Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

DR. PIERRE KORY ON THE DARKHORSE PODCAST WITH BRET WEINSTEIN | COVID IVERMECTIN PUBLIC HEALTH CRIMES

The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, the organization co-founded by Dr. Pierre Kory in response to COVID-19, has in my opinion been one of the greatest displays of humanity during this situation. Through their work, inexpensive protocols that both prevent and treat COVID-19 have been developed and taken up by countless doctors worldwide, and have influenced the public health policies of many national and regional governments around the world. In this interview with Bret Weinstein, Kory describes his journey tackling COVID first-hand as a doctor, and the uphill battle it has been trying to get the world to accept protocols that actually work.
https://flccc.net
FLCCC’s COVID Prevention & Treatment Protocols: https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/
Ivermectin for COVID-19, summary of the current research: https://ivmmeta.com/
Summary of the current results from COVID early treatment studies: https://c19early.com/
How to Get Ivermectin: https://covid19criticalcare.com/guide-for-this-website/how-to-get-ivermectin/

Source: https://youtu.be/Tn_b4NRTB6k

July 9, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

In Germany, burning the Israeli flag is a problem, but killing Palestinians isn’t

By Motasem A Dalloul | MEMO | July 6, 2021

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Idan Roll met with the German Ambassador, Susanne Wasum-Rainer, on Monday along with visiting German parliamentarians. Roll thanked the German guests for their country’s strong support for Israel during its major military offensive against the Palestinians in Gaza from 10-21 May.

Germany’s unlimited support and cooperation make it a special friend of Israel. Among EU members it is the second-biggest supplier of weapons to the occupation state. Between 2009 and 2020, 24 per cent of Israel’s arms imports came from Germany.

When Israel treats international law, human rights, democratic principles, and liberal beliefs with contempt, Germany automatically takes its side, even when the result is the killing of innocent children and women. During the latest Israeli offensive, Germany supported Israel’s “right to defend itself” although it was killing civilians and destroying civilian buildings and infrastructure. The fact that an occupying state has no right to claim “self-defence” against the people under occupation was ignored by the Germans.

On 12 May, a German government spokesman, Steffen Seibert, refused to condemn Israel’s killing of 14 Palestinian children. He referred to the legitimate Palestinian resistance as “terrorist attacks” and that the resistance groups had to stop their action against Israel so that “people do not die”.

Seibert ignored the Israeli warplanes pounding the besieged Gaza Strip. He ignored the Israeli tanks firing indiscriminately towards densely-populated areas across Gaza. He ignored weeks of Israeli harassment and attacks on Palestinians worshipping in Al-Aqsa Mosque throughout Ramadan, and the residents of Jerusalem facing attacks by illegal settlers, which prompted the resistance groups to act. He ignored all of that.

On the same day, the deputy spokesman of the German Foreign Ministry, Christofer Burger, angered journalists when he said that the Palestinians had no right to self-defence. His claim that this right is only guaranteed by international law to sovereign states and Palestinians are not a state was palpable nonsense. All people living under occupation, collectively and individually, have the right to defend themselves and resist military occupation. Israel’s occupation of Palestine is a military occupation.

On day ten of the Israeli offensive, when the occupation state had killed 66 children, 40 women, and 16 elderly people out of 266 Palestinians killed in total, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas insisted that, “Germany stands with Israel and its right to defend itself.” He even visited Israel to prove that his country’s support was not limited to words. “I came to Israel to show solidarity and support Israel. Israel’s security and that of the Jewish residents here are not negotiable.”

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas in Berlin, Germany on June 23, 2021 [Abdulhamid Hoşbaş/Anadolu Agency]

German FM Heiko Maas, June 23, 2021 [Abdulhamid Hoşbaş/Anadolu Agency]

Two days earlier, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the then Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and “sharply condemned the continued rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel and assured the prime minister of the German government’s solidarity.” She showed great interest in Israel’s security and safety of its people and condemned only the legitimate Palestinian resistance.

Germany’s verbal support for Israeli brutality and aggression against the Palestinians was backed up by officials who claimed that peaceful protests during which Palestinian flags were flown and anti-Israel slogans were chanted were “anti-Semitic”. Calls for Israel to be held accountable for its breaches of international law were described as “hate speech”.

According to Seibert, “Anyone who uses such protests to shout out their hatred of Jews is abusing the right to protest [in Germany].” He described the pro-Palestine protests which raised awareness about the ongoing Israeli crimes as “anti-Semitic rallies”, and stressed that they “will not be tolerated by our democracy.”

During a debate in the German parliament during the Israeli offensive on Gaza, Maas condemned the pro-Palestine demonstrations and called for a violent crackdown on them. “There shouldn’t be one centimetre of space for anti-Semitism on our streets. Never again.”

Germany has since banned the Hamas flag in the country in response to pro-Palestine demonstrations. “We do not want the flags of terrorist organisations to be waved on German soil,” Thorsten Frei, a lawmaker for Merkel’s CDU, told Die Welt. A ban, he added, would send “a clear signal to our Jewish citizens.”

President Frank-Walter Steinmeier told Israeli daily Haaretz that Germany believes that the International Criminal Court (ICC) has no jurisdiction to investigate Israeli war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories because of the “absence of the Palestinian state”. Germany is not only unconcerned about Israeli crimes against the Palestinians, but also does not even want those crimes to be investigated. Palestine was, of course, granted the status of a “non-member observer state” by the UN in November 2012, a move described as “de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine”.

Writing in Open Democracy, activist and sociologist Inna Michaeli said that Germans are against the entirely peaceful Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement which seeks to end the Israeli occupation. Moreover, apparently, they do not like to hear anyone accusing Israel of killing children, despite this being “a description of horrendous reality — one in three Palestinians that Israel kills in Gaza are children.”

She asked rhetorically: “What should people chant when Israel is killing children? How can the victims express their rage and sorrow, how can they mourn their children who are killed again and again by Israel?”

Even the German mainstream media ignores Israeli brutality against the Palestinians. “Much of the mainstream media coverage of Nakba Day demonstrations did not even mention nor explain to the readers what the Nakba is, and its continuation in the form of ethnic cleansing and denial of Palestinians’ right to return,” Michaeli pointed out. “Berlin, with the largest Palestinian population in Europe, is home to people whose family members have been murdered by Israel in recent days. These protests are often framed as ‘anti’ Israel, but the fact that they are primarily ‘for’ Palestinian life is omitted.”

Omri Boehm is an Israeli philosophy lecturer in New York. “Whenever one attempts to raise this subject, one is immediately accused of anti-Semitism,” he noted. “It is impossible to simply state the facts. For example, that within Israel’s borders, three million Palestinians live under brutal military law without being recognised as Israeli citizens. The Germans do not want to see this.”

When pro-Palestine protesters burned an Israeli flag in Germany, Interior Minister Horst Seehofer described the act as “anti-Semitic” and said that Germany would crack down hard on anyone found to be spreading “anti-Semitic hatred” because “We will not tolerate Israeli flags burning on German soil.”

Commenting on this, Michaeli said: “Israeli flags matter, Palestinian lives do not. When people, politicians, and the media, care more about the burning of national flags than the burning of homes and neighbourhoods and the killing of entire families, they should really have a hard look at themselves.”

German support for Israel goes back to the early 1950s when reparations were paid to the state as the “heir” to the Holocaust victims who had no known surviving family. Billions of German marks and euros have been handed over in the intervening decades, helping to build Israel as a state. The fact that this is largely to the detriment of the people of occupied Palestine has, shamefully, been lost on successive German governments. Those parliamentarians who met Israeli officials earlier this week need to be educated about international laws and conventions, and the reality of Israel’s brutal military occupation which they and their colleagues in Berlin endorse so willingly.

July 8, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

A Country That Has Lost Its Way: U.S. Government and Corporations Combine to Strip Citizens of Their Rights

By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 8, 2021

The American people have increasingly become aware that government surveillance and corporate censorship have combined to keep people ignorant and controlled. What is taking place has generated some dark humor. A friend of mine, also a former CIA officer, wrote to me recently and said tongue-in-cheek that he retains a lot of respect for the Agency because it is the only major government national security entity that does not read our mail and emails. Those jobs are the responsibility of the NSA and FBI. I responded that I would imagine that CIA does in fact read quite a lot of mail where it operates overseas but it is probably done the old-fashioned way by recruiting an underpaid mail clerk as an agent.

The whole issue of the government spying illegally on its own citizens has again made the news with the claims by conservative commentator Tucker Carlson that NSA has been spying on him, presumably because he has connections that the government regards either as subversive or, in the new reckoning, as “extremists” who are potential “domestic terrorists.” Given the reasonable assumption that anyone who voted for Donald Trump might well fall under those categories, that means that something like half the U.S. population could be under suspicion.

Mass electronic surveillance of literally trillions of phone calls and messages worldwide without a warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment restrictions on searches without probable cause or a proper warrant issued by a judge has been the regular NSA authorized procedure at least since 9/11 and there is no reason to assume that it is no longer the practice. It basically is initiated by the agency involved (normally NSA or FBI) going to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court or to some other appropriate judge to get a warrant on an individual where there is some probable cause. Probable cause can consist of “someone searching the web for suspicious stuff.” The Court then gives its approval, which it does in the case of FISA 99% of the time. When that individual is then surveilled, the names of his or her contacts are also added to the investigation. And it goes on from there, expanding and growing until it includes thousands of phone numbers and email addresses, individuals who are overwhelmingly innocent of any wrongdoing.

So, it is safe to assume that many of us are right at this moment eligible for being monitored electronically by the federal government. If one combines that with the Biden Administration’s June 1st announcement of a war on “domestic terrorism,” which it clearly considers to be a function of “white supremacists,” it is easy to see where all that is going. Biden pulled no punches, describing the threat from “white supremacy” as the “most lethal threat to the homeland today,” so that would mean that the government is doing all in its power to stamp it out, whatever it takes and whatever that means.

Surveilling ordinary Americans for what they might be thinking, which is what this comes down to, would be a George Orwellian 1984 tale for our times, updated from when Winston Smith was doing mandatory daily exercises in front of his television set. He slacked off a bit and the TV instantly admonished him. He then wondered whether it was possible that he and all the other residents of Airstrip One (once called Britain) are surveilled all the time. He concluded that they were.

So, if your television set suddenly speaks to you in the next few months, it might not be Alexa. The other development that has surfaced in the past couple of weeks is the increased corporate cooperation with what the government is saying and doing. Mainstream media has certainly done its share of obfuscation, including the current near total suppression of the story that a key witness who provided false testimony against journalist Julian Assange languishing in a British prison has turned out to be a pedophile, diagnosed sociopath and serial liar. But the major player is inevitably social media, which has enormous power in the United States and also elsewhere to shape opinions and propagate false information that serves the government agenda. The media has banned numerous groups, individuals, and links to sites from its pages, a barrier to free speech and freedom of expression. And it has, for example, enthusiastically cooperated fully with the essentially fraudulent government claims of Russian interference in the two most recent U.S. elections. It is censoring or denigrating material that is at variance with official policies, including, for example, Facebook’s pop-ups that appear whenever there is any article that contests the approved version of the response to the COVID virus.

Back in June, the Biden administration said it would also be working with some of the large high-technology and social media companies to “increase information sharing” to assist in combatting radicalization. Biden announced that his Justice Department would create ways for Americans to report radicalized friends and family to the government. One senior official put it this way: “We will work to improve public awareness of federal resources to address concerning or threatening behavior before violence occurs… If you see something, say something. This involves creating contexts in which those who are family members or friends or co-workers know that there are pathways and avenues to raise concerns and seek help for those who they have perceived to be radicalizing and potentially radicalizing towards violence.”

In other words, in plain English, the Biden Administration is calling on Americans to spy on friends, neighbors and family and reporting any “extremist” views to the authorities. Well, Facebook is now fully on board with more of the same, engaged in the “hot” war against the “white supremacists/extremists/domestic terrorists.” It has blocked or shut down many former contributors and also begun posting at least two versions of warnings to users. One targets individuals who might have personally been visiting an “extremist” site while the other encourages users to snitch on friends or family who might be enticed by such material. The personalized pop-up reads as follows: “[Name of Recipient], you many have been exposed to harmful extremist content recently – Violent groups try to manipulate your anger and disappointment. You can take action now to protect yourself and others.-Get support from experts-Spot the signs, understand the dangers of extremism and hear from people who escaped violent groups.”

The snitch on friends version reads: “Are you concerned that someone you know is becoming an extremist?-We care about preventing extremism on Facebook. Others in your situation have received confidential support. How you can help. Hear stories and get advice from people who escaped violent extremist groups-Get support.”

To be sure, one has to ask how Facebook knows that one has visited an “extremist” site since they have blocked such material. Are they somehow hacking into the personal accounts of their own users? The situation is dire, no doubt about it, but it has provoked a backlash, including this post: “Become the extremist Facebook warned you about!” One also has to wonder how Facebook will deal with individuals who complain about some other groups with a demonstrated history of promoting violence, including black lives matter, that are not white supremacist related. It will almost certainly do nothing, just like the federal government’s demonstrated “racially sensitive” supine response to a year of riot, burning, looting and homicide. In truth Americans are standing at the edge of a precipice with just one more “crisis” possibly coming that will tip everyone over the edge so we wind up with a totalitarian government which works hard to keep everyone safe by doing the opposite. We are almost there, and if you doubt it just go take a look at Facebook.

July 8, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

French City Fair Drops Covid Measures In Victory For People Power!

By Richie Allen | July 7, 2021

On Friday last, the historic city of Tours in France opened its annual fair. It’s normally a very big deal. This year is even more special as the fair celebrates its centenary. However, organisers and traders were shocked on Friday, when hardly anyone turned up.

Attendees and staff were told that they would need a “sanitary pass” to attend. To get a pass, a visitor or worker needed to show proof of vaccination or take a PCR test at the entrance. Throughout Friday, the fair was a ghost town and only 4 per cent of the staff had shown up.

Panic ensued. Traders, having spent thousands of euros for their pitches started screaming bloody murder. Others started buying and selling products among themselves. It was grim. Punters were walking away in their thousands. No-one wanted anything to do with the PCR tests piled high at the entrances.

At the 11th hour, the city backed down and all restrictions were lifted. The traders had been bombarding the local authority all day with texts and emails, threatening retribution if the sanitary pass wasn’t kicked to the kerb.

The city blinked and the fair was mobbed over the rest of the weekend. The PCR tests are still rotting at the entrances. The people of Tours stood up.

Vive La France! That’s the way it’s done. That’s people power. The French never let you down. Let it be a lesson to the businesses of the UK and Ireland.

We are sick to the back teeth of this scamdemic. We want our lives back. We want to frequent shops, theaters, cafés, cinemas, bars and restaurants again. We’ll fill your tills.

Just remember, whether we have been jabbed or not is none of your business. Same goes for face muzzles. The ball is now firmly in your court. I can’t wait to see you again.

July 8, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

Global Vaccine Passports Have Arrived Courtesy of Google, EU

Image Credits: Google
Privacy To Go | July 8, 2021

On June 30th, 2021, the Google Developers blog announced the launch of vaccine passports in Android through its Passes API.

Less than 24 hours later, the European Union, long mired in a sea of national standards for digital jab records, rolled out its EU-wide vaccine passport.

Two completely different vaccine passport schemes unveiled on the same day, encompassing the whole of the Western world? What are the odds!

Exceedingly low, of course. This level of coordination belies yet another blitz in the ongoing rollout of a global, technofeudal control grid. The EU has arguably been at the forefront of this rollout – its standardized digital jab certificate is little more than an aggregator for the draconian technology now operating at the Nation-State level.

Adoption of this unified standard is already approaching 100% of EU Member States. Doublethink rhetoric of restoring the Schengen Area’s “freedom of movement” abounds, even as additional barriers to travel are erected.

In this sense, Google and the US are playing catch-up. While de facto vaccine passports have been implemented sparingly in places like New York, California, and Hawaii, an ever-expanding number of States have banned the notion outright.

Yet herein lies the insidiousness of the public-private partnership model: Technocrats can use governments where it suits them, corporations where it does not, and an increasingly bizarre fusion of the two where necessary. Even the propaganda rollout surrounding jab passports is bifurcated by this model, with the EU using official government bulletins while Google syndicates the news via trendy tech blogs.

And though many States in the US have passed legislation or executive action to curb the implementation of vaccine passports, Google could care less.

Google Passes: Vaccine passports for all, regulation be damned

Like the contact tracing API before it, political resistance alone is proving ineffective against the technological implements of the Great Reset. Even the staunchest State level opponents to this agenda have done nothing to halt the hyperactive Bluetooth surveillance grid running on Android and iOS devices – on the contrary, many have used taxpayer money to help finance its data harvesting operations.

Similar political action against digital vaccine passports will not halt Google’s rollout via the Passes API, either.

In fact, Google’s selection of the Passes API to implement vaccine records is telling in its own right, given the information it already stores: Boarding passes for airlines. Travel tickets. Event tickets.

While legislative action in States like Florida may allow you to attend a Miami Dolphins game with your biological privacy intact, the same may not be said for travel. The battle over Federalization of airline travel was lost on November 19th, 2001 with the creation of the Transportation Security Administration, whose influence has been expanding ever since – the latest privacy affront being the REAL ID Act, which mandates highly insecure RFID technology for interstate air travel.

Even more dangerous are biometric companies with government contracts, like CLEAR, whose terminals are already widely used at TSA PreCheck terminals and event centers.

Google Passes and other digitized jab certificates are simply a competing product. One that is already in the pocket of 85% of Americans alone, with similar adoption levels in Europe.

Products marketed for “convenience” like TSA PreCheck biometrics will, over time, become mandatory – the REAL ID Act itself is a perfect example of this Fabian creep. Passed all the way back in 2005, its full implementation has been pushed back multiple times due to individual State holdouts, most recently until 2023.

But these delays are immaterial – the framework’s existence is all that matters, as despite not being enforced, privacy-violating RFID technologies are now the norm for US driver’s licenses. Jab certificates like Google Passes will be no different. Once in place, they will be utilized – if not immediately, then in the future.

Not only can the Passes API integrate with third-party pharmaceutical companies to track jab history, it is also capable of storing results from dubious PCR tests. This level of biodigital convergence sets an unsettling precedent, as Silicon Valley’s expectation is that your medical history will now be in your pocket at all times, integrated with their servers, and subject to whatever authority may ask for it.

Passes is not an isolated product, either – it’s a development suite within the broader Google Pay SDK.

There are technical reasons why Google may have chosen to use the Pay SDK as opposed to a health-focused API like Google Fit – QR code generation, limited use passes, and encrypted keyrings are already present in the Passes API. However, despite Google Pay’s scant consumer use at present, the long-term intent is crystal clear: Access to financial services and medical records will be intertwined.

In Closing

The post-2020 era has pushed humanity to the precipice of a longstanding dream of our would-be comptrollers. Whether it is Newt Gingrich’s Age of Transitions or the late Zbignew Brzezinski’s Between Two Ages, the kind of biodigital convergence represented by digitized medical passports has been at the forefront of the Technocratic agenda for decades.

As Silicon Valley attempts to bridge the “last mile” of mandated biometric surveillance, resistance to these aims on an individual level remain multivariate – ditch your smartphone, or at least utilize a privacy-respecting alternative that is incompatible with Google or iOS services. Starve the business of travel and entertainment industries that would see us become serfs in exchange for bread and circuses.

If you’re in the EU, use paper records instead of digital equivalents, or better yet, refuse to comply at all.

Educate well-meaning policymakers to the threats represented by the pseudo-private sector and impress upon them that the dangers of State surveillance are rapidly being outpaced by Terms and Conditions mandated by smartphone companies.

Neofeudal Technocracy is desperately trying to extract humanity’s consent to these draconian efforts before the next phase of the so-called Great Reset.

Don’t let them.

July 8, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | Leave a comment

Stringency Index Is Not Associated With COVID-19 Death Rate Across US States, but IS Associated With Higher Unemployment

By Noah Carl  • Lockdown Sceptics • July 5, 2021

Some people oppose lockdown on principle, arguing that the government should never infringe on fundamental liberties like the freedom to leave our home or open our business, regardless of the impact this may have on disease transmission.

It’s a reasonable position, but I’m more drawn to the consequentialist case against lockdowns. This can be summed up as “benefits small, costs large”. In other words, even if lockdowns do reduce mortality from COVID-19 (under some circumstances), they don’t do so by anywhere near enough to justify their costs.

As I noted recently, several cost-benefit analyses of the UK’s lockdowns have been published, and each one concluded that the costs almost certainly outweighed the benefits. (Which may explain why the Government has thus far refrained from publishing any estimates itself.)

A rather elegant demonstration of the consequentialist case against lockdown was provided back in May, in the form of a Twitter thread by the data scientist Youyang Gu.

Comparing the 50 US states, Gu obtained data on the COVID-19 death rate, the change in unemployment rate, and the average Government Stringency Index. The latter is a measure of the number and severity of restrictions imposed during the course of the pandemic (school closures, stay-at-home orders, etc.). Gu’s two main charts are shown below:

He found that the Stringency Index was not associated with the COVID-19 death rate (left-hand chart), but was strongly associated with an increase in unemployment (right-hand chart). In other words, US states with longer and more stringent lockdowns haven’t had fewer COVID-19 deaths, but they have seen higher unemployment.

In the replies to Gu’s thread, some critics argued that restrictions were often imposed in response to large outbreaks, so you can’t assume that causation only goes from restrictions to deaths and unemployment. However, Gu points out that the relative ordering of restriction levels is fairly constant over time, so this is unlikely to be a major issue.

His analysis adds to a large body of evidence indicating that – for the vast majority of Western states – the benefits of lockdown were small, but the costs were very large. Gu’s thread is worth reading in full.

July 5, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

What I am seeing happening in the world of Covid now

By Meryl Nass, MD | July 4, 2021

1. A case was adjudicated in Weimar, Germany regarding the necessity of pandemic measures (and the actual occurrence of a dangerous pandemic) for children several months ago. The plaintiffs won, and the Weimar government was ordered to dismantle its lockdown and school-based measures.

Next, the judge was attacked, had electronics seized, was searched and possibly jailed. This was a couple of months ago.

This week, 14 locations related to 8 people (the judge, another judge who was a friend of the first judge, the expert witnesses, the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s partner were all searched and electronics were seized. The best guess is that the German government is on a fishing expedition to build a case against the judge, witnesses etc. for some illicit behavior. This is unprecedented lawlessness against the judicial system itself, in an attempt to over turn the first successful legal challenge to the pandemic response. Very important case. Consider supporting the defense of those who were attacked.

2. The paper I wrote about earlier, published last week in the Vaccines journal was retracted, with no methodologic criticism, no inaccuracy alleged, simply because it found that for every 3 lives saved by vaccination, 2 are lost due to adverse reactions to the vaccine.

3. The CDC’s ACIP meeting made clear that CDC intends to begin booster shots in the fall, even without supportive evidence that they are needed or even beneficial.

4. The Army Times and Navy Times have written that vaccinations for servicemembers will become mandatory in September, after the vaccines are fully licensed. One article claims only 15% of Army soldiers have taken the vaccine.

5. CDC and FDA have dug their heels in to cover up the adverse reactions and hide the databases they use to determine actual adverse event rates.

6. It is said that 500 colleges are requiring vaccinations of students and usually of staff as well. Legal proceedings against these mandates have been threatened at U California, U Connecticut, U Indiana and Rutgers–interestingly, all state universities.

7. People in Sydney, Australia went out to the parks and open areas yesterday despite instructions to stay home, enjoying the unseasonable warmth without masks. Will Australia’s impossible “zero covid” policy remain standing?

8. Governments appear to be testing the waters regarding what the population will tolerate vis a vis lockdown measures.

9. The NEW BUSINESS ITEM #33 at the National Education Association’s (NEA) virtual assembly, which called for forced covid testing and vaccination of all students and staff to reopen schools in September, was overwhelmingly defeated. One post on twitter said 81% of the delegates voted no.  It seems the crowd is realizing there is almost no Covid in the US.

10. Fourteen states offered lotteries up to 1 million dollars to encourage vaccinations. The NYT reports there was a short burst in vaccinations then it ended, and at least 2 states have given up the lottery plan as it failed to continue to produce the desired increase in vaccinations.

11. 47% of the total US population has been vaccinated. 8% more had just one dose, and most of them stopped after one. 67% of those over 18 have had at least one dose of vaccine; 58% have had both doses. It looks like this is where the numbers will stay. I think 40% of US adults are going to remained unvaccinated, or have decided to stop after one dose. How the government tries to corral this group into taking these dangerous vaccines will be interesting.

July 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Prosecutors Drop Charges Against British Army Veterans Over Killings In Northern Ireland’s Troubles

Sputnik – 02.07.2021

On 30 January 1972 the British Army’s Parachute Regiment shot dead 13 unarmed Catholic civil rights marchers in Londonderry. The incident, known as Bloody Sunday, became a recruitment tool for the Provisional IRA who were determined to kick British troops out of Ulster.

Two retired British Army soldiers have been told they will not face trial for murder over incidents during The Troubles in Northern Ireland.

More than 3,600 people suffered violent deaths during The Troubles – 30 years of sectarian strife in Northern Ireland, which was ended by the Good Friday Agreement.

​Soldier F – believed to be a former member of the Parachute Regiment – was awaiting trial over the deaths of James Wray and William McKinney on Bloody Sunday in Londonderry.

Soldier B was facing a murder trial in relation to Daniel Hegarty, 15, who was shot in the head in Derry in July 1972.

The Public Prosecution Service reviewed both cases after another trial collapsed earlier this year.

In that case Soldiers A and C were acquitted of murdering IRA member Joe McCann after a court ruled statements they made were inadmissible.

​The PPS announced on Friday, 2 July, that in view of that ruling and the similarity of the evidence against Soldiers F and B “there was no longer a reasonable prospect of key evidence in proceedings against Soldier F and Soldier B being ruled admissible.”

The decision was greeted with anger by families of the Bloody Sunday victims, who said they would seek a judicial review.

John Kelly, whose brother Michael died on Bloody Sunday, said: “It’s a day of devastation but we’re not going to give up. The fight for justice goes on.”

​Soldier F had been the only person charged in relation to Bloody Sunday. The PPS had already decided there was insufficient evidence to charge 16 other former soldiers.

The British government announced in May it would introduce legislation to give greater protection to former soldiers who had served in Northern Ireland.

That followed the resignation of defence minister Johnny Mercer, who quit in disgust at the treatment of British Army veterans who had served in Northern Ireland.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

In many states, minors may consent to receive COVID-19 shot even without parent’s knowledge

By Mordechai Sones | America’s Frontline Doctors | June 30, 2021

A District Administration survey conducted just before the FDA’s authorization for 12-15-year-olds to receive the COVID-19 shot found that only 3 in 10 parents said they would vaccinate their children right away, with most instead wanting to wait and see, or saying they would not get their child vaccinated at all or would do so only if required for school.

However, with the authorization of Pfizer’s shot for 12-15-year-olds, a group that totals almost 17 million, minors can consent to receive the COVID-19 shot even without the parent’s knowledge in many states.

The age at which a minor can consent to receive the experimental biological agent in Alabama is age 14; in San Francisco, 12; Philadelphia, 12; North Carolina, 11; South Carolina, 16. America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) Legal Director Ali Schultz explained: “They can all consent, minors can consent, on their own, even if they live with their mom and dad who are married, they live with their parents, no issues, the child literally can consent at school to receive the vaccine, without the parents even knowing.”

She continued: “We’ve had so many people reach out, and they were just heartbroken, they cannot believe that their child was able to get this without them even knowing, because as parents they were personally against the vaccine, and no-one even ran it by them.

“And what’s even scarier: It’s up to the health care provider, in a multitude of states; Iowa, Idaho, Washington, Arkansas; so if a ‘health care provider’ deems that it is appropriate for a minor to get the vaccine, then they can do so without parental consent.”

According to District Administration, although most states still require parental consent, “the landscape may be shifting slightly as more jurisdictions seek to encourage vaccination of young people.” Their specific findings are as follows:

  • Most states (41) require parental consent for vaccination of minors below the age of 18, although one of these states (NE) requires consent below age 19. There are some exceptions to these requirements:
    • Many allow for certain minors, such as those who are emancipated, homeless or living apart from their parent or guardian, or married, to self-consent.
    • Cities in two states (San Francisco in CA and Philadelphia in PA), have moved to allow minors, ages 12 and older, to self-consent for COVID-19 vaccination.
    • In one state (AZ), if a parent refuses to consent for COVID-19 vaccination, but if a child or a doctor requests it, a court order can be obtained to allow for vaccination.
  • In 5 states, a minor’s ability to self-consent is based on a specific age as follows:
    • Two states where a minor must be at least 16 (RI and SC)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 15 (OR)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 14 (AL)
    • One state where a minor must be at least 11 (DC; in DC, each healthcare provider may institute additional requirements which could include requiring a parent or guardian to be present).
  • The remaining 5 states apply the “mature minor doctrine”, meaning that there is no specific age cut-off but providers have discretion to decide if a minor possesses the maturity to consent for themselves (AR, ID, NC, TN, WA).
  • This means that parental consent has already been required for 16-17 year-olds in most states (41) since the initial authorization of the Pfizer vaccine on December 11, 2020. Two additional states require consent for some subset of 12-15 year-olds, bringing the count to 43 states where most minors in this age group would need parental consent. Once the next group of children is eligible for vaccination, those below age 12, this number will grow to 45.

National Vaccine Information Center‘s Barbara Loe Fisher commented on the “shifting landscape”: “This past year, we have seen many lawmakers in the U.S. and other countries vote to eliminate or severely restrict civil liberties in the name of the public health.  One of the most outrageous legislative actions violating parental and human rights took place in Washington, D.C. in November 2020 when City Council officials gave doctors the power to vaccinate children as young as 11 years old and hide what they did from parents. The D.C. Mayor refused to veto the bill and, in January 2021, the U.S. Congress sat on its hands and gave tacit approval to enactment of the most dangerous child vaccination law in America.”

She continued: “In a breathtaking violation of medical ethics and several federal laws, the new vaccine concealment law in Washington, DC allows doctors to extract “informed consent” from young children too immature to know what informed consent means or what a vaccine reaction looks and feels like. The D.C. City Council majority, with only three members dissenting, cruelly disempowered parents by voting to make it illegal for a doctor, insurance company or school administrator to divulge a child’s vaccination history in records that can be seen by the child’s mother or father.

“An 11-year old child does not know or understand his or her personal health history but most parent do. If a child has experienced previous vaccine reactions, has severe allergies or other health conditions that could increase vaccine risks, parents kept in the dark will not have a way to protect their child from further harm.

“Parents who don’t know which vaccines their children have been given will not be able to monitor them for signs of a potentially life-threatening vaccine reaction that requires immediate medical treatment. If the child is injured or dies after vaccination, parents will not know they must apply to the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) before the filing deadline expires.

“Parents will not know their insurance company has been billed for vaccines. Parents will not know that a school the child attends is in possession of their child’s secret vaccination records even when there is a vaccine exemption for religious belief reasons on file with the school.

“This blatant violation of a parent’s moral right and legal responsibility to make medical risk decisions on behalf of a minor child was endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics22 and pushed through by the DC City Council, while the Mayor and the US Congress looked the other way.”

She concluded: “The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights states that:

“The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society;” and “For persons who are not capable of exercising autonomy, special measures are to be taken to protect their rights and interests;” and “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information.”

“It is a profound betrayal of public trust for any city, state or federal government to strip parents of their God given right to protect their children from harm by allowing a doctor to give a child a pharmaceutical product without getting a parent’s permission. Science is not perfect, doctors are not infallible, and pharmaceutical products like vaccines come with risks that can be greater for some individuals than others, which is why parents must retain the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking on behalf of their minor children.

“Will the vaccine concealment bill that is now law in Washington, DC be exported to your state next?”

Mercury News provided the list of where parental or guardian consent is now generally required for COVID-19 vaccinations among people ages 12 to 15, based on a CNN query to health departments across all 50 states:

  • Alabama — Yes for younger than 14
  • Alaska — Yes
  • Arizona — Yes
  • Arkansas — Yes
  • California — Yes
  • Colorado — Yes
  • Connecticut — Yes
  • Delaware — Yes
  • Florida — Yes
  • Georgia — Yes
  • Hawaii — Yes
  • Idaho — Yes
  • Illinois — Yes
  • Indiana — Yes
  • Iowa — “It is up to each individual health care provider/health system”
  • Kansas — Yes
  • Kentucky – Yes
  • Louisiana — Yes
  • Maine — Yes
  • Maryland — Yes
  • Massachusetts — Yes
  • Michigan — Yes
  • Minnesota — Yes
  • Mississippi — Yes
  • Missouri — Yes
  • Montana — Yes
  • Nebraska — Yes
  • Nevada — Yes
  • New Hampshire — Yes
  • New Jersey — Yes
  • New Mexico — Yes
  • New York — Yes
  • North Carolina — No for teens
  • North Dakota — Yes
  • Ohio — Yes
  • Oklahoma — Yes
  • Oregon — Yes for younger than 15
  • Pennsylvania — Yes
  • Rhode Island — Yes
  • South Carolina — Yes
  • South Dakota — Yes
  • Tennessee — Yes for younger than 14
  • Texas — Yes
  • Utah — Yes
  • Vermont — Yes
  • Virginia — Yes
  • Washington — Yes
  • West Virginia — Yes
  • Wisconsin — Yes
  • Wyoming — Yes

Additionally, some private businesses or pharmacies have their own rules.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Petition to Halt FDA Approval of COVID Vaccines

By Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn | July 3, 2021

In the global COVID pandemic there has not been a more important action to protect public health than the current Citizen Petition to FDA to stop the full approval of COVID vaccines until many serious concerns and issues are genuinely addressed.

There has been no significant coverage of this historic petition by mainstream and corporate social media. This cancel action is itself as remarkable as the petition itself. This is a concerted effort to keep the public uninformed about the many problems with the COVID vaccines. Any person who spends the time to peruse the 20-page petition would most likely have a very negative view of the vaccines. For the unvaccinated this awareness would greatly increase vaccine hesitancy and rejection. For the vaccinated it would produce concern and regret.

The political system would literally go crazy if the petition was seriously covered by big media. Big drug companies would jump into action to suppress political and media attention to the petition. The goal of this article is to better inform the public and motivate people to take action.

CONTEXT

Before delving into the substance provided in the petition context is needed to fully understand the critical importance of the petition and make the case for individuals to officially express their support for it as part of the federal regulatory process.

One rational reaction to reading the very detailed, 20-page petition signed by 27 physicians and medical researchers from the US and other nations is this: Why not use all the detailed concerns about the COVID vaccines to demand FDA take the experimental vaccines off the market?

Indeed, the biggest name on the list of signatories is the esteemed Dr. Peter McCullough of Baylor University. He has been very outspoken and honest about many pandemic issues. He has said that, considering the high numbers of deaths and serious health impacts associated with taking the vaccines, FDA should do what it has done in the past when new medicines and vaccines had high negative impacts. Take them off the market.

Why not petition FDA to do this? Just imagine what stopping the whole COVID vaccine effort worldwide would cause. Political and public health systems would not know what to do. They would be totally stunned and flummoxed. So, though the current petition does not do this, it definitely took considerable courage to make the case to FDA to not move quickly from an emergency use authorization to full approval of the COVID vaccines.

People who have not fallen victim to the endless propaganda of the political, big media and public health systems promoting COVID vaccine jabs may not be willing to seriously examine the medical and scientific details of the petition. The problem is cognitive dissonance. Too many people will not easily resolve their propaganda induced positive views of the vaccines with the medical and science details in the petition. But that is what must happen. People must temper their fear of COVID infection with awareness that vaccines are now experimental and have not been sufficiently proved safe for all users.

The potential frustration and fear if the vaccines were deemed insufficiently safe could be mitigated by advocating for early home/outpatient treatment and preventive use of a number of cheap, safe and fully approved generic medicines. The government and public health system have blocked their wide use in favor of the wait-for-the-vaccine strategy that serves the financial interests of vaccine manufacturers. As presented in detail in Pandemic Blunder and this website, there are mountains of medical evidence to justify the treatment protocols. They are legitimate, proven alternatives to experimental and insufficiently tested vaccines that might be fully approved by FDA.

To achieve true protection of public health we need an avalanche of official public support for the petition. More details later on how people can do this.

WHAT THE PETITION EMPHASIZES

A week after the June 1 petition, lead authors of the petition published an editorial in the British Medical Journal with the title “Why we petitioned the FDA to refrain from fully approving any covid-19 vaccine this year.” Here are some key statements that use plain language to summarize key parts of the petition:

“The message of our petition is ‘slow down and get the science right—there is no legitimate reason to hurry to grant a license to a coronavirus vaccine.’ We believe the existing evidence base—both pre- and post-authorization—is simply not mature enough at this point to adequately judge whether clinical benefits outweigh the risks in all populations.”

“We focus on methods and processes, outlining the many remaining unknowns about safety and effectiveness—and suggest the kinds of studies needed to address the open questions.”

“Trials by vaccine manufacturers were designed to follow participants for two years, and should be completed before they are evaluated for full approval.”

“We also call on FDA to require a more thorough assessment of spike proteins produced in-situ by the body following vaccination—including studies on their full biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, and tissue-specific toxicities.”

“We all agree that there remain many open, unanswered questions surrounding the efficacy and safety of covid-19 vaccines that must be answered before the FDA gives serious consideration to granting full approval.”

“Some surveys suggest that vaccine hesitancy in the United States is due, in part, to lack of full FDA approval. While approval might lead to increased public confidence in covid-19 vaccines, as well as provide legal support for employer-instituted vaccine mandates, to approve a medical product for these reasons is outside FDA’s regulatory purview. Approval decisions must be driven by the safety and efficacy data. The potential unintended consequences of a rushed approval may contribute to growing mistrust of the US public health and regulatory institutions.”

“For each covid-19 vaccine, the benefits may ultimately outweigh the harms. Or not. Or we may end up in a more nuanced position, finding that benefits outweigh harms for some populations, but not others. Only time—and better evidence—will tell.”

Now, some key parts of the petition itself are presented to further illustrate what medical and science perspectives have been formulated to pressure FDA to better evaluate the COVID vaccines.

A most important point made in the petition is this. Work must be done to show that there is “substantial evidence of clinical effectiveness that outweighs harms in special populations such as: infants, children, and adolescents; those with past SARS-CoV-2 infection; immunocompromised; pregnant women; nursing women; frail older adults; and individuals with cancer, autoimmune disorders, and hematological conditions.” This is so important because so many of the deaths and harmful impacts have occurred in these groups.

Most importantly: “The widespread use of a COVID-19 vaccine under EUA, particularly for a limited amount of time, also is not a valid reason to approve a product.”

And here is a critical point that many critics of the vaccines have focused on: “In-situ production of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is the target mechanism of action of all COVID-19 vaccines with an EUA at present. Therefore, the safety profile of spike protein itself (i.e., in the absence of virus) must be thoroughly understood [in all populations]. Recently, evidence of systemic circulation of spike protein or its components in subjects post-immunization was reported. All studies we are aware of to date raise concerns about the safety of spike protein, and the concentration of circulatory spikes was correlated to the disease severity in COVID-19 patients.”

WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO

Though FDA cannot ignore the petition, there is no assurance that it will genuinely address all of the issues and concerns in it. Or that it will postpone approval of the vaccines until there is sufficient research and analysis into all the points in the petition.

It must be appreciated that the petition is authorized by federal law. The FDA citizen petition process, described in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR Part 10), allows individuals and community organizations to request the agency make changes to health policy. Any “interested person” can request the FDA “issue, amend or revoke a regulation or order,” or “take or refrain from taking any other form of administrative action.” Granting full approval of the COVID vaccines is a major FDA administrative action with both national and global significance.

What is needed is a massive number of people officially registering their support of the petition on the proper FDA website. This can be done anonymously. Here are important links for the petition:

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades. As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine. As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 US Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers. He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years. He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and America’s Frontline Doctors.

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

FINALLY AN RCT ON FACEMASKS IN CHILDREN – PARENTS TAKE NOTE!

Ivor Cummins | July 1, 2021

NON-CENSORABLE as this is a simple summary of study * just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association – JAMA *

ALL Parents should be aware of the emerging science – their kids are THEIR responsibility.

Download the vid here: https://we.tl/t-nPkQHzkh5T

NOTE: My extensive research and interviewing / video/sound editing and much more does require support – please consider helping if you can with monthly donation to support me directly, or one-off payment: https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_…
– alternatively join up with my Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/IvorCummins

July 3, 2021 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »