arms come to a grinding halt.

Indeed, the reluctance to enforce the ICC arrest warrants on behalf of the German government is not rooted in any sense of “moralism.” This is a talking point to earn the sympathy of Western liberals who still do not see the massive fingerprint of their own governments in the ongoing Gaza genocide.

The root of the decision, as it usually is within the context of imperialism, is money. Germany is solely motivated by its role as a junior agent in American imperialism, hoping to make a quick buck while its US masters erode its own energy infrastructure.

A refusal to enforce an already toothless warrant, which attacks two Israeli regime leaders and not the issue of Zionism itself, is simply the German government conducting business as usual as it has for over 90 years.

The infamous Haavara agreement lives on today, not in its original context, but not far from it either. Germany’s stance on the ICC arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant reveals deep ties to Zionism rooted in the Haavara agreement.

Musa Iqbal is a Boston-based researcher and writer with a focus on US domestic and foreign policy.

November 29, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Rumble Sues California Over Censorship Law That Impacts Satire

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | November 27, 2024

A new legal challenge, spearheaded by Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys, has thrust the state of California into the spotlight once again over allegations of infringing on free speech rights. This federal lawsuit, lodged on behalf of video-sharing platform Rumble, argues that two new California statutes unconstitutionally restrict users’ ability to share political content online.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

Under these controversial laws, specifically AB 2655, platforms like Rumble are coerced into policing and removing content that the state deems harmful. These regulations have been criticized for compelling platforms to censor speech, thereby becoming unwilling agents of government censorship. According to ADF Senior Counsel Phil Sechler, in a press release sent to Reclaim The Net, “California’s war against political speech is censorship, plain and simple. We can’t trust the government to decide what is true in our online political debates.” He emphasized the importance of platforms like Rumble, which resist governmental pressures to curtail free expression.

The complaint details the operational challenges: “The law forces Rumble to undertake the impossible task of training its team to recognize and then remove and label content based on inherently vague and subjective terms on which even pollsters and government officials cannot agree, such as what content may be ‘likely to harm’ electoral prospects or may likely undermine confidence in an election.”

Further, Rumble contends that AB 2655 oversteps by altering and compelling the speech of private entities, thus infringing upon their rights to free speech. It argues that neither the Constitution nor Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act allows California to “alter and compel Rumble’s speech while also mandating that it censor its users’ speech. As such, this Court should enjoin AB 2655 and declare it unlawful.”

The genesis of these laws can be traced back to July when a parody video targeting Vice President Kamala Harris spurred Gov. Gavin Newsom to advocate for making such content illegal. Subsequently, the California Legislature expedited the passage of these laws, which Gov. Newsom signed into action on September 17. AB 2839, in particular, imposes vague criteria to penalize individuals for sharing content related to elections, such as political memes and parodies.

In the detailed legal challenge, attorneys argue that AB 2655 forces Rumble to alter its own speech and police its users’ speech based on arbitrary criteria that even experts cannot uniformly interpret. The law imposes a duty on Rumble to train staff to identify and mitigate content that could potentially damage a politician’s reputation or undermine confidence in elections — criteria seen as inherently subjective.

This lawsuit follows a similar successful defense of free speech by ADF on behalf of The Babylon Bee and attorney Kelly Chang Rickert, leading to a temporary halt on enforcing AB 2839 against them while their legal battle continues.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

US Republicans Condemn UK’s Online Censorship Law as a “Tsunami… Heading Towards America”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 26, 2024

UK’s “censorship law” – Online Safety Act – has gained in notoriety, as it has now become the subject of interest of the US House Judiciary Committee, which has for years tried to shed light on the censorship on the internet, and its actors and factors.

So much so that the committee’s members have coined the expression, the Censorship Industrial Complex.

While most of the body’s activities are centered around US social media and allegations of the Biden-Harris administration’s involvement in pressuring them to censor speech, no “complex” is considered to be on an industrial scale for no reason.

A flurry of third parties – such as “fact-checkers” and “raters” – have been involved and investigated, including those based abroad – notably, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH).

A member of the Republican-majority committee, Congressman Darrell Issa, now strongly criticized the trends concerning censorship-enabling legislation in the EU and in the UK, singling out the Online Safety Act, and warning that “a tsunami of censorship is heading towards America” from abroad.

And that’s just to add to what is already there – Issa called that situation, “malign actors here at home.” As for the UK law, the congressman is unimpressed by its authors and supporters promoting it as a way to protect against hate speech and other online ills.

According to Issa, what it does is give regulators a tool to censor free speech, and as such is viewed by Republicans as part of “a broader global push by the Censorship Industrial Complex.”

Issa in full, from The Spectator:

“The growing attacks on free speech in the US – as well as the UK and EU – pose a direct threat to free people on both sides of the Atlantic. We know that legislation like the Online Safety Act that is said to combat ‘hate speech’ empowers regulators to censor free speech.

“Congressional Republicans understand that these threats to free speech are part of a broader global push by the Censorship Industrial Complex, which includes not only the EU, UK, and other nations but also malign actors here at home. We are committed to confronting this growing threat alongside the incoming Trump Administration to fight against these assaults on free speech within our borders and around the world.”

The congressman had no problem counting the UK and the EU (with its Digital Services Act) among the places this push emanates from, while also vowing that the second Trump administration, alongside Congress Republicans, intends to “fight against these assaults on free speech within our borders and around the world.”

In the UK itself, there are those like Reform Party leader Nigel Farage who couldn’t agree more. Farage, who has close ties with Trump, has made comments about a free speech crackdown in his country.

The UK branch of the Alliance Defending Freedom advocacy group also agrees. Executive Director Paul Coleman said that the Judiciary Committee’s criticism and stance on a number of issues “shows that the UK is fast becoming notorious around the world for its censorious practices.”

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Free speech crackdown: Expect more house raids as Germany’s left moves to supercharge law on ‘insulting’ politicians

Remix News | November 28, 2024

Following a wave of house raids and arrests against those who “insult” politicians in the German government, the ruling far-left Social Democrats (SPD) are doubling down and moving to make it even easier to target speech violations and insults while also increasing punishments — despite growing criticism.

Lower Saxony’s Justice Minister Kathrin Wahlmann (SPD) has submitted a proposed resolution to the Conference of Justice Ministers of the German states to allow prosecutors more extensive options to prosecute “insults to politicians,” as reported by German newspaper Welt.

The new proposal would drop the threshold required to prosecute individuals who “insult” politicians. Currently, the act indicates that insults that “significantly impede” the politician’s “public work” can be charged. However, the new proposal would delete this section, which would then allow for prosecutors to more easily pursue a variety of offenses that do not necessarily “significantly” impede a politician’s work.

Lower Saxony’s Justice Minister Wahlmann (SPD) said she found it “unbearable” to see “the disgusting hate comments” that politicians are exposed to, which is why she is launching this proposal.

“Anyone who is particularly committed to the community should also benefit from the community’s special protection,” she said, adding that current rules had “proven to be insufficiently effective.”

Currently, the maximum prison sentence is three years in prison for “insulting” a politician, but this could increase further. The new proposal would also allow authorities to more easily pursue cases in instances where no report or complaint has been filed.

It must be underlined that these cases are being weaponized against the German populace at a tremendous rate. For example, police recently raided a retired soldier’s house for calling Economic Miniister Robert Habeck, of the Green Party, an “idiot” in a meme posted to X. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, also of the Green Party, won her criminal case against a woman who called her the “worst foreign minster ever.” In the case of CDU leader Friedrich Merz, a woman is being prosecuted for calling him a “drunkard.”

It is unclear how these cases “significantly hindered” the public lives of these two major politicians, but a wave of such cases have been launched in recent years, primarily by left-wing parties. In fact, Habeck has filed criminal charges against 805 people, while Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has launched 513 criminal complaints.

Merz himself has also launched such cases, but he is not disclosing how many. However, the specific law, which is section 188 of the German criminal code, was passed by Merz’s party, the Christian Democrats (CDU), under the leadership of former Chancellor Angela Merkel. With this law in hand, thousands of criminal cases have been launched against citizens for speech “insults.”

Augsburg constitutional lawyer Josef Franz Lindner is critical of the new law proposal, telling Welt : “If the element of significantly hindering public activity were removed from Section 188 of the Criminal Code, it would actually be easier for public prosecutors to investigate an insult to a politician ex officio and come to a conviction… However, I see problems with the principle of proportionality and, above all, with the principle of equal treatment.”

He notes that the law is designed to protect the “public work” of politicians, but “if the element of public work were removed, however, this reason for the unequal treatment of politicians and other people would no longer apply. The argument would then be that the honor of politicians is worth more than that of normal citizens. I see this as a violation of the Basic Law (the German constitution).”

The move to make this speech law even harsher comes at a time when a prominent Green Party MP Renate Künast calls critics of such “insult” arrests supporters of the extreme right, saying “anyone who criticizes this is supporting right-wing extremism.”

Notably, she is currently spearheading an effort to ban the rival Alternative for Germany (AfD) entirely from the democratic process.

These “insult” cases also do not only apply to politicians, but even judges as well, as seen in one case where a German man criticized a judge’s sentence for a Syrian man who was convicted of raping a 15-year-old girl. The man who “insulted” the judge in an email ended up being fined at a higher rate than the Syrian rapist in the case, who was given no prison time — only probation.

Notably, these house raids and prosecutions are having the desired effect: a population terrified of criticizing the government.

As Remix News reported earlier today, freedom of expression in Germany is being increasingly constrained, with 74 percent of citizens believing people are holding back their opinions out of fear of repercussions, according to a new survey by Insa.

This growing trend is illustrated by recent high-profile cases, such as individuals facing criminal convictions for insulting politicians on social media and even pensioners receiving police visits over internet memes.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

UK, US intended to move Palestinians out of Palestine through UNRWA, British documents reveal

By Amer Sultan | MEMO | November 27, 2024

The UK and the US intended to resettle Palestinians in the neighbouring countries, after they were forced to flee their homes in Palestine in 1947 and 1948 due to the terrorist actions of Zionist forces, British documents reveal.

The documents, unearthed by MEMO in the British National Archives, also show that the British government viewed the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) as a tool to achieve this goal.

UNRWA was established by a UN General Assembly resolution on 8 December 1949, and officially began operations on 1 May 1950, with its headquarters in Beirut, Lebanon. Since its inception, the agency’s main mission was to transfer Palestinian refugees from direct relief to work programmes while awaiting a political solution to their plight. By mid-June 1950, the UN reiterated that the agency “has no mandate to deal with political settlement of the problem of the Palestinian refugees”.

In December 1949, the UN adopted Resolution 194, which recognised the Palestinian refugees’ right to return to their homes in Palestine. The resolution called for refugees who wished to return and live peacefully with their neighbours to “be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date.” It was adopted with 35 votes in favour, including from the United Kingdom and the United States, 15 votes against and 8 abstentions.

The resolution also stipulated that compensation should be provided to those “choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

However, in August 1949, 13 months after the announcement establishing Israel, the British government decided that the “final solution” of the problem lies in “resettlement not in relief”.

Prime Minister Clement Attlee, in a memo on the “Palestinian Arab refugees” problem, instructed his foreign, treasury and economic ministers to “discuss what further provision should be made” for addressing the problem. “The emphasis should lie heavily on resettlement,” he wrote.

When UNRWA’s operations began in 1950, the agency was assisting around 750,000 Palestinian refugees residing in 58 recognised refugee camps across Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Attlee’s memo further instructed that no financial support should be given to the governments of countries hosting the refugees unless they contributed to the resettlement effort. “Any further specific contributions from British funds should be conditional on the recognition by the local government concerned, to a greater extent than hitherto, of responsibilities in the matter,” the memo added.

This followed deliberations among various British governmental departments to establish an official British stance on the refugee problem. The ministers recommended that the governments of the neighbouring countries should “make a substantial contribution to the relief and resettlement” of the Palestinian refugees. They stressed that the British government should prioritise resettlement over relief efforts, and that “the major emphasis should be on the framing of the scheme for resettlement in preference to relief.”

At the time it was estimated that the combined costs of relief and resettlement efforts from both Western and non-Western governments amounted to around $24 million. The ministers recommended waiting to see what contributions other governments would make before committing further British funds. “We should also expect them to contribute a larger proportion to any future fund than their share,” they wrote.

In a letter to the prime minister, Lord Jay, the British economic minister, expressed his belief that “the only radical solution of the relief problem is by way of resettlement and not relief.”

“The prime responsibility for these Arab (Palestinian) refugees rests with the local governments concerned,” he wrote. While acknowledging that Britain had a “special position in the Middle East,” Lord Jay suggested that Britain had a “substantial interest” in the refugee question. However, he also argued that the British contribution to the relief fund was already “more than our appropriate share.”

Lord Jay’s letter was sent to the prime minister after a request from Ernest Bevin, the then foreign minister, who proposed that “further funds should be provided for relief and/or resettlement” of the Palestinian Arab refugees. In his response, Lord Jay again emphasised that the main focus “should be on resettlement”.

The British government viewed the refugee issue as “a direct responsibility” shared not only by Israel but also by the neighbouring Arab states and the international community.

In his letter, Lord Jay reminded his colleagues that the Arab states “inhabit an area so important from the political and strategic aspect” and noted that the Arabs “tend to consider that British policy over the last thirty years has been responsible for the setting up of a Jewish state and, in some degree, for the displacement of these Arab refugees.”

The documents also reveal that the UK and the US were in frequent contact to discuss how best to resettle the Palestinian refugees in host countries through ongoing relief activities.

The British “have been considering both in London and with the Americas how best to stimulate the local governments to continue the work of relief and turn it into resettlement,”Lord Joy’s letter explained. The British and the Americans believed that the resettlement “would provide the only long-term solution of the problem.”

The documents reveal that less than a year later, a number of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon appealed to Britain and human rights defenders for the right to return to Palestine, their homeland. In a letter to the British prime minister, sent through the British consul in Beirut, they wrote in Arabic: “We truly believe that you could send us back to our homes by using your powers if you wished.”

The letter was written by Ali Ahmed El-Abed, who had been forced to leave his village, Shafa Amr, in northern Palestine. He had to live as a refugee in the Wavel Camp, located in Baalbek, east of Beirut.

The letter placed the responsibility for the Palestinian refugees’ plight squarely on the UK. It reminded the British government that Palestinians had been under British protection for 30 years and noted: “As a result, we are scattered away far from our homes, our country, and our people.” The situation of the refugees was deteriorating, the letter explained, stating that “the situation goes from bad to worse,” and warning that “death is nearer to us than life.”

The letter, dated 21 June 1950, reminded the British government that the refugees still considered themselves “under British protection, and carry passports bearing the British crown.”

On 18 July, the British government rejected the petition. In its response, the government expressed “sympathy” for the refugees, but clarified that “it is not possible for His Majesty’s government to take any action in this matter except through the medium of the United Nations.” The response, sent to El-Abed, affirmed the British government’s “full and unqualified support” for the UN in addressing the issue.

A few weeks later, the former Soviet Union’s ambassador received a similar letter, signed by 10,000 refugees, requesting support for the Palestinians’ return to their homes. This letter rejected UNRWA as a project that “aimed to prevent the implementation of the decisions of the United Nations.” The signatories viewed this project as a “pursuit of an imperialist policy.”

The letter, written in Arabic with an English translation, was sent to the British government and insisted on the implementation of UN Resolution 194, which affirmed the Palestinians’ right to return to their homes in Palestine.

November 28, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany Tightens Grip on Online Speech as Vice Chancellor Defends Arrest of Online Critic

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 26, 2024

Germany’s authorities continue to double down on their crusade against all manner of free speech on the internet: from the right of citizens to criticize them, to satirical content like memes.

Instead of considering apologizing to a pensioner whose home was recently raided by law enforcement for an online post unflattering of his person, German Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck is now urging even stricter regulation of social media.

And it’s clear what kind of regulation Habeck – who was referred to as “an idiot” in the post that got 64-year-old Stefan Niehoff in hot water with the prosecution – wants to see more of.

The Green Party politician cited the EU’s controversial, sweeping censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA), as a tool that could be used to “regulate” algorithms used by social media.

According to the German press, Habeck told the ARD broadcaster not only that he wouldn’t apologize but went on to try to explain – or, justify – why he filed a criminal complaint against the pensioner in the first place.

Habeck suggested that being called an “idiot” was just the straw that broke the camel’s back; his grievance supposedly originates from a previous “racist” post by Niehoff.

That’s not what the prosecutor said when they sent the police to the man’s home, however; only the post branding the high-ranked official as “idiot” was mentioned as the reason for the search – as it was allegedly intended “to defame Robert Habeck in general and to make his work as a member of the federal government more difficult.”

In Germany, those found guilty of such offenses can end up in prison for up to three years, or be forced to pay a fine.

Habeck mentioning a previous “racist” post, meanwhile, stems from the prosecution saying the pensioner “could be suspected of incitement to hatred” (but this was not the reason for sending the police to Niehoff’s home).

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

The Silver Bullet – An Address by Dr Mike Yeadon

Dr Mike Yeadon and Tim West | November 25, 2024

Hello, my name is Dr. Mike Yeadon, and in the next 15 minutes or so, I would like to address those of you who’ve been vaccine injured or bereaved, and also those of you who are involved in the political process in Northern Ireland, as well as anywhere else in the world who might hear me. At the end of this process, I hope you will believe what I’m going to tell you, which, shockingly, is that the materials masquerading as vaccines were designed intentionally to harm the people who received them. I’m probably the most qualified former pharmaceutical company research executive in the world speaking out on this matter, and since I spent my entire career in the business of working with teams designing molecules to be new potential medicines, I think I am qualified to comment on it, and that is my shocking judgement that has been only reinforced over the last almost four years since I first said it.

I’ll also have some suggestions for what we can do together to fight against the global crime which is ongoing. So, just a little bit about me so you can decide whether or not to believe me. So, I’m a career-long research scientist.

I’ve worked all of my life in the pharmaceutical industry and in biotech. My first degree included a training in toxicology, so that’s an understanding of how materials can injure human beings at a molecular level, and what the relationship is between the structure of them and the toxicity. In my second degree, a PhD, I did research in respiratory pharmacology, control of breathing and control of respiratory reflexes.

So, and then after that, I joined the pharmaceutical industry in 1988, and I worked until very recently on new medicines for allergic and respiratory diseases. In my corporate career, I was for a long time responsible at Pfizer, then the biggest research-based drug company in the world, for everything to do with allergic and respiratory diseases in the research field. So, that was my responsibility.

And in the last 10 years, after leaving in 2011, I was an independent and I became the founder and CEO of a biotech company, which was eventually acquired by Novartis, which was then the biggest drug company in the world. So, I have had a good career, and I was well regarded in the industry for my scientific acumen and judgments, until, of course, I started speaking out against the nonsense, the COVID pandemic, and especially the so-called vaccines. I’ve become persona non grata.

It was my former colleagues after that. So, I’m well qualified to comment on the toxicological principles, properties of molecules, and the kind of effects you might see from certain structures. So, just very briefly, before I talk about the so-called vaccines, what happened in 2020? It’s taken me a long time to get there, and I haven’t made everybody happy with the decision I’ve reached, but there was not a pandemic or a public health emergency.

I don’t think there was anything at all, apart from lies, propaganda, fear-based information, fake diagnostic tests called PCR, and then, as it were, misattribution of real illnesses that people did have, which were called COVID when there was no such thing. But what happened, shockingly, was that after the World Health Organisation’s chairman called a pandemic, which was not true. There’s never been a pandemic.

There won’t be pandemics. They’re immunologically impossible. But after he called them, many countries in the world changed radically their medical management practises for people in hospitals, also in care homes, and in the community.

And very briefly, in hospitals, many people were sedated, had a plastic tube put down their airway, and unconscious, put on mechanical ventilators. I can assure you that is not ever an appropriate treatment for someone with an influenza-like illness, whatever you might think COVID was. But that would not be something you would do, and if applied to frail and elderly people, they will die in large numbers, which they did.

So that was the first crime. It’s not a mistake. There are no mistakes here.

Mistakes were not made. They were told to do this by figures at supranational level. We don’t know exactly who, but we know this because these mad procedures changed in many countries all at the same time.

So that’s hospitals, in care homes, assisted living, old-age people’s homes, and so on. Many people were given drugs like Midazolam, which is an injectable form of a drug like Valium, a sedative. But they were also given injections of pain-relieving drugs like morphine, even if they weren’t in pain.

My PhD was in the field of understanding what opiate drugs like morphine do to the respiratory reflux, and I can assure you it suppresses and suppresses it and depresses it. So if you give an elderly person on their own an injection of Midazolam, they will become sedated and sleepy, and if you give them an injection of morphine, their breathing will slow. I can tell you, it’s absolutely forbidden to give a person those two drugs together, those two drug classes together, unless they are under intense ongoing medical monitoring.

And the reason is they’re likely to fall asleep and stop breathing. That, of course, is what happened. So that’s hospitals and care homes.

Your relatives were killed by the medical procedures that were imposed. Now, it’s quite possible early on that not everybody involved knew what was happening, but I’m afraid after a few days, you’d have to be a blockhead not to realise that it was what you were doing to your charges, your patients, that was resulting in their deaths. So I’ve completely lost any trust in the medical profession because virtually no one has spoken up four and a half years later.

This happens to lots of people. If you listen to the recordings, heartbreaking recordings given to the Scottish COVID Enquiry, I think that’s probably the only place where there’s been an official taking of evidence from people. And what I just described is exactly what happens to lots of people’s relatives and no doubt happens to some people in Northern Ireland as well.

It certainly happens in England. There were worse things as well. People in the community were deprived of medical care that would have saved their lives.

And there’s plenty of evidence to say that not being given antibiotics when they had incipient bronchial pneumonia also killed thousands, possibly tens of thousands of people. And there, ladies and gentlemen, was your pandemic. All of those deaths were attributed to COVID and you were told this is this terrible pandemic, you need to lock down, wear masks, do what you’re told.

Nothing was happening at all apart from medical murder and propaganda from the television and the newspaper, politicians and many public, well-known public figures who are doing what they were told. So of course one conclusion I’m going to come to later is stop listening to liars. The people who’ve lied to you shouldn’t listen to them ever again.

Stop listening to them today. But for me, I think the worst thing, because it comes out of my industry and because it’s so deliberate, it requires such a lot of forethought, are the so-called vaccines. Now we were told there was this new infectious disease, so far so good ladies and gentlemen, but then they said don’t worry we’ll rustle up a vaccine and they did so at least in about 10 months, something like that.

I can tell you after spending a career in this industry, you can no more make a baby in one month with nine women than you can make a complicated biological product in 10 months. It cannot be done. It was not done.

They did something else. They created materials which were essentially injected poisons. They were not vaccines.

There was never anything to vaccinate against. And when you’ve listened to what I’ve just told you, you know that must be true because you can’t do something in 10 months that normally takes 6 to 12 years. Medicines are not put together randomly.

They are built. And they’re built by people who are discussing with colleagues, work out what kind of materials, what kind of structures, what kind of formulations, what kind of doses you would need to add in order to hit a particular molecular target to have a chance of a particular therapeutic goal being reached without unacceptable side effects. That’s called rational design.

And that is my whole career, ladies and gentlemen, from my undergraduate days to today. So when I look at the design of the medicine, whatever kind it is, and look at the design on paper and its composition structures and so on, it is as if I’m looking over the shoulder of the designer, someone like me, someone with my qualifications designed these things. So when I look at them, I’m looking over the shoulder of the designer and I can discern something of what their objectives were, what were they trying to do? And I came quickly to the conclusion that they wanted to bring about toxicity that would injure, kill and reduce fertility.

There aren’t any other alternatives. And remember, there was no public health emergency. So I’ll just give you three examples.

I’m not going to be too scientific, but three things so you can check them. The objective of these so-called gene-based vaccines was to inject you with a genetic sequence for something called spike protein. Now, it doesn’t really matter what spike protein is, if it’s real, where it came from.

The point is, it’s a genetic sequence for a protein that doesn’t belong in your body. It’s non-self, it’s foreign. Your immune system is a wonderful work of God and nature.

It distinguishes self, things that are meant to be inside you and are fine from anything else, foreign, non-self. If you inject a person with a genetic sequence that instructs your body to become a factory for some protein that doesn’t belong in you, your immune system will detect that and it will attack every cell that’s done that instruction and kill it. Now, these materials, when injected in your arm, didn’t stay in your arm, they travelled around your heart, your lungs, your kidneys, your brain, your ovaries.

And in every place it landed, if it was taken up and expressed, your body registered that as foreign invasion and it attacks and kills every cell doing it. There is no other possible consequence from doing that. So that’s step one and no one can argue that’s not what they did.

That is the design of them. It also picks a particular protein. I’m not really sure where spike protein came from, if it’s really real, but proteins like the one they claim was encoded in these gene-based materials are known to be toxic.

There are loads of experiments, lots of published experiments, showing that proteins like that one cause blood coagulation, damaged nerves, damaged heart tissue. So they injected you with something that would make your body make a protein that doesn’t belong there, knowing axiomatically, automatically, unavoidably, your immune system would attack that. It would be like rejecting an organ transplant.

Your body would say, that’s foreign, got to go, uses your immune system to kill it. And then they also inject you with something that’s inherently toxic. So if it got out into your body or wherever it was made, it would harm you.

And I’ve got a third one that cannot be argued with. At least the mRNA products from Pfizer and Moderna were encapsulated in something called lipid nanoparticles. It’s really a blob of fat, complicated, technical blob of fat, that’s what it is after all.

And what that material did is allowed your injection to glide all around your body across all biological barriers and get everywhere in your body. So of course, it’s not what you would want, is it? For something that they told you was inhaled into your nose and lungs. But no, it went all around your body, into your brain, blood vessels.

But in particular, I need to tell you, there were publications that are now more than 10 years old in peer-reviewed journal articles. I’m sceptical about whether they’re always very honest, but there were peer-reviewed journal articles showing that lipid nanoparticles were recognised over a decade ago of having a particular property, which you’re not going to like to hear, which shocked me when I learned it. They tend to deposit their payload into the ovaries.

That is exactly what happened with these injected materials. There was at least one study performed with the Pfizer agents, with the Japanese regulatory authorities. Lo and behold, the material accumulated in the ovaries of the test animals.

That is what’s happened, ladies and gentlemen, every woman and girl injected with these materials. Remember what I said about designing molecules to do things deliberately with objectives in mind? They picked lipid nanoparticles, knowing they accumulate the payload in ovaries. It’s not an accident.

Mistakes were not made. So I tell you, as a professional who spent his whole honest scientific career in an industry I did not realise was corrupt, trying to make experimental medicines for respiratory and allergy diseases, that my experience tells me that there are multiple independent, unnecessary and obvious mechanisms of toxicity built into these so-called vaccines. And then by sheer luck, all four companies, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and Pfizer, all chose basically the same formula for their so-called vaccines.

That would never happen if it was real. For a start, I would call my opposite numbers and say, we should do different things because if something goes wrong, if we’re wrong in an assumption, all of the so-called vaccines will fail for the same reason. We should do different things.

It’s called diversification. But no, they all did the same things because they’re just lying. They were making intentionally dangerous material, passing them off as vaccines to having you and your children.

And that’s what they did. Of course, I didn’t get injected and neither did my children and most of my relatives. Some of them didn’t believe me.

I’m afraid they’ve been injected too. So big picture, what happens, I think from the research I’ve done, and of course, I’m an expert in research and development, not in politics, but I believe that very wealthy people, the kind of people who run foundations with names, have planned, as have their antecedents for a couple of generations, to take over the world, to remove the freedoms of ordinary people like us that they regard as useless eaters. They don’t want us around anymore.

And their intention is to strip us of our freedoms by persuading us that there are very frightening events occurring in the world, and we need them to lead us to safety. There are documents you can find from a group called the Club of Rome, who in the late 1960s were commissioned by some of these people who run the nameless global foundations that have hundreds of billions of pounds of worth. They were asked to come up with scenarios that would produce challenges for countries that couldn’t be solved by countries on their own, so they would have to look outwards and upwards to supranational solutions.

Now guess what? The two things they came up with, pandemics of infectious diseases, which I know as an immunologist are not possible and have never happened. The other thing they said to account for or plan for were climate change crises. I’ve done enough research now, ladies and gentlemen, I’ve spoken to people who have spent as long in climate atmospheric research as I have in pharmaceutical R&D, and they have explained to me, and I understand very well, that there’s all of this nonsense about carbon dioxide, global boiling, net zero.

It’s all a complete scam from the same people who bought you the Covid scam and the dangerous injections. It’s the same people. They want one world government, they want to be deprived of your liberty, and then I’m afraid I think they will kill us using these injections because they’re going to do it again.

All over the world, factories to make mRNA-based materials are being thrown up, billions of doses are being made, and if we let them they will sicken in our arms and people will sicken and die. So those of you who have been injured or bereaved, in my mind no blame whatsoever attaches to you. How could you know that people you trusted and thought you could trust were lying to you? Well, you didn’t know, but if you let them inject you again, you have no sympathy for me because they have lied to you, you’ve been injured or killed, and I’ve explained to you that they’re liars and they have attacked us.

So if you go along with it, you cannot be saved. All we need to do is enough of us continue to speak out about this and say we’re not having it anymore, get lost, don’t listen to liars anymore. People who’ve lied to you forfeit their trust forever, in my view, and so anyone who’s in the political process, for example in Northern Ireland looking at this so-called public health bill, which if you pass it would allow these supranational criminals to take you from your house, to inject you by force if necessary, they are aiding and abetting a global crime.

And I saw someone online say recently that if you pass that legislation, I don’t think it’d be unreasonable to interpret that as an act of war. It’s as serious as that. So politicians, you may well be under pressure from shadowy figures, but if you go along with it and hope for like an easier time of it, you will have unlocked the doors of hell and pushed everybody in it and you as long with it as well.

So this is your time to do what I’m doing, which is to speak out no matter the consequences. I say to you if you’re frightened about what happens, if you speak out, you should be absolutely terrified about what’s going to happen if you don’t. So really that’s all I’ve got to say.

I do think these criminals are going to do it again, they’re continuing to threaten us with pandemics like bird flu, monkey pox and so on. It is all nonsense. Stop listening to liars right now.

Put things right between you, the people you love, and between you and God if you haven’t already. And for goodness sake, be one of the people who speaks out no matter what the consequences, because if you don’t, we’ll lose our freedom and then our lives. Thank you.

November 27, 2024 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Israeli forces use Palestinian children as human shields in Jabalia refugee camp

A Palestinian family rests on the rubble of a building west of Gaza City, on November 25, 2024. (Photo by Omar AL-QATTAA / AFP)
Defense for Children International Palestine | November 26, 2024

Israeli armed forces have forced Palestinian children to act as human shields during the siege on Jabalia refugee camp in north Gaza, placing them directly in harm’s way amid live fire and tank shelling.

During a series of military operations in the Jabalia refugee camp, the Israeli military forced Palestinian children and their families to stand in front of tanks and military vehicles as soldiers fired on civilian areas in multiple incidents during October, according to documentation collected by Defense for Children International – Palestine. On October 15, Israeli tanks surrounded the camp, firing indiscriminately and severely injuring several Palestinian civilians. In multiple documented cases, including on October 15, 17, and 20, Israeli soldiers detained Palestinian children as young as six years old, using them and other Palestinian civilians to shield advancing military forces. These tactics not only endanger the lives of children but constitute an egregious violation of international humanitarian law.

“Israeli forces’ use of Palestinian children as human shields is a deliberate and unlawful act, one that places children’s lives in extreme danger and causes unimaginable trauma,” said Ayed Abu Eqtaish, accountability program director at DCIP. “This practice is a clear war crime, demonstrating a blatant disregard for international law and underscoring a pattern of impunity that has cost Palestinian children their safety, dignity, and in many cases, their lives.”

On October 15, Israeli forces launched an assault on Jabalia refugee camp, where Mohammad Al-Za’anin, his wife, and three children, aged six, four, and two, had been sheltering in a relative’s home. At approximately 9 a.m., Israeli tanks surrounding the Tal Al-Zaatar neighborhood began firing shells indiscriminately, severely injuring Mohammad’s wife. Mohammad attempted to flee with his children, raising a white flag and moving towards Gaza City. However, Israeli soldiers intercepted the family, detaining them with several others and positioning them in front of a tank that continued to fire shells over their heads. Mohammad and his children were held in this position for over five hours, with soldiers ignoring his pleas to protect his terrified children. After hours of intense fear, Israeli forces ordered the family to abandon their belongings and walk south.

On October 17, Israeli tanks again encircled the Jabalia refugee camp’s Tal Al-Zaatar area, where Islam Fayyad, his wife, and their three children, aged six, four, and eight months, were living. As Israeli forces closed in, Islam’s wife raised a white flag and attempted to flee with the children. When they neared a checkpoint, Israeli soldiers ordered them via loudspeakers to discard their belongings into a pit and approach the tanks. Israeli forces then separated the men from the women and children, holding Islam’s wife and children in front of military vehicles for two hours while shells and bullets flew overhead. Fayyad’s six-year-old daughter, Marwa, pleaded with her mother, “We are going to die, Mom,” as soldiers continued firing, undeterred by the children’s visible terror.

A third incident occurred on October 20, when Israeli forces bombed homes near the residence of Mahmoud Nasser and his family in Jabalia. Mahmoud, his wife, and their three children, including a newborn, raised a white flag and attempted to escape with dozens of other families. Soldiers detained them, ordering men, women, children, and elderly civilians to walk in front of advancing military vehicles, which were shelling nearby buildings. The Nasser family, along with other displaced families, was forced to walk in front of a bulldozer and a tank that directed fire toward the Indonesian Hospital. This lasted for over half an hour before the families were taken to a high point overlooking Jabalia camp, where they were held as human shields for an additional hour and a half before being released.

The recent siege on northern Gaza is part of a broader pattern of escalated violence and collective punishment targeting civilians. Over the past few months, relentless military operations in northern Gaza, including heavy bombardments, have resulted in widespread destruction, displacement, and civilian casualties. The siege has exacerbated starvation and turned overcrowded shelters into disease-ridden areas where families are forced to live without access to adequate food, clean water, or medical care.

Since 2000, DCIP has documented dozens of cases of Palestinian children used as human shields by the Israeli military in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Since the Israeli military began its genocidal assault on Gaza on October 7, 2023, Israeli forces have used many Palestinian children as human shields during ground operations, and the full extent is unknown given the limited capacity of human rights organizations to document cases safely.

The use of children as human shields is a blatant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Additional Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions, and a war crime under international criminal law which prohibits putting civilians at risk in armed conflict, particularly in situations where they may suffer physical harm or psychological terror. Deliberately positioning children in front of armed vehicles to deter resistance or shield military forces is an appalling violation of international humanitarian, criminal, and human rights law.

Despite clear international prohibitions, Israeli forces have repeatedly used Palestinian children as human shields in military operations across the occupied Palestinian territory, perpetuating a cycle of trauma and violence for which there has been no accountability. DCIP’s documentation reveals a consistent pattern in which Israeli forces act with impunity, knowing they are unlikely to face any repercussions or consequences for their systematic abuse of Palestinian children.

November 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

No more ‘deals’: what Palestinians want and will fight to achieve

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | November 26, 2024

A major problem in American thinking about the Middle East is the utter rejection of the notion that Palestinian rights are fundamental, if at all relevant, to the coveted peace and stability of the region. Long before Donald Trump’s first “Deal of the Century” was revealed officially on 28 January, 2020, successive US administrations attempted to “stabilise” the Middle East at the expense of the Palestinians.

Earlier plans, or deals, rested on the premise of the total marginalisation of the Palestinian people and their cause. They included the 1969 Roger Plan and Roger Plan II in the early 70s, which culminated in the Camp David Accords later in the decade.

When all had failed to subdue the Palestinians, Israel and the US began investing in an alternative Palestinian leadership that would be compliant with Israeli will, often in exchange for money and a minimal share of power. The outcome was the 1993 Oslo Accords, which initially segmented Palestinians politically, yielding competing classes, but eventually failed to defeat the Palestinian quest for freedom.

Numerous other initiatives and plans, produced mostly by the US and other western entities, tried to conclude the Palestinian struggle in favour of Israel without having to deal with the inconvenience of putting pressure on Israel to respect international law. They have all failed.

Trump’s so-called “Deal of the Century” was another failure.

It was situated in previously thwarted Israeli plans centred around Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2009 “economic peace”. For Israel, the new “deal” was meant to represent a win-win scenario: ending Israel’s regional isolation, amassing wealth, making the Israeli military occupation permanent, avoiding any accountability under international law, and thus permanently defeating the Palestinians.

The ongoing Israeli war and genocide in Gaza, the destabilisation of the whole region and the ongoing Palestinian steadfastness and resistance are the final proof that there can never be real peace in the Middle East without justice for Palestinians and other victims of Israeli brutality. No number of future US-western deals and initiatives can ever alter this fact.

The same inference applies to those operating at a less official capacity, but still committed to the same perusal of creative “solutions” to the so-called “conflict”. Such notions may suggest that the lack of solutions reflects the lack of imagination, resolve or the dearth of legal text that makes a just end to the “conflict” impossible.

However, a solution is readily available. Indeed, the solution to military occupation, apartheid and genocide is simply to end the military occupation, dismantle the racist apartheid regime, and hold Israeli war criminals accountable for their extermination of the Palestinian people.

Not only do we have enough international and humanitarian laws and court orders to guide us through the process of holding Israel accountable, but we also have more than the needed critical mass of international consensus that should make this “solution” possible. The main obstacle is the stubborn and unconditional US support of Israel, which has allowed the occupation state to flout international law and consensus with total impunity for decades.

International law regarding Palestine is not an outdated resolution.

It is a robust and growing legal discourse that refuses to entertain any Israeli or US interpretation of the war crimes, including the crime of genocide underway in Gaza and the rest of the occupied Palestinian territories.

Last February, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) began holding hearings that allowed representatives of over 50 countries to articulate their political, legal and moral stances on the Israeli occupation of Palestine. While the acting legal adviser at the US State Department argued that the 15-judge panel at The Hague should not call for Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied West Bank, China’s Foreign Ministry’s legal adviser, Ma Xinmin, contended that Palestinian “use of force to resist oppression is an inalienable right”.

In July, the ICJ issued a landmark ruling that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory in all of its expressions is illegal under international law, and that such illegality includes the occupation of East Jerusalem, all Israeli Jewish settlements, annexation attempts and theft of natural resources.

In September, international consensus followed again, when the UN General Assembly passed a resolution demanding that Israel must end “its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” within 12 months.

This is but a footnote in the massive body of international law regarding the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Yet more is constantly being added to the already clear discourse, including the latest arrest warrants by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for top Israeli leaders, including Netanyahu.

With such clarity in mind, why then should Palestinians, Arabs and the international community entertain or engage in any new deals, plans and solutions that operate outside the realm of international law and standards? The issue is obviously not the lack of a roadmap to a just peace, but the lack of interest or will, namely on the part of the US and a few of its western allies. It is their relentless backing of Israel and financing of its war machine that makes a just solution in Palestine unattainable, at least for now.

As far as Palestinians are concerned, there can only be one acceptable “deal”, one that is predicated on the full implementation of international law, including the Palestinian people’s right of return and right to self-determination. Continued US-Israeli attempts to circumvent this fact will never impede Palestinians from carrying on with their legitimate struggle for freedom.

November 26, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment