Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal Challenging New York’s Removal of Religious Exemption for Schoolchildren

By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | May 26, 2022

The U.S. Supreme Court this week decided not to take up an appeal by parents seeking to challenge New York lawmakers’ 2019 removal of the religious exemption to vaccination requirements for schoolchildren.

The court’s May 23 order announcing its decision not to hear arguments in the case F.F. v. New York allows a lower court decision to stand. The lower court concluded the parents’ arguments lacked merit and the state was not targeting religion when it eliminated the religious exemption.

“Today we learned that the U.S Supreme Court will not hear the religious repeal case we have argued for the last almost three years,” lead attorney Michael Sussman told Autism Action Network (AAN).

Sussman said in an AAN email to members:

“As those who have followed the case know, the legislature in NY repealed the 50-year-old religious exemption for students in June 2019. It did so with hateful rhetoric accusing religious people of being fraudsters.

“I believe this violated the first amendment which this court explicitly has held does not suffer any state action smitten with religious intolerance. I had expected this court to reaffirm this principle, but four justices did not vote to hear our case.

“So, we have lost. The only hope now is in the state legislature and hope is hard to find there.”

Every year, the Supreme Court receives about 10,000 petitions for certiorari but hears only about 80 of them. If the case pertains to state law, or is comprised of parties from only one state, the chance that the Supreme Court will hear the appeal is small.

The lawsuit originated after former Gov. Andrew Cuomo on June 13, 2019, signed into law a bill that repealed the religious vaccine exemption for children whose parents or guardians hold genuine religious beliefs that do not permit the child to receive vaccinations.

The state law applies to students under 18 in both public and private schools and prohibits unvaccinated children from attending school or daycare in the state unless they have a medical exemption.

“The science is crystal clear: Vaccines are safe, effective and the best way to keep our children safe,” Cuomo said after signing the bill. “While I understand and respect freedom of religion, our first job is to protect public health.”

The appeal stemmed from a lawsuit filed on July 10, 2019, by attorneys Sussman and Children’s Health Defense chairman and chief legal counsel Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on behalf of 55 families in the New York State Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the legislature’s repeal of the religious exemption to vaccination.

The families who brought the case included those from the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths. They argued the repeal of the exemption violated their First Amendment rights, exhibited hostility toward religion and breached protections under the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, among other issues.

The families claimed the policy forced them to either violate their beliefs or homeschool their children.

“In lobbying for its passage, numerous legislators publicly mocked and ridiculed those seeking religious exemptions for their children, and the legislature left intact a medical exemption,” the parents’ brief stated.

“There is no dispute the repeal [of the religious exemption] has put tens of thousands of students to the Hobson’s choice of violating their sincerely held religious beliefs or being denied the right to attend any manner of in-person schooling.”

Sussman said there was ample evidence leading up to the passing of the bill that state legislators had shown open hospitality toward faith and people of faith.

“Comments of leaders of the New York legislature spoke of profound religious intolerance, which motivated the repeal of the religious exemptions,” Sussman told AAN.

For example, Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins was quoted in a newspaper referring to the repeal by saying, “We have chosen science over rhetoric.”

Assembly sponsor Jeffrey Dinowitz said in a television interview, “There is nothing, nothing in the Jewish religion, in the Christian religion, in the Muslim religion … that suggests that you can’t get vaccinated. It is just utter garbage.”

State Sen. Brad Hoylman, Senate sponsor, deprecated those who hold religious exemptions, stating, “Let’s face it. Non-medical exemptions are essentially religious loopholes, where people often pay for a consultant to try to worm their way out of public health requirements that the rest of us are following.”

In an editorial, State Sen. James Skoufis referred to the “so-called ‘religious exemption,’” writing, “The time is now to end the state’s nonsensical and dangerous religious exemption.”

Skoufis added, “We’ve already wasted too much time debating this issue.”

Skoufis failed to mention that neither the Senate nor the Assembly convened even a single hearing on the topic.

“Short of some cataclysmic political upheaval, there is no future for ‘religious exemption’ in New York,” John Gilmore, executive director of AAN, said in an email.

But, he said, “that does not mean there is no hope that the power of the state to make vaccinations mandatory for our children and adults cannot be taken away from our overlords in Albany.”

Several other states prohibit K-12 schools from granting religious exemptions to required vaccinations for schoolchildren, including California, Mississippi, Connecticut, West Virginia and Maine.

May 26, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Even if the Government Can ‘Move On’ From Partygate, the Public are Stuck With the Consequences of Lockdown

By Mark Shaw | The Daily Sceptic | May 25, 2022

“Let’s move on please, there are more important things to deal with.” This is what we often hear in relation to ‘partygate’. I don’t think sceptics are in such a hurry. We all want to move on in life but that is not easily achieved when we have been misinformed, taken for a ride and then taken to the cleaners.

The sceptics aren’t just Daily Sceptic readers but a growing number of the public who are seeing that much of the media have not delivered a full, honest account in reporting the last two years of pandemic restrictions and enforced medical interventions. What I find interesting is that, in much of the media’s eagerness to see the downfall of Boris Johnson, everyone is getting to see a little more of the ‘bigger picture’ the media have, up until now, been trying to hide. How could those enforcing all those ridiculous mandates be indulging in so many parties and social mixing if Covid was such a deadly disease? Why were so many coerced into a trial vaccination programme for a disease that evidently poses so little threat to them?

How we have been deceived! Yet much of the media focus on the minor detail of whether a particular event was a party, what certain photos show, whether Boris Johnson actually knew he was attending a party, whether he should have received more fines etc. They want to know if there is enough evidence to show that the PM misled Parliament because convention dictates that, if that were the case, he should resign – the big news story. The news story for me is whether the Government misled the public, not Parliament.

The scandal that lies before us is one demonstrating how those in power, who determined the rules and directed the hardships of the last two years, are more concerned about themselves and whether they have misled their colleagues than us plebs. The deception has severely affected many of us, the younger generation in particular. There are now increased hospital waiting lists, deaths from delayed cancer diagnosis and treatment and rampant economic inflation – true wrongs that deserve more than a token fine. It is this mendacity and betrayal that have consequences and will continue, possibly for decades, to have grave ramifications from which some may never be able to ‘move on’.

Dr. Mark Shaw is a retired dentist.

May 25, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

The Scottish government is silencing Palestinians

By Yvonne Ridley | MEMO | May 24, 2022

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is facing a backlash after a group of Palestinian academics criticised her decision to embrace the working definition of anti-Semitism prepared by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance because the definition clearly contradicts a hate crime review commissioned by her own government.

The Holyrood government took the decision to follow Westminster in its adoption of the controversial IHRA definition of anti-Semitism which includes, as an example, “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavour.”

Now Sturgeon’s government is in the embarrassing position of embracing two conflicting reports which openly contradict each other. To add to her woes, international human rights groups as well as a UN rights expert recently declared Israel to be an “apartheid state”.

The contents of the IHRA definition clash with the findings of Lord Bracadale, who was appointed by Scottish Ministers in 2017 to lead the Independent Review of Hate Crime Legislation. A group of Palestinian academics has now confronted Sturgeon’s government over this clear contradiction.

A few days ago, an open letter was published in the Scottish media about the dilemma facing Palestinians living in Scotland who accuse the Holyrood government of effectively gagging them from talking about the ethnic cleansing of Palestine during and ever since the Nakba.

“As Palestinians in Scotland we feel the need to be able to tell our story of being driven from our homeland in a programme of ethnic cleansing that built the state of Israel on the destruction of our villages and towns,” wrote the 26 signatories, including Amina Abdel-Khaliq, Dr Nur Abdelkhaleq, Waseem Abu Aghlain and Dr Kholoud Ajarma. “The Scottish Government’s adoption of the problematic IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-Semitism limits that freedom by protecting the state of Israel from democratic critiques of its widely recognised apartheid structures.

“Responding in part to the question of the IHRA definition, Lord Bracadale’s 2018 Review of Hate Crime Legislation accepted the case put forward by Palestinians and others that legislation should not protect ‘political entities’ since that could lead to the ‘curtailment of freedom of expression and freedom of political debate’.”

In their letter, the signatories demand that the Scottish Government should act on the findings of Lord Bracadale’s hate crime review which it commissioned.

“The Palestinian community voice has been absent while the state that violates them has been armed and supported by our government and the entire UK political class,” commented the co-founder of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Mick Napier. “That Palestinian first-person voice is uniquely compelling in forcing acknowledgement of the blood-soaked record of Israel, its past and present record of violent ethnic cleansing that is concealed or justified by our politicians.”

Napier added the warning that, “The Scottish Government seems intent on burying Bracadale’s warning that the IHRA can muzzle free speech. It must not be allowed to do so.”

I’ve always believed that hate towards and the unfair treatment of Jews should be roundly condemned, opposed and met with zero tolerance. But to be frank, the IHRA definition, which seeks to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, does not serve to protect Jews; it is all about protecting the rogue state of Israel and its zealous supporters.

Towards the end of last year, I wrote about 82-year-old Diana Neslen who faced expulsion from the Labour Party after she was accused of posting “anti-Semitic” views on social media. The problem for Labour leader Keir Starmer and his party, though, was that Diana is a Jew.

After three investigations by the party she became so fed up that she employed lawyers, who fired off a warning letter telling Labour officials that her anti-Zionist viewpoint is a protected philosophical belief under the Equality Act in the UK. Furthermore, the lawyers at Bindmans said that she herself had been “subjected by the party to discrimination and harassment related to her protected philosophical belief.”

Predictably, the Labour Party backed down although it has yet to apologise to Neslen or abandon complaints against other party members under similar investigations. Jewish Voice for Labour, of which Neslen is a member, says that at least 46 Jewish Labour Party members, two of whom have since died, have faced or are facing disciplinary charges relating to allegations of anti-Semitism.

“To say that we are insulting Jews is wrong,” Neslen told the Guardian in February. “We are acting in accord with what we regard as Jewish values and Jewish ethics, and I’m not going to change that.”

So it seems that for most Palestinians and many Jews, the IHRA was designed to protect Israel, its racist policies and its Zionist supporters. Meanwhile, Lord Bracadale’s report makes it crystal clear that criticism of Israel and its racist policies is entirely legitimate.

There can be no doubt that anti-Semitism is a crime, but equally there can be no doubt that fighting Zionism is a duty for anyone who opposes apartheid. It’s time for Sturgeon and her government to get off the fence, scrap their support for the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and allow Scottish Palestinians to tell their stories without let or hindrance.

May 25, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

School shootings. I am sorry but this needs to be said.

By Merly Nass, MD | May 25, 2022

1. Normal people have no interest in killing children, especailly ones they do not know, especially in large numbers.

2. In my view, only people subject to mind control (please investigate Sirhan Sirhan or read about US intelligence agency attempts to create mind controlled assassins beginning in the 1950s) or people taking certain drugs are even capable of carrying out such an act.

3. School shootings are the most provocative and effective way to initiate a change in gun laws, which means taking away the guns from some or all of the people who privately own them.

4. The large number of American gun owners pose a daunting challenge to the globalists who wish to control them. Police and military will not be willing to enter the homes of gun owners to remove their guns or for other purposes.

5. Few Europeans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders own guns, and it is believed by many that the imposition of much harsher lockdowns on the citizens of these nations, compared to the US, was enabled by this fact.

6. There have been shortages of guns and ammunition in the US since the onset of the pandemic. Whether this is due to supply-demand, including increased purchases by the federal government, or to other market forces, is not clear.

7. There has been very little exploration into the past history of those who committed mass murders in the US in recent years, especially in schools. I want to know if any or all of these mass murderers may have been enrolled in black mind control projects.

8. I want a full accounting of the mind control programs paid for with taxpayer dollars in the US and elsewhere.

9. I want an investigation into the many thousands of self-reported “targeted individuals” (TIs) who complain of voices beamed into their heads and other forms of what can only be termed torture.

10. I want an investigation into the implants some of these people claim were introduced into their bodies.

11. We are being attacked in many perverse ways, and we must open our eyes, pull our power back, or the attacks will continue and will destroy us.

May 25, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | Leave a comment

Will NAC Become a Banned Supplement?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | May 23, 2022

N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a form of the amino acid cysteine and a common dietary supplement, has been on the market for nearly six decades. Among its many benefits is helping increase glutathione and reduce the acetaldehyde toxicity1 that causes many hangover symptoms, but anyone who overdoses on acetaminophen (Tylenol) also receives large doses of NAC in the emergency room, as it helps prevent liver damage by increasing glutathione.

However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration suddenly cracked down on NAC in 2020, claiming it is excluded from the definition of a dietary supplement, as it was approved as a new drug in 1963,2 before it was marketed as a dietary supplement or as a food.

Retailers, including Amazon, pulled supplements containing NAC from their shelves in response, as the FDA’s move meant that NAC could no longer legally be marketed as a supplement, even though there are no fewer than 1,170 NAC-containing products in the National Institutes of Health’s Dietary Supplement Label Database.3

Draft guidance released by the FDA in April 2022 gives a glimmer of hope that NAC will continue to be available over-the-counter,4 but it’s still uncertain whether NAC will end up becoming a banned supplement.

FDA Announces ‘Enforcement Discretion’ for NAC Products

According to the FDA, their draft guidance, once finalized, will:5

“… explain our intent to exercise enforcement discretion with respect to the sale and distribution of certain NAC-containing products that are labeled as dietary supplements.

This enforcement discretion policy would apply to products that would be lawfully marketed dietary supplements if NAC were not excluded from the definition of “dietary supplement” and are not otherwise in violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.”

In July 2020, the FDA sent out warning letters to seven companies that marketed NAC as a remedy for hangovers.6 Nine months after the FDA issued warning letters with their position that NAC supplements could not legally be sold, Amazon began removing products containing the supplement.7

The new verbiage suggests, however, that the FDA will not be enforcing their policy that NAC cannot be marketed as a dietary supplement, even though it’s technically still illegal to do so. And therein lies the problem. Steve Mister, president and CEO of the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), explained:8

“That still leaves some exposure for the industry for a state [attorney general] to say, ‘Well if it’s technically illegal under the federal law,’ we don’t care that FDA’s not enforcing it. We could do it. It also leaves you potentially exposed [to] a plaintiff’s attorney.”

Further, payment processing platforms, including PayPal, are among those that added policies prohibiting the sale of NAC products labeled as supplements following the FDA’s 2020 warning. It’s unknown whether PayPal will reverse its policy, or whether other major retailers, like Amazon, will begin to offer NAC supplements again.

Former FDA official Robert Durkin suggested that, in theory, the “draft guidance in and of itself should provide enough comfort to retailers to start marketing NAC-containing dietary supplements now.”9 Whether that will be the case in practice remains to be seen.

Two Citizen Petitions Filed With the FDA

After the FDA decided that NAC could no longer be marketed as a dietary supplement, CRN and the Natural Products Association (NPA) filed separate citizen petitions with the FDA requesting that the agency reverse its position.

The CRN letter in December 2020 challenged the FDA’s determination that NAC should be precluded from supplementary use.10 They then filed a citizen position petition June 1, 2021, requesting the FDA reverse its position and outlining why this sudden policy change is “legally invalid on multiple grounds.”11

The NPA filed a separate citizen petition with the FDA12 requesting that the agency not exclude NAC as a dietary supplement or, alternatively, that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issue a regulation finding NAC is lawful in supplements.

November 24, 2021, the FDA announced they were requesting more information about how NAC has been marketed as a dietary supplement,13 including information and data on the date that NAC was first marketed as a dietary supplement, reports of adverse events and details on how the products are marketed and sold.14 In their latest draft guidance, the FDA suggests it is still considering the petitioner’s requests:15

“… we have not yet reached a final decision on one petitioner’s request to issue a regulation to permit the use of NAC in dietary supplements, and we are considering initiating rulemaking to provide by regulation that NAC is not excluded from the definition of dietary supplement.

If, among other considerations, the FDA does not identify safety-related concerns as we continue our review of the available data and information, we are likely to propose a rule providing that NAC is not excluded from the definition of dietary supplement.”

FDA Acknowledges There Are No Safety Concerns

In a positive step, while the FDA stated that their full safety review of NAC is ongoing, its initial review “has not revealed safety concerns with respect to the use of this ingredient in or as a dietary supplement.” The agency further explained:16

“In addition, NAC-containing products represented as dietary supplements have been sold in the United States for over 30 years and consumers continue to seek access to such products. Accordingly, while the FDA continues its evaluation of the request to initiate rulemaking, the FDA issued this draft guidance to explain our policy regarding products labeled as dietary supplements that contain NAC.

Unless we identify safety-related concerns during our ongoing review, the FDA would intend to exercise enforcement discretion (as described in the draft guidance) until either of the following occurs: we complete notice-and-comment rulemaking to allow the use of NAC in or as a dietary supplement (if we move forward with such proceedings) or we deny the citizen petition’s request for rulemaking.

If the FDA determines that this enforcement discretion policy is no longer appropriate, we will notify stakeholders by withdrawing or revising the guidance.”

With the draft guidance suggesting that no safety concerns have been noted, and enforcement is unlikely, Marc Ullman, counsel to the law firm Rivkin Radler LLP, suggested it should be perceived as “a win for industry” and that Amazon should “rescind its ban” on NAC dietary supplements in response:17

“FDA has said there’s no safety issue and it’s not going to take enforcement action. I think it would be an incredible overabundance of caution for any retailer to say, ‘We shouldn’t get NAC back into commerce.'”

Was FDA’s Ban Fueled by COVID-19 Treatment Hopes?

The FDA’s crackdown on NAC coincided with research suggesting COVID-19 treatment as a new indication. According to one literature analysis,18 glutathione deficiency may be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment.

Previous research has shown NAC inhibits the expression of proinflammatory cytokines in cells infected with highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus. Proinflammatory cytokines also play a crucial role in COVID-19 severity.19 Considering many COVID-19 cases also involve blood clots in addition to excessive oxidative stress, and NAC effectively addresses both, I believe NAC should be included in the standard of care for COVID-19. As noted in the FASEB Journal :20

“COVID-19 may cause pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cardiovascular alterations, and multiple organ failure, which have been ascribed to a cytokine storm, a systemic inflammatory response, and an attack by the immune system. Moreover, an oxidative stress imbalance has been demonstrated to occur in COVID-19 patients.

N-Acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC) is a precursor of reduced glutathione (GSH). Due to its tolerability, this pleiotropic drug has been proposed not only as a mucolytic agent, but also as a preventive/therapeutic agent in a variety of disorders involving GSH depletion and oxidative stress …

Thiols block the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 thereby hampering penetration of SARS-CoV-2 into cells. Based on a broad range of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory mechanisms … the oral administration of NAC is likely to attenuate the risk of developing COVID-19, as it was previously demonstrated for influenza and influenza-like illnesses.

Moreover, high-dose intravenous NAC may be expected to play an adjuvant role in the treatment of severe COVID-19 cases and in the control of its lethal complications … including pulmonary and cardiovascular adverse events.”

Another study published in 2021 compared consecutive patients hospitalized with moderate or severe COVID-19 pneumonia.21 One group received only standard care and the other group received 600 milligrams of NAC twice daily for 14 days. There were 42 in the NAC group and 40 in the control group. Treatment with NAC led to lower rates of severe respiratory failure and significantly lower mortality rates.

NAC Offers a Multitude of Benefits

NAC has been described as an “old drug with new tricks” because scientists are continually uncovering new ways to use it.22 Along with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and mucolytic properties, NAC may be a useful adjuvant for a variety of chronic diseases and other medical conditions, including:23

  • Polycystic ovary disease
  • Male infertility
  • Sleep apnea
  • Acquired immune deficiency syndrome
  • Influenza
  • Parkinsonism
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Peripheral neuropathy
  • Stroke outcomes
  • Diabetic neuropathy
  • Crohn’s disease
  • Ulcerative colitis
  • Schizophrenia
  • Bipolar illness
  • Obsessive compulsive disorder
  • As a chelator for heavy metals and nanoparticles

Recently, it was found that NAC may also prevent strokes in people with hereditary cystatin C amyloid angiopathy (HCCAA), a rare genetic disorder.24 People with HCCAA have an average life expectancy of just 30 years, and most die within five years of their first stroke,25 so reducing their incidence could prove to be essential to increasing survival.

The finding is even more significant because it was conducted by researchers from Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), which is notoriously against supplements. NAC appears to work by preventing the formation of amyloid-producing proteins, which promote amyloid deposits linked to strokes.26

It could also have potential for Alzheimer’s as, according to the CHOP researchers, the process of protein deposition that occurs in HCCAA is similar to what occurs in Alzheimer’s, although at an accelerated pace, which is why dementia occurs later in life than Alzheimer’s.

With so many potential health benefits, the root of the motivation to ban NAC as a supplement likely lies in protecting the finances of pharmaceutical companies. Hopefully in this case, however, the FDA will determine that NAC should be allowed to exist under the dietary supplement definition, ensuring widespread access to this important compound will continue the way it did for decades.

Sources and References

May 24, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

Biden Regime’s Ministry of Truth Stumbles

But it is only on “pause” and we will be seeing it again

BY PHILIP GIRALDI • UNZ REVIEW • MAY 24, 2022

Finally some good news – maybe! The Department of Homeland Security’s recently launched Disinformation Governance Board has gone into what has been described as the “pause” mode and its controversial Director Nina Jankowicz has resigned, citing “vile personal attacks and physical threats.” Its status will reportedly be reviewed over the next 75 days and it will likely be rolled out more quietly next time around and under a different name.

The Board was developed to counter what was held to be unfair criticism of policies being promoted by the government. Ironically, however, it has recently become clear that the White House itself has been doing much of the lying. It uses the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other government agencies to spread false information, referred to as disinformation, to dupe the public into believing that there is something good and noble about America becoming heavily involved in the war in Ukraine, with all that entails. And, of course, since the evildoers must be excoriated as that drama is playing out, good old Russia fits in admirably, particularly as the Democrats still like to pretend that it was Moscow’s interference that defeated Hillary in 2016.

A lie is a lie, but it is the ultimate irony when a government that is caught lying on a regular basis sets up an inquisition that seeks to identify and take action against ordinary citizens who are accused of spreading “disinformation.” Of course, critics on the right immediately discerned that the disinformation will consist of anything that challenges the official government line on various issues, up to including pandemics, white supremacist domestic terrorism, aborting unwanted babies, and even the march to war. Although the inept President Joe Biden Administration can rightly be accused of elevating deceit to a steady diet of malapropisms, one can trace the rise of egregious lying by heads of state to the Gulf of Tonkin incident and, more recently, to the criminal deceptions carried out by the George W. Bush Administration. Those lies led to the invasion of Iraq, which cost trillions of dollars, killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of Americans, and which is still producing unrest in the region.

So now we were to be confronted by the Disinformation Governance Board, so designated under the august authority of the Department of Homeland Security to root out disinformation and those who are seeking to disseminate falsehoods about what our noble elected officials are doing to us in Washington. Followers of George Orwell inevitably, and almost immediately, dubbed the new creation the Ministry of Truth.

The official launch documents in late April claimed that the DGB would be “protecting free speech, privacy, civil rights, & civil liberties” against the “threat of disinformation.” Its focus would be on “homeland security, focused specifically on irregular migration and Russia,” meaning that it would be discrediting any source that complains about the flood of aliens crossing the US southern border or casting doubts on the necessity of supporting America’s Ukraine “allies.” In a follow-up briefing DHS elaborated that it would monitor threat “disinformation spread by foreign states such as Russia, China and Iran, or other adversaries such as transnational criminal organizations and human smuggling organizations.”

And the board was to be headed by one Nina Jankowicz, a weird, highly politicized concoction who sang about her mission in a tweet entitled “You can just call me the Mary Poppins of disinformation” while confirming that she would be the first executive director of the DGB. She has also written a book entitled “How To Be A Woman Online.” She has worked for the National Democratic Institute, the Democratic Party affiliate of the National Endowment for Democracy that promotes democracy worldwide. She has also been a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington.

In an NPR interview responding to a question concerning Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, Jankowicz ridiculously opined that “I shudder to think about, if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would be like for the marginalized communities around the world…” Glenn Greenwald further described the new Disinformation Czar as having “herself ratified and helped spread virtually every disinformation campaign concocted by the union of the Democratic Party and corporate media over the last five years. Indeed, the only valid basis for calling her a ‘disinformation expert’ is that she has spread disinformation with such gusto. The most notorious of those was the pre-election lie that the authentic Hunter Biden laptop was ‘disinformation.’ She also decreed falsely that the origins of COVID were definitively proven to be zoonotic and could not have come from a lab leak, was a frequent and vocal advocate of the fraudulent Steele Dossier, and repeatedly pronounced as true all sorts of Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy theories which Robert Mueller, after conducting an intense 18-month investigation, rejected as lacking evidence to establish their truth.”

Jankowicz’s boss Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas nevertheless claimed that she was “eminently qualified,” a “renowned expert,” and politically “neutral.” But to put that in context, her rather thin actual work history, heavy on being a Democratic Party apparatchik tied to the Clintons, oddly includes a stint as a Fulbright-Clinton fellow in 2017 serving as an adviser on disinformation to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry. She sports the US and Ukrainian flags next to her picture on her twitter page.

Attempts by governments to shape their message by discrediting alternative viewpoints are not exactly new. Here in the US, suppressing contrary views is nearly as old as the republic. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 gave the president power to deport potentially “dangerous” foreigners and made it a crime to print “any false, scandalous, and malicious writing” about the government. President John Adams supported these laws because he wanted to prevent a war with France, quite the reverse of what the Biden regime is seeking to do as it mobilizes against Russia. Vice President Thomas Jefferson was openly disgusted by the unconstitutional acts, which probably contributed to his election as president in 1800.

The Acts were subsequently allowed to expire and were never reviewed by the Supreme Court, but there is also the later example of the Committee for Public Information which was used by the government to support the war party line in World War One. There followed the Espionage Act of 1918, which is still in effect, that was used liberally by President Woodrow Wilson to silence critics of American entry into the war. The definition of what constitutes “espionage” was deliberately made infinitely elastic and the Act is still in use against whistleblowers and presumably also Julian Assange.

Given the language connected with the launch of the Disinformation Government Board, it might reasonably be assumed that it would have surely sought to suppress “malicious writing” and speech relating to the Biden sponsored wave of illegal immigration along the country’s southern border that has driven America’s foreign-born population to a record 46.6 million people. And, in addition to an increase in arriving Afghans, which was actually written into the bill proposing $33 billion more for Ukraine, there will surely be more Ukrainian migrants. Jewish organizations in the US, Europe and Israel are already actively bringing in co-religionists. Given political realities, displaced Ukrainian Jews will likely be quietly given refugee status granting them full benefits to include housing and welfare payments.

Not surprisingly, the surging wave of immigration is highly unpopular among working people who are already established, even among many Democrats, and the Biden response will be to compel the bad vibes go away, literally, by openly labeling critics as liars peddling disinformation. Whether there will be actual criminal or civil penalties attached to the process remains to be seen when the board is most likely resurrected under another name.

And, of course, the likes of Senator Rand Paul, Congressman Tom Massie, journalist Tucker Carlson and former Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard would have their views on the developing catastrophe in Ukraine challenged and denigrated, to include possibly arranging for their banning from social media sites, which is already being done to some critics. The fact is that we do not know at this point exactly what the new Board will eventually be empowered to do, but one can count on the results being bad, destructive both of the First Amendment and of honest journalism in the United States.

The ability of the government to collude with corporate America to diminish personal liberty of the citizenry cannot be understated. We have already seen corporations that operate on the internet proactively terminating accounts that it considers politically unacceptable. Consortium News, a perfect respectable site of long standing that has a splendid record of investigative journalism, was recently delisted by PayPal, which took the further step of confiscating its nearly $10,000 of funds with the threat that the money might be retained by PayPal as an additional punishment.

The reality is that the government can unleash its thousands of lawyers to make a case against nearly every citizen who is politically active. Which is why the Biden Administration has already been criminalizing and/or sanctioning any foreign organization that has “interfered in or undermined public confidence in United States elections,” as if the two major parties are not already doing that quite effectively all by themselves. If that is truly a crime why aren’t Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell being sanctioned?

In my own experience, I have dealt with threatened punishment regarding my contributing to and participating in the activities of an Iranian NGO and a Russian information site. Neither organization can plausibly be regarded as a threat to the United States, though they both were highly critical of US government policies, as am I. In one case, American participants in a conference overseas organized by the Iranians were warned that they would be arrested upon return, which currently appears to be “due process” in the US. In the case of the Russian site, the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) advised that any American writing for the site could be fined as much as $311,562!

The unfortunate reality is that the real damage is being done through the employment of government driven restrictions punishing ordinary citizens who are exercising their right of free speech and free association. It is easy to claim that a foreign news service or NGO is “undermining confidence in US elections” as it is a charge that one need not have to prove. Indeed, it is unprovable and it is a weapon that can be used to manage dissent and to narrow the bounds of acceptable discourse. The question becomes whether and to what extent the successor to the now paused Disinformation Governance Board will attempt to apply similar standards to Americans. One might suggest that the barring of dissident US journalists and political figures from social media sites and from funding mechanisms like PayPal is the first shot to be fired in a long struggle over what is “truth” that will play out over the next two years.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

May 24, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Inclusion, Wokeness, and Davos 2022

By Richard Hugus | May 23, 2022

The picture above is of a sign outside a performing arts theater in Santa Barbara, California. Looks like everyone is welcome. Well, not really. It turns out that if you’re  not “vaccinated” you’re not welcome. If you haven’t arrived at the ticket booth with ID and proof of being injected with two doses of an emergency use experimental gene treatment for “covid 19” — a treatment which has no efficacy and is associated with millions of serious injuries and deaths — this #LoveForAll message doesn’t actually apply to you. If you’re not “vaccinated” the only way you can get into the theater now is if you have taken a test proving you don’t have the plague. Don’t want a PCR swab up your nose? Too late for an antigen test? Tough luck. This rainbow venue welcomes EVERYONE, except for carriers of the plague.

“Who doesn’t love LOVE?” Apparently, the state of North Carolina doesn’t. The founder of Insist On Love For All which makes and sells the $60 sign displayed above, took a trip to Asheville, North Carolina a few years ago and was impressed by signs “embracing diversity.” Says Insist On Love’s founder,

shop owners started displaying these signs over two years ago [2018] to encourage tourism following the passage of the controversial House Bill 2 in North Carolina, which requires certain public bathrooms to be designated for use by males or females based on their biological sex. “The signs in Asheville moved me. Love is the only weapon we can use to fight hate . . . “

In this case, “hate” was displayed by 1) the idea that men and women should have separate bathrooms, 2) the idea that men (or men who think they’re women) don’t have a right to walk into women’s bathrooms, and vice versa,  3) the fact that other sexes besides male and female have not been acknowledged, and 4) the fact that the state of North Carolina thus discriminated against all those who don’t have male/female privilege. There is also the ‘hate’  involved in the unwillingness of North Carolina to provide separate bathrooms for a theoretically unlimited number of other genders. Unless #LoveForAll is somehow a front for a consortium of plumbing supply companies (this would actually be comforting news), there is nothing left for us to conclude but that ‘love’, as the term is being used here, is indeed a weapon, not to fight hate, but to fight reason. ‘Love’ is now a buzzword in a well-established “diversity and inclusion” narrative sent down from academic critical theory to the progressive left to the mainstream media to the culture at large. Has there ever been a time when good things have been so twisted into their opposite? This is not about love or inclusion. This is shallow virtue signaling by people who have been swallowed up by a political machine designed to turn cultural norms upside down, not for the purpose of bringing needed change, but for the purpose of creating chaos and a loss of rationality, after which new supposed norms can just be lifted into place.

“All sexual orientations”, cited in the sign, is also a topic at the current May 22-28 Davos forum, where “resilience through equity” and “inclusivity” for the “LGBTQI+ community” is on the formal agenda. Do the corporate bosses, social engineers, and preening politicians at this forum really care about equality, or are they just using the brand to create the upheaval necessary to bring in fantastic profits and power? The answer is obvious. The agenda is exclusion, not inclusion; fascism, not liberalism. Their plan is for the majority of humanity, gay or straight, to be excluded from their rights, autonomy, and independence, while the bosses enjoy their wealth and slave labor. Like #LoveForAll,  everyone is welcome in the Great Reset except those who believe there are only two sexes — that is, just about everybody since the beginning of human history. Everyone is welcome in virtue-signaling countries, corporations, and institutions except those who choose not to accept a medical intervention also never heard of before in human history — that of altering the human genome on the pretext of defeating a virus. In other words, everyone is welcome except those who have chosen not to go insane. The insanity is called wokeness. Wokeness is nothing but a tool being used to effect a very ugly and very ambitious power grab. When the job is done, everyone duped into thinking they were fighting for the victims of oppression and equality for all will be swatted away like flies.

The would-be gods at Davos brought us their own version of the Apocalypse — plague, war, famine, and death became covid, Ukraine, food shortages, and vaccines. Do such people even remotely care about racial prejudice and gender dysphoria? No. They either massively exploited or completely made up these issues to create disorder. Indeed, their eugenicist predecessors had certain, ahem,  opinions about people with disabilities, sexual deviants, and racial groups which they know can’t be mentioned in polite society today. So they went the other way. Not believing in God, the Davos elite see themselves as gods. The further this delusion takes them, the harder they will fall. There will also come a time of reckoning for the collaborators in this program — those who, wittingly or not, aided this monstrosity. Galling self-righteousness, ignorance, and hypocrisy were the least of the crimes in this class. The ones higher up — those who made the plans, gave the orders, and knew what they were doing — face a reckoning that perhaps we do not have words for. It may be a regular new round of guillotining such as we have seen before in history. Or it may be that this time wickedness has gone so far it will have to be ended forever. Prospects for the Davos crew do not look good.

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Israel denies EU delegation entry to to Palestine

MEMO | May 23, 2022

A European Parliament delegation cancelled a trip to the occupied Palestinian territories yesterday after the group’s chairperson, Manu Pineda, was denied entry to Israel, reported Wafa news agency.

The Spanish member of the European Parliament and chair of the parliament’s delegation for relations with Palestine was scheduled to travel to the occupied Palestinian territories with a group of European lawmakers to review the situation on the ground following the assassination of Palestinian Al Jazeera journalist, Shireen Abu Akleh.

However, at late notice the group was informed that the mission would not be able to go ahead as planned due to what has been described as a “unilateral decision” taken by Israeli authorities.

“Israel is blocking the work of the European Parliament,” said Pineda, adding that the delegation had also been denied access to the besieged Gaza Strip.

He shared the letter that the Israeli Foreign Ministry, which states occupation forces “cannot allow the visit to Gaza of delegations with political affiliation and legislators.”

In response, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, who is currently in Israel to meet President Isaac Herzog and Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, said on Twitter, she regretted Israel’s decision to refuse entry to Pineda and would raise the decision directly with the Israeli authorities during her visit.

“Respect for MEPs and the European Parliament is essential for good relations,” she said.

Pineda thanked Metsola for her remarks and called on her to “apply reciprocity in our institution until the decision is reversed.”

“It is important that we are united to defend the European Parliament,” he said.

The European Parliament’s delegation for relations with Palestine has 18 members and informs the European Union legislature about political, economic and human rights developments in the occupied territories.

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The 10-Year Pandemic Plan

THE PLAN – The WHO plans for 10 years of pandemics from 2020 to 2030

More information, and to see all the documents featured in THE PLAN.

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | May 21, 2022

As the dust begins to settle from the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s easier to look back with clarity on the unprecedented events that have taken place over the last two years. Thousands of medical doctors and scientists now believe that the pandemic was planned and used to install a world dictatorship. Further, it’s unlikely to be the last.

The World Health Organization, in fact, has planned for 10 years of infectious diseases from 2020 to 2030, as revealed by WHO virologist Marion Koopmans in “The Plan,” featured above. When asked whether chances are high that there will be a second pandemic, she responds (translated from Dutch), “Yes, this has been in the WHO’s 10-year plan for some time. That plan says that there will be a major infectious disease crisis. Well, this was year one.”1

How could they know that an infectious disease crisis is imminent in the next decade? A series of shocking evidence reveals that this may have been the plan all along — a plan that hasn’t been hidden. On the contrary, it’s been stated openly for years that a pandemic was coming, setting the stage for widespread acceptance and compliance around the globe.

Proof the Pandemic Was Planned?

The WHO virologist’s acknowledgement that the agency has a plan for 10 years of ongoing pandemics mirrors a statement by Bill Gates that COVID-19 was “pandemic one” and “pandemic two” is coming. “We’ll have to prepare for the next one. That will get attention this time,” he says — while smiling.2

It’s important to understand that Bill Gates is WHO’s No. 1 funder, contributing more to WHO’s $4.84 billion biennial budget3 than any member-state government, via multiple avenues including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as well as GAVI, which was founded by the Gates Foundation in partnership with WHO, the World Bank and various vaccine manufacturers.

In short, Bill Gates is essentially the owner of WHO, and WHO’s 10-year pandemic plan is also Gates’ plan. As noted by Stop World Control:4

“In the globalist view, mankind as a whole must submit to the ‘World’ Health Organization, without them ever asking our opinion or even consulting with other medical experts. In fact, every medical expert speaking out against their decisions is censored.”

Other world leaders are also on board. England’s Prince Charles, for instance, has publicly stated, “There will be more and more pandemics, if we don’t do ‘the great reset’ now.”5

Millions of COVID-19 Test Kits Sold — in 2017 and 2018

It’s difficult to ignore the numerous announcements, both subtle and overt, that a pandemic was coming, which occurred in the years and months leading up to 2020. Data from World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) shows COVID-19 test kits were imported by different countries in 2017 and 2018. “Let this sink in for a second: Literally hundreds of millions of COVID-19 test kits were exported and imported, all over the world, during 2017 and 2018,” Stop World Control explains.6

The data was posted September 5, 2020, on social media and it went viral. The next day, WITS swapped “COVID-19 test kits” with “medical test kits,” but the Internet Archive Wayback Machine still has an image of the original.7 Meanwhile, in 2017, Anthony Fauci somehow knew that an outbreak was coming. In fact, he all but guaranteed it, stating:8

“There is no question there is going to be a challenge for the coming administration in the area of infectious diseases. There will be a surprise outbreak. There’s no doubt in anyone’s mind about this.”

Gates also stated publicly in 2018 that a global pandemic was imminent, likely within the next decade, while Melinda Gates went so far as to state that an engineered virus in the coming years was humanity’s greatest threat.9

Then there’s the often-overlooked fact that the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation sponsored a novel coronavirus pandemic preparedness exercise shortly before the pandemic started.

The event, which took place October 18, 2019, in New York, was called Event 201, and it included a detailed simulation of a coronavirus outbreak with a predicted global death toll of 65 million people within a span of 18 months.10 December 19, 2019, shortly after the event, Gates tweeted, “I’m particularly excited about what the next year could mean for one of the best buys in global health: vaccines.”11

Moderna Had COVID-19 Shots in 2019

Here’s another unsettling fact: December 12, 2019, Moderna, together with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), sent mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill12 — again, that’s before the pandemic started. The confidential documents were revealed by The Daily Expose, which reported:13

“What did Moderna [and NIAID] know that we didn’t? In 2019 there was not any singular coronavirus posing a threat to humanity which would warrant a vaccine, and evidence suggests there hasn’t been a singular coronavirus posing a threat to humanity throughout 2020 and 2021 either.”

Going back further, in 2010, The Rockefeller Foundation released a report titled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,” which uses scenario planning to explore ways that technology and growth/development and government might play out over the coming decades. One of the scenarios they detailed was a pandemic with some eerie similarities to COVID-19:14

“In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit … The pandemic … had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and of office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.”

The scenario suggests that China fared far better than the U.S., due to its government’s “quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.”

As the pandemic continues, “national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.”

The increased authoritarian control and oversight of citizens continued even after the pandemic ended, and was welcomed at first in exchange for “greater safety and stability.”

Pandemic Propaganda Has Been Ongoing for Years

So-called “predictive programming” prepares the public for future events via entertainment. In the 2003 series “Dead Zone,” a coronavirus pandemic is featured with chloroquine emerging as the cure. “V for Vendetta” is another example. This 2006 movie features the rise of dictatorship and fear-based propaganda due to a virus. Curiously, the film is set in 2020 as “an uncompromising vision of the future.”

In 2012, a comic book titled “Infected,” produced by the European Union for distribution among their employees only, also depicted a virus originating in a Chinese lab that sets stage for worldwide tyranny, described as the “one health approach.”15

Even the Summer Olympics in 2012 included the scenario of a pandemic — complete with nurses and hospital beds — in its opening show.16 Even in the months leading up to the pandemic, additional red flags were raised. Among them:17

  • Months before the pandemic, a panel discussed the need for “a global disruptive event to make the world willing to accept experimental vaccines”
  • In August 2019, Australia published a management plan for a pandemic18
  • Six months before the pandemic, the Global Vaccination Summit prepared to vaccinate the entire world
  • In September 2019, WHO instructed all governments to prepare for an imminent pandemic due to a “rapidly spreading lethal respiratory pathogen”19

And in 2022, a group of international lawyers, experts and scientists is now trying to spread the word that the COVID-19 pandemic is a criminal operation intended to increase control and establish a world dictatorship:20

“The power structures colluded to stage a pandemic that they had been planning for years … To this end, they deliberately created mass panic through false statements of fact and a socially engineered psychological operation whose messages they conveyed through the corporate media.

The purpose of this mass panic was to persuade the population to agree to experimental so-called “vaccinations” (which they are not). These have been proven to be neither effective nor safe, but extremely dangerous and even lethal.”

Thousands Standing Up Against the Tyranny

At this point, signs that an all-encompassing global totalitarian plan is being quietly put together, piece by piece, are all around us. The Rockefeller Foundation released a “National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan” that calls for the use of a digital “patient identification number” to track all Americans after testing them for COVID-19,21 and multibillionaire criminals are working to impose worldwide tyranny. As noted by Stop World Control:22

“Total world domination has been a diabolical desire of many powerful leaders throughout world history. Just think of the notorious world empires of Rome, Great Britain, the Persians, the Russians, and so on.

This perverse passion has never left the corrupt hearts of humanity, but the means to achieve this goal have changed. Instead of invading nations with tanks and bazookas, they now enslave humanity using the force of fear. Once they can create enough panic, they can present the ‘solution’. This solution, however, means removing our freedoms and submitting us to their control.

The main players in globalism are the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization, the European Union, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and particularly the many private banks that basically control the world already. These visible entities are, however, just a facade that hides the true powers, which are the many ‘Secret Societies.’”

Thousands have opened their eyes to the truth, however, and are making progress in sharing it with the world. This includes, among many others:

  • America’s Frontline Doctors
  • World Doctors Alliance
  • World Freedom Directory
  • Doctors for COVID Ethics
  • Great Barrington Declaration
  • World Freedom Alliance

If you want to be a part of positive change, know that there is hope — and it starts with information. With every fact you share with your inner circle, the knowledge grows and, with it, optimism for the future. A simple yet profound notion to remember is this:23

“The tyranny is 100% dependent on the ignorance of the public. The solution is therefore to inform the people around us. Once people know what is really happening, they will stop complying and start resisting.”

Sources and References

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Film Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Australian Doctors Finally Speak Out! – Conference Of Conscience – Part 1

Zee Media | May 19, 2022

Over the past two years, no professional group has been silenced, threatened, or targeted more than Australian doctors. So many have stayed silent because of organisations such as AHPRA and various Medical Boards threatening to suspend or de-register them if they dare voice their genuine concerns as physicians.

For the first time in a conference of this nature, a group of brave Australian doctors have finally decided to speak out about what they and their patients have been subjected to, the ways the government and TGA have skewed the safety and efficacy data of the COVID-19 vaccines, purposeful suppression of early treatment that could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, and the danger of continuing the COVID-19 vaccination program.

Australia and the whole world is currently at risk. The World Health Organization who is largely responsible for millions of deaths globally is currently proposing a global Pandemic Treaty which seeks to give the WHO complete control over every country. More information about this can be found on zeeemedia.com.

Stay tuned for Part 2.

If you would like to support Zeee Media to continue getting the truth out to more people, you can donate via this link:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=48KZT6SYT2R44

Website:

https://www.zeeemedia.com

Uncensored on Telegram:

https://t.me/zeeemedia

Dr. Zelenko has saved thousands of lives through his Z-Stack protocol, and has recently launched Z-DTox which he advises will help prevent blood clots, and help protect those with a compromised immune system, including those who have been vaccinated.

To order Dr. Zelenko’s products today, visit the below link, and use referral code MARIAZEEE for 5% off your order:

https://zstacklife.com/?ref=MARIAZEEE

Dr. Peter McCullough’s new book can be found on the link below:

https://couragetofacecovid.com

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9062939/?fbclid=IwAR2uqkj0PjHfvoi121HkBF7DkjALqBFUa3K_aHyQS-mU3Cq77GR651HcugQ#!po=24.2063

May 22, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Leave a comment

Sign the World Freedom Declaration – Oppose IHR amendments

OffGuardian | May 21, 2022

The Health Freedom Defense Fund – a US-based non-profit – has published an open declaration opposing the planned amendments to the International Health Regulations.

Kit broke down the proposed changes in detail in yesterday’s article. Suffice to say, they amount to a massive threat to both individual liberty and national sovereignty.

You can read the full text of the HFDF declaration here, or a (slightly) abridged version below.

The declaration has already been signed by almost 30,000 people, including Robert Kennedy Jr, Dr Sucharit Bhakdi and Naomi Wolf.

To see the full list of signatories, and add your own signature you can click here.

*

Declaration of Opposition to the Proposed International Health Regulations Amendments

We, the undersigned, oppose the proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) existing 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) and stand in support of all people’s right to health sovereignty and self-determination.

The United States’ proposed amendments to the IHR are set to be considered at the 75th World Health Assembly, which begins on the 22nd of May, 2022. The proposed amendments, however, create an ambiguity relating to the date they become effective as the proposed amendments expressly state they will become effective six months after the date of notification by the Director-General, whereas the existing IHR provides that amendments become effective 18 months after notification by the Director-General.

If accepted, these legally binding amendments would come into effect for all member states except those that explicitly reject them. Under Article 59 of the IHR, de facto approval is assumed for any member states that fail to reject or take reservation to the amendments.

The existing IHR, adopted in 2005, respect the sovereignty of all member nations. The proposed amendments, however, would expand and codify the WHO’s authority to implement global health mandates in direct violation of national sovereignty and citizens’ rights.

These proposals attempt to eliminate a nation’s autonomy, during times of real, assumed or anticipated public health emergencies, affording the WHO unilateral power in assessing and determining a health emergency and empowering the WHO to dictate policy and response.

All of this comes on the heels of the COVID-19 crisis during which the WHO grossly mismanaged all facets of the global health response by encouraging economy-destroying lockdowns, suppressing early preventive treatments and recommending interventions that have proven to be neither safe nor effective.

Under the guise of health regulations, these amendments would permit the WHO to seize executive governance powers over member states, granting governing powers to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

In sum, the IHR amendments would, among other changes:

  • Intensify the surveillance of all countries and their citizens.
  • Grant the WHO the authority to tell other member states when one member state isn’t reporting and launch punitive actions.
  • Empower the WHO Director-General to declare when and where a pandemic or “alleged” emergency is occurring using undisclosed sources.
  • Confer unrestricted powers to the Director-General to define and implement interventions.
  • Give the WHO the ability to access and mobilize capital in the event of a pandemic.
  • This power grab by the WHO, its donors, and stakeholders represents a direct attack on the political and economic sovereignty of all nations and their citizens.

By repeatedly promoting policies that caused catastrophic economic, social, physical, emotional and mental damage across the globe, the WHO has failed in its mission as global steward of public health and cannot be entrusted with setting policy for all citizens of the world.

Of note, the WHO enjoys immunity from every form of legal action, arrest, and searches of their papers, documents, and facilities.

The WHO should not be allocated more money, power, or authority nor should it be allowed to further control the world’s health agenda or implement biosecurity measures.

Global agreements brokered by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats must never be permitted to rule any nation.

It is imperative that each nation and territory retain its sovereignty, especially during times of crisis, so that the entire global community can be protected from globally directed policies that primarily benefit powerful financial and ideological stakeholders.

The undersigned respectfully request that all nations and their representatives repudiate such agreements.

We strongly oppose the proposed IHR amendments which would require nations and their citizens to adhere to the dictates of an unaccountable global body.

We oppose any involvement in a treaty, agreement, or other legally binding global document that would hinder any nation’s sovereignty in the area of public health.

We assert that nations and their citizens are best-positioned and -equipped to make health decisions appropriate to their communities.

We demand that the people of each nation be in charge of determining their response to health crises.

As citizens of the world, we defend the rights, freedoms, and privacy of all members of the global community by calling for the rejection of the IHR amendments and the WHO’s attempt to usurp the power and authority of health policy from its rightful place – at home amongst the people.

On May 18, 2022, this declaration was authored and signed by,

Leslie Manookian
Health Freedom Defense Fund

May 21, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Solidarity and Activism | , | Leave a comment

The WHO Changes Guidelines to Favor Lockdowns

BY WILL JONES | BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE | MAY 18, 2022

The World Health Organisation intends to make lockdowns and other non-pharmaceutical interventions intended to curb viral spread part of official pandemic guidance.

The revelation comes in a report scheduled to go to the WHO’s World Health Assembly later this month. This is not part of new pandemic treaty and does not require the endorsement of member states. The report says the implementation is already underway.

Many have raised the alarm about a new WHO pandemic treaty. However, as I’ve noted previously (and as Michael Senger notes here), there isn’t a new pandemic treaty on the table. Rather, there are amendments to the existing treaty, the International Health Regulations 2005, plus other recommendations (131 in all) put forward in a report from the Working Group on Strengthening WHO Preparedness and Response to Health Emergencies.

Most of these amendments and recommendations relate to information and resource sharing and preparation for future pandemics; none of them directly interferes with state sovereignty in the sense of allowing the WHO to impose or lift measures. However, that doesn’t mean they’re not dangerous, as they endorse and codify the awful errors of the last two years, beginning with China’s Hubei lockdown on January 23rd 2020.

The recommendations in the report originate from WHO review panels and committees and were sent out in a survey in December 2021 to member states and stakeholders to seek their views.

Non-pharmaceutical interventions appear three times in the recommendations, once under “equity” and once under “finance,” where states are urged to ensure “adequate investment in” and “rapid development, early availability, effective and equitable access to novel vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics and non-pharmaceutical interventions for health emergencies, including capacity for testing, scaled manufacturing and distribution”.

While rapid development and early availability of non-pharmaceutical interventions sounds worrying in itself, it could be interpreted in a number of ways by states.

Where it really gets alarming, however, is in the “leadership and governance” section. LPPPR 29 states (emphasis added):

Apply non-pharmaceutical public health measures systematically and rigorously in every country at the scale the epidemiological situation requires. All countries to have an explicit evidence-based strategy agreed at the highest level of government to curb COVID-19 transmission.

The requirement that a country’s pandemic strategy must aim to curb viral transmission is a major change from the current guidance. The U.K.’s existing pandemic preparedness strategy, prepared in line with previous WHO recommendations, is completely clear that no attempt should be made to stop viral transmission as it will not be possible and will waste valuable resources:

It will not be possible to halt the spread of a new pandemic influenza virus, and it would be a waste of public health resources and capacity to attempt to do so.

It almost certainly will not be possible to contain or eradicate a new virus in its country of origin or on arrival in the U.K. The expectation must be that the virus will inevitably spread and that any local measures taken to disrupt or reduce the spread are likely to have very limited or partial success at a national level and cannot be relied on as a way to ‘buy time’.

It will not be possible to stop the spread of, or to eradicate, the pandemic influenza virus, either in the country of origin or in the U.K., as it will spread too rapidly and too widely.

But now the WHO says that curbing viral transmission is to be the aim of pandemic response. This is a disaster.

Worse, the report says this recommendation will be incorporated into the WHO’s “normative work,” meaning it will be part of official WHO guidance to states in responding to a pandemic. Worse still, it says it’s already being implemented – it doesn’t need a treaty or the agreement of member states to do this, it’s already happening.

Expect to see new guidance appearing at the international and national levels over the coming months and years which incorporate this presumption that restrictions should be imposed to curb viral spread. This is despite the last two years only confirming the wisdom of the WHO’s previous guidance that this is not possible and not worth the attempt.

This matter must be raised at the highest levels so that lockdowns and other non-pharmaceutical interventions are kept out of all pandemic planning.

Sign the parliamentary petition against the latest moves by the WHO here – now at over 121,000 signatures.

May 21, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »