Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Democrat Prosecutors Vow to Continue Trying to Jail Trump Allies as Party Floats Shadow Cabinet Idea

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 17.11.2024

Republicans defeated Democratic candidates across the spectrum of electoral contests on November 5, winning the presidency, the House and the Senate. Federal and state lawmakers and governors have drawn up ‘resistance’ plans, while strategists debate the pros and cons of fighting Trump “to the death” versus “playing nice.”

Democratic prosecutors pursuing Donald Trump in his four federal criminal cases reportedly plan to ease off the pressure on the president-elect, but have vowed to continue fiercely pursuing his surrogates and allies, both at the federal and state levels.

“In all likelihood, the state criminal cases will be put on hold during Trump’s presidency. If they try to continue with the prosecutions, or even to impose a stayed sentence, I suspect the decisions will be reversed on appeal. It is even possible that the cases will be dismissed,” Syracuse University law professor Gregory Germain wrote in a post-election analysis of Trump’s legal status.

Citing the election interference case, Germain pointed to the Supreme Court’s July ruling that former presidents enjoy “absolute” immunity with respect to their “core constitutional powers,” which includes some protection against criminal prosecution, and said he’s confident that the Supreme Court would “uphold a self-pardon” for Trump, although such pardoning power doesn’t extend to state prosecutions.

For Trump’s allies, however, among them former chief of staff Mark Meadows, attorney Rudy Giuliani, and other lawyers and aides, the situation is not as rosy, Washington beltway outlet The Hill said in an analysis.

“In fact, with Trump effectively out of the picture, any limitations the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision would have put on the prosecution – barring certain evidence and causing further delays – are now gone,” the outlet said, paraphrasing Georgia State University law professor Michael Kreis.

Georgia Democrat and District Attorney Fani Willis, pursuing Trump in the Georgia election interference case, has vowed publicly to continue pursuing the president-elect, notwithstanding the election outcome.

“If someone has an indictment in this office, no matter who they are, we continue to pursue those charges,” Willis told local media this week. “I’m here for eight more years, is my plan. So if that’s what it takes for us to get some justice in some cases, we come to work every day, we’ll come to work and look for justice.”

Willis’s status in the Trump case is precarious and presently being decided by a Georgia appeals court after the discovery of her secret romantic relationship with Nathan Wade, the top special prosecutor in the case, which a judge earlier ruled to be a sign of “impropriety.”

Arizona AG Kris Mayes has similarly signaled that her office will not be dropping charges in the “fake electors” prosecution against Trump’s allies.

“I have no intention of dropping that case,” she said. “We won’t be cowed. We won’t be intimidated. And patriots across the country must stand up for our Constitution, for what is lawful.”

The judge in that case quit after the discovery of a controversial email which defendants said showed “utter contempt” for Trump, signaling intolerable bias.

Similar charges are facing Trump surrogates in Michigan, having been previously dismissed or challenged in Nevada, New Mexico and Pennsylvania.

Resistance’s New Idea: Shadow Cabinet

Trump’s imminent return to the White House with GOP majorities in both chambers of Congress has prompted Democrats to brainstorm strategies on what to do over the next 2-4 years, from “resistance” to his agenda at the state level by governors and local legislatures, to fighting his cabinet picks in the Senate by dividing Republicans against one another. Some strategists, pundits and politicians have also called for selective cooperation with the incoming administration, including picking their battles carefully and looking for “common ground when… circumstances dictate.”

Another idea – floated by Democratic-leaning media and North Carolina Democratic Congressman Wiley Nickel last week, is setting up a “shadow cabinet” – a British political tradition of appointing ‘shadow ministers’ (or in the US case ‘shadow cabinet heads’ for executive branch departments, like the Departments of Defense or Justice), to scrutinize government policy.

The shadow cabinet system presently exists in Commonwealth countries, and a handful of other nations, including Denmark, Italy, Japan, and occasionally, France (where the practice is uncommon).

“We need new ideas,” Nickel said of the initiative. “Democrats have to stop playing defense and start going on offense. It’s not enough to say we’re against Trump and his Project 2025 agenda. We have to say what we’re for, and that’s what’s really behind this idea, to get folks there to counter every cabinet agency, every position that Trump appoints.”

Nickel has called his idea “democracy’s insurance policy,” and indicated that the 26-member shadow cabinet could be appointed by Democratic House and Senate leaders.

“It’s really easy,” the lawmaker assured, floating Senator Adam Schiff as Shadow Attorney General, Representative Adam Smith as Shadow Pentagon chief, Representative Suzan Delbene as Shadow Commerce Secretary, and Representative Rosa Delauro as Shadow Health and Human Service Secretary, to name a few.

In the British tradition, shadow cabinets have no executive power. This means that even if the Democrats manage to set up an American version, they will not be able to implement their own agenda.

November 17, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

Elon Musk’s X Sues California Over Deepfake Law Seen as Threat to Free Speech

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | November 16, 2024

Elon Musk’s X has initiated legal action against the state of California, seeking to prevent the enforcement of a new statute mandating that major online platforms either remove or label deepfake election-related content, as a violation of the First Amendment, particularly for its impact on memes and satire.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

The legal challenge was presented in a federal court earlier this week, focusing on legislation designed to curb the influence of artificially altered videos, images, and sounds, collectively known as deepfakes. The legislation is poised to become effective on January 1.

The law in question, Assembly Bill 2655, was signed as part of California’s efforts to safeguard the integrity of the upcoming 2024 US presidential election from the risks posed by technological manipulation. Governor Gavin Newsom, having clashed with Musk following Musk’s sharing of a parody video of Vice President Kamala Harris, aims to mitigate these alleged risks.

The legislation has sparked concerns among tech giants and free speech supporters, who understand that it suppresses user engagement and stifles free discourse and satire under the guise of curbing misinformation.

X’s legal challenge raises critical questions about the boundaries of free speech in the digital age, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for user-generated content. By requiring platforms like X to preemptively label or remove content, the law, as X contends, “will inevitably result in the censorship of wide swaths of valuable political speech and commentary.”

“AB 2655 requires large online platforms like X, the platform owned by X Corp. (collectively, the ‘covered platforms’), to remove and alter (with a label) — and to create a reporting mechanism to facilitate the removal and alteration of — certain content about candidates for elective office, elections officials, and elected officials, of which the State of California disapproves and deems to be ‘materially deceptive,’” the complaint reads.

The complaint also states that “this system will inevitably result in the censorship of wide swaths of valuable political speech and commentary and will limit the type of ‘uninhibited, robust, and wide-open’ ‘debate on public issues’ that core First Amendment protections are designed to ensure.”

It goes on to say, “AB 2655 imposes a prior restraint on speech because it provides, pursuant to Sections 20515(b) and 20516, expedited causes of action under Section 35 of the California Code of Civil Procedure through which political speech can be enjoined before there occurs a ‘final judicial determination’ that the ‘speech is unprotected.’”

Finally, it states, “AB 2655 violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 2, of the California Constitution, both facially and as-applied to X Corp. AB 2655 imposes a prior restraint on speech that forces platforms to censor only certain election-related content of which the State of California disapproves and also directly and impermissibly interferes with the constitutionally protected content-moderation speech rights of covered social media platforms, like X.”

The implications for satire are particularly severe, as highlighted by the case of the parody Harris videos. Although Governor Newsom’s office insists that AB 2655, also known as the Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024, says it exempts parody and satire, the practical application of this exemption is murky at best since it was a parody video that was the impetus for Governor Newsom to push for the introduction of the law.

November 17, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

The Flatline

The Stagnation of Life Expectancy

Biopolitiks by Dr. Alejandro Diaz | November 14, 2024

Life expectancy is one of the most relevant measures of health outcomes. Historical data on this issue tells the story of the revolutionary medical advancements of the last centuries. Over the last 100 years, life expectancy has risen dramatically. Rapid industrialization and scientific advancements have reduced the early mortality risk tremendously. Since 1900, life expectancy has doubled in nearly every corner of the globe. However, something extremely interesting happened at the turn of this last decade. For the first time in over 60 years, global life expectancy dropped. This wasn’t an isolated trend, by the way. Life expectancy had been flatlining for about the past 10 years globally, and 30 years in some developed nations, particularly the United States.

Life Expectancy Statistics according to Our World in Data

What’s the reason behind this flatline?

To dive into the hows and whys behind the stagnation, it is important to first understand how this data is measured and what it means for health outcomes. Life expectancy refers to the number of years the average person within a selected population can expect to live. Although there are various methods, the most common is referred to as “period life expectancy.” This method calculates the period during which a person born in the year of measurement can expect to live if the death rates stay constant.

Life expectancy is widely considered to be one of the most relevant indicators in the measurement of the health of a population. Experts believe that this is a more accurate measure than other comparable indicators, like total mortality. More broadly, some refer to it as a clear indicator of human progress.

Regardless of the many interpretations, it is clear that this is a relevant global health statistic.

Life expectancy is not only a health indicator—it’s a Biopolitikal indicator. It accurately quantifies the relationship between policy and the health outcomes of governed populations. This statistic can measurably grade the quality of public health policy. The coordination of those in charge of scientific/medical advancements, in conjunction with policymakers, has driven improvements. This outlines the importance of this measurement and how it is indicative of recent systemic failures on the Biopolitikal level.

Globally, the stagnation of this metric coincides with the increased incidence of chronic diseases. It seems that much of the detriment, not only in life expectancy data but in disease burden generally—particularly non-communicable disease burden—begins around the year 1990. The medical advancements of the prior century appear to have leveled off in their impact on health outcomes.

Among developed nations, the United States stands out, with life expectancy lagging behind comparable nations.

Life Expectancy vs Health Expenditures (Our World in Data)

The situation of the United States is quite particular in the sense that it represents some of the highest expenditures per capita on healthcare but lies around the mid-range of the spectrum in terms of overall health outcomes. In this specific chart above, it measures life expectancy. The United States has been the most affected country by the global chronic disease epidemic, by far.

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report from earlier this year in February stated that around 130 million people suffer from some sort of chronic disease in the United States. The figure has risen by nearly 50 million in the last 30 years. This represents a clear Biopolitikal failureOne study out of California mentioned the increase in circulatory disease as one of, if not the main, contributors to the stagnation of American life expectancy “post-2010.”

This chronic disease data is reflected in life expectancy rates. From 1960 to 1990, the U.S. life expectancy rate rose nearly six years; in the next 30-year period from 1990 to 2020, it rose only two years. The correlation is clear.

The data is similar globally; however, the United States is a special case.

In the previously mentioned CDC report, they also estimate that around 90% of the over $4 trillion USD in yearly federal health expenditures go to managing chronic diseases. This shows that not only is the chronic disease epidemic costing the government trillions in taxpayer dollars, but also that some are making billions in treating them.

This, of course, is in the United States. But what does the global data suggest? In Europe, experts suggest that around 70% of all deaths on the continent originate from chronic diseases, specifically cancer and cardiovascular disease. Despite the economic disparities, data out of Latin America shows a very similar story. The WHO estimates that around 63% of men and 60% of women are considered overweight in the region.

These figures represent incentives for the system to keep the patient sick in perpetuity, contributing to stagnating life expectancy rates. However, this also represents an enormous opportunity for us to make a positive transformation in the Biopolitikal framework.

The Path Forward

To reverse this tendency we must course correct. The solution lies in the collective decision-making processes. A critical review of the current landscape is a necessity.

We must review certain aspects influencing the chronic health epidemic and the general detriment of health outcomes across the board. That means looking at the root causes. In my professional opinion, I would include in that list the current vaccine schedule. Is it really necessary for people to receive the nearly 70 vaccines that are on the recommended immunization schedules from the moment they practically leave the womb to adulthood? When most deadly infectious diseases have been eradicated globally. What effects are these having on children? Could this be why we’re seeing widespread immunosuppression in the global population?

Recommended child immunization schedule according to the CDC

Food and agriculture policy must be modified. Last week we discussed the effects of the dangerous chemicals and additives included in the global food supply. Many of these have been linked to long-term health issues, including hormonal disruption, obesity, ADHD, and chronic diseases. These additives compromise the nutritional value of food and contribute to the global rise in non-communicable diseases by promoting unhealthy dietary patterns.

Additionally, overmedication further exacerbates these ailments. Instead of addressing the root dietary issues, doctors resort to pharmaceuticals.

I would go so far as to argue that this critical review should extend to medical school curricula. Curriculums should be modified to include further training on nutrition, functional medicine, etc., giving medical graduates a new understanding to take on these public health crises.

Medical schools don’t teach you how to think; they teach you what to think.

Transforming, from a policy perspective, the way we look at public health is necessary. We as a society must collectively broaden our perspective to consider these alternative approaches.

Luckily, the point of inflection is now. Global attitudes toward this line of thinking are shifting rapidly. There is immense enthusiasm arising from the possibility of real reform coming to the highest levels of Biopolitikal decision-making.

With today’s announcement, it seems as though we are even closer than we think of it all coming to fruition. As of today, November 14th, President-Elect Donald J. Trump has nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as the next Secretary of Health and Human Services, definitely the most qualified for the position. As I have mentioned repeatedly in my substack posts, whatever the United States does, the world will follow. Parting from this principle, Global Biopolitiks is set to experience a massive shift in the coming years.


About me (Dr. Alejandro Diaz)

I am a Pediatric Allergist / Immunologist and Global Health Expert with extensive international experience. I have delivered conferences in over 27 countries around the globe on topics of medicine, migration, biosecurity, and related topics. This includes prestigious venues such as the White House, the US Capitol, the Romanian Parliament, the European Parliament in Brussels, the Mexican Senate of the Republic, the United Nations in Geneva, Japanese Parliament, among others.

My career encompasses diverse roles in healthcare including private practice, health systems, and advisory positions for medical service companies, governments, and government entities worldwide.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Aletho News | , | Leave a comment

As Cancer Rates for Young Adults Continue to Climb, Are Doctors ‘Dancing Around the Elephant in the Room’?

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |November 13, 2024

Cancer rates among Generation X (Gen X) and millennials are on the rise. A USA Today report cited environmental and dietary changes as possible contributing factors — but some experts say that’s only part of the story.

Dr. Mike Varshavski, a family medicine physician and health influencer, told USA Today the factors are “usually so complex and multifactorial” but that “one of the major drivers of cancers [are] the rising rates of obesity in the United States and across the globe.”

However, Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist at Children’s Health Defense, said the USA Today story “dismantles its own solution” — because some doctors noted that their younger cancer patients were frequently “healthy” before their diagnosis.

“The U.S. is ranked fourth in the world for age-standardized incidence of cancer — 367 per 100,000 — and 19th for adult obesity (42.7%),” Jablonowski said. “The cancer epidemic is way beyond diet and exercise.”

USA Today cited figures from an American Cancer Society (ACS) study, published in The Lancet in August. According to the study, 17 types of cancer — including breast, colorectal, liver, gastric, ovarian and pancreatic cancer — are rising among younger adults. Mortality trends connected to some cancers have also increased.

USA Today also listed celebrities with recent cancer diagnoses — including Princess Kate, Elle Macpherson, Jenna Fischer and Olivia Munn — all Gen Xers (born between 1965 and 1980) or millennials (born between 1981 and 1996).

The article recommended younger adults be vigilant about their health. Experts who spoke with The Defender welcomed this message. However, they criticized what they said was an attempt to normalize rising cancer rates among young adults while ignoring other possible underlying causes, including vaccines.

“If you normalize a disease, you will alter the health behaviors addressing the disease,” Jablonowski said. “If you believe cancer is inevitable or occurs at random, then you believe your health behavior has no impact on the chances of developing cancer.”

Dr. Margaret Christensen, a clinical educator and co-founder of the Carpathia Collaborative, said USA Today’s recommendations that younger people engage in “fine-tuning” their “diet and exercise routines,” stay up-to-date on cancer screenings and visit their doctor regularly, are important.

“But where is the information on prevention?” Christensen asked. “Nothing is mentioned about the toxic chemicals and ultra-processed foods and antibiotics in the food supply that are impairing our immune system to begin with.”

There’s been a ‘sea change in the cancer message’

Many doctors and scientists noted the timing of rising cancer rates among young adults.

Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor of oncology at St. George’s, University of London, told The Defender, “Colorectal [cancer] has been slowly rising in young people for well over a decade and probably more. However, there has been an inflection in the rate of rise from mid-2021. This is worldwide.”

John Beaudoin Sr., author of “The Real CdC” and “THE CDC MEMORANDUM,” told The Defender that while incidence rates for such cancers have risen for a decade, “the change in rate or rise is what decries a new issue introduced into society.”

Beaudoin said that if the annual increase was 2% per year consistent with a 2% population increase, that is understandable. “But if the rate then goes to a 4% annual increase, then there is a major issue. The rate doubled and is not consistent with population increase.”

Dr. Pierre Kory, founder of the Leading Edge Clinic and president emeritus and co-founder of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), agreed. He said the USA Today report and the study in The Lancet mark “a sea change in the cancer message.”

Childhood vaccination ‘set the scene’ for rising young adult cancer rates

According to USA Today, there’s “no exact cause known for the rise in cancers among young people,” although “researchers are trying to figure it out.”

However, the article suggested that environmental factors, namely “changes to our microbiome over time — the environment, air, water, etc.” — may be partly responsible.

Christensen agreed, at least in part. “The same factors — environmental toxins in the food, water, air and many medications that cause insulin resistance and obesity — are causing cancers,” she said. “However, even in countries with lower rates of obesity, we are still seeing increased levels of cancers in younger folks.”

With environmental factors and obesity accounting only partially for the rising onset of cancer in younger adults, experts told The Defender vaccines likely contribute significantly to this increase.

“This has led me to look at childhood vaccines and I am afraid they have set the scene,” Dalgleish said. “There are now far too many. The adjuvants alone correlate with autism and ADHD,” attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

“The chronic inflammatory states recorded after some of the joint vaccines are highly likely to boost the induction of early cancer,” Dalgleish said.

Dr. Paul Marik, co-founder of the FLCCC, said he believes COVID-19 vaccines may have contributed to the more recent increases in cancer incidence recorded by the CDC.

“The rapid increase in cancers was noted in 2021, 2022 and 2023 after the rollout of the mRNA jabs,” said Marik, author of “Cancer Care: The Role of Repurposed Drugs and Metabolic Interventions in Treating Cancer.”

He added:

“There is strong mechanistic data to explain how the jabs may lead to cancer. This association is strong. There does not appear to be another plausible explanation. Obesity rates have increased slowly [and] cannot explain the massive increase in cancers noted recently.”

Christensen said USA Today and organizations like the ACS “are dancing around the elephant in the room” by “not wanting to make the connection to the vaccines while stating the obvious problems we can’t ignore.”

“Mainstream media have been completely negligent, in my view, for not holding our concerns regarding the vaccines and cancer to account,” Dalgleish said.

Instead of ignoring the problem, “The concept of turbo cancer needs to be accepted,” Marik said. “More research is required to more precisely determine who is at risk, what the incidence is and how to prevent and treat this disease.”

“The best way to stop the young person’s cancer epidemic is to stop the cause,” Jablonowski said.

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

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

US Democrats demand Musk be probed for Russia ties

RT | November 16, 2024

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk should be investigated over media claims that he communicated with several senior Russian officials in recent years, two top Democratic senators have demanded in a letter.

Jack Reed, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Jeanne Shaheen, a senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee, raised concerns about the media allegations in a letter to US Attorney General Merrick Garland and Pentagon Inspector General Robert Storch on Friday.

In October, at the height of the US presidential election, the Wall Street Journal claimed that Musk had communicated with several top Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, as recently as this year.

Musk oversees billions of dollars in US government contracts as CEO of SpaceX. As the tech billionaire claims to hold top secret level security clearance, and manages extremely sensitive government contracts, his potential communication with Russia is a risk, the senators said.

“These relationships between a well-known US adversary and Mr. Musk, a beneficiary of billions of dollars in US government funding, pose serious questions regarding Mr. Musk’s reliability as a government contractor and a clearance holder,” they wrote.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov blasted the pre-election WSJ claims about the billionaire’s alleged phone calls with Putin as “disinformation.” Historically, there has only been one call between the two, he said.

“It was before 2022, they spoke over the telephone,” Peskov stated, adding that they discussed Russia’s scientific progress, and likely future developments. “There were no contacts between Musk and Putin after that, and all claims otherwise are false.”

The spokesman noted the claims are likely related to the “extremely confrontational electoral political fight” in the US.

After his victory in the US presidential race, Donald Trump announced that Musk will head the future Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The initiative will aim to cut trillions of dollars in “waste and fraud” in annual US government spending, “dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies,” Trump said on Thursday.

Musk said his role in DOGE “is going to be a revolution.”

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Debbie Wasserman Schultz labels Trump’s pick for intel chief ‘Russian asset’

RT | November 16, 2024

Tulsi Gabbard, US President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for national intelligence director, is “likely a Russian asset,” according to Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Florida). In an interview with MSNBC on Friday, Schulz accused Trump of making “irresponsible” choices for his new cabinet.

Gabbard is a former congresswoman from Hawaii and a lieutenant colonel in the US Army Reserve. An outspoken critic of Washington’s military interventions, she left the Democratic party shortly after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Last month she announced that she had joined the Republican Party and was backing Trump. The president-elect announced her nomination earlier this week, saying that Gabbard “will bring the fearless spirit that has defined her illustrious career” to the US intelligence community, which includes the NSA, CIA, and FBI.

Schultz claimed that appointing Gabbard to the post would be “dangerous,” as it would make her “a direct line” from the US intelligence community “to our enemies.”

“Tulsi Gabbard is someone who has met with war criminals, violated State Department guidance and secretly, clandestinely, went to Syria and met with [President Bashar] Assad. She’s considered to be, by most assessments, a Russian asset,” the congresswoman claimed, saying that she personally considers Gabbard “someone who is likely a Russian asset.” Schultz did not elaborate on her allegations.

Gabbard has not yet commented on Schultz’s accusations. She previously welcomed Trump’s nomination in a post on X, thanking the president-elect for the opportunity to “defend the safety, security and freedom of the American people.”

Twitter users were quick to lambast Schultz’s for her remarks, pointing out that she presented no evidence of Gabbard’s alleged spying on Russia’s behalf and calling her claims “defamatory.” One user noted that “whenever the left doesn’t like somebody – they’re a Russian asset.” Gabbard was not the first of Trump’s picks to be accused of having ties to Russia – earlier on Friday, two top Democratic senators demanded a probe into SpaceX CEO Elon Musk over media claims that he had contacts with senior Russian officials. Trump earlier announced that Musk would head the future Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), tasked with reforming the US government.

In her interview, Schultz called Trump’s entire cabinet reshuffle “the most extreme and dangerous” in history and a “Star Wars bar level craziness.” She noted that while a few of Trump’s picks are passable, most are “individually unqualified.”

Apart from Gabbard, the congresswoman was especially unhappy with the nomination of former Florida congressman Matt Gaetz for attorney general. She claimed it was “breathtaking in its extremism” as Gaetz has “no experience whatsoever with the Justice Department other than being a subject of investigation for sex trafficking minors.”

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Iran ‘categorically’ dismisses NYT report about its envoy’s meeting with Musk

Press TV – November 16, 2024

The Iranian Foreign Ministry has “categorically” dismissed an American newspaper report on a meeting between Tehran’s ambassador to the United Nations and Elon Musk, a close ally of US President-elect Donald Trump.

The New York Times on Friday cited two Iranian officials as saying that the meeting between Musk and Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations Amir Saeid Iravani was held at a secret location in New York on Monday and lasted more than an hour.

The officials reportedly described the discussion as focused on how to defuse tensions between Tehran and Washington.

The Times said Musk, the world’s richest man, himself initiated the meeting, held at a location chosen by the Iranian side.

In an interview with IRNA on Saturday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei rejected the report of the meeting and expressed surprise over “extensive” media coverage by American outlets in this regard.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Israel Wins the US Election

The new cabinet might be worse than the old one

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • November 15, 2024

There are inevitably several jokes going around in the circles that I frequent that “MAGA” should instead be “MIGA” as the recent US national election only allowed one to choose between two parties that tried to excel in expressing their love for the Jewish state, with the winner Donald Trump’s Republicans ending up on top to “Make Israel Great[er] Again.” Another joke, more in line with dark humor, is the growing belief that Kamala Harris might have lost the election with the margin of difference being the perception that the Israeli genocide in Gaza, enabled by her party and President Joe Biden, turned many voters against her. Ironically, Donald Trump was more ambiguous and may well turn out to be even worse when it comes to developments in the Middle East.

Joe Biden’s cabinet and senior appointments were overloaded with Jews and while Trump’s choices are ethnically more mixed they all are truly dedicated to letting Israel have its way with its neighbors. Several high officials might well be considered demented when it comes to the arguments they make to protect the Jewish state, up to and including urging preemptive strikes carried out by the US against Iran, Syria and Lebanon. An Israeli newspaper has revealed that the Israeli government and Trump’s team are already in discussions regarding how to remove Iran’s government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for his part has claimed that he has already spoken with Trump several times since the election and that the two leaders see “eye-to-eye” on Iran. Netanyahu is convinced that a direct strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities is feasible as long as the United States fully supports Israel if a war breaks out.

The new Trump cabinet lineup includes Congressman Marco Rubio of Florida as Secretary of State, FOX news journalist Pete Hegspeth as Secretary of Defense, Representative Elise Stefanik of New York as Ambassador to the United Nations, former Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas as Ambassador to Israel, Congressman Mike Waltz as National Security Adviser, Governor Kristi Noem as head of Homeland Security, and Steven C. Witkoff as special envoy to the Middle East. Together they constitute a cohesive group that has delighted the president-elect Trump’s most hawkishly pro-Israel backers. All of those nominated share a passion for promoting Israeli interests as well as bemoaning Jewish concerns over issues like the constantly claimed “problem” of surging antisemitism. Matt Brooks, the longtime chief executive of the Republican Jewish Coalition, called the nominees “a true dream team for those who care about a strong, vibrant, unshakable US-Israel relationship.”

For those of us who had hoped for something more like peace on earth it looks, however, quite a bit different. Paul Craig Roberts even jests that the lineup appears to have been appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Perhaps the most demented of the lot is also the individual in the most potentially threatening position, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Hegseth is a journalist with FOX news with one observer noting that he has never managed any organization larger than his three wives and five children prior to his upgrade to the $1 trillion budgeted 2.9 million Pentagon employees. Even by Christian Zionist standards, he might well be considered to be an extremist. An excerpt from Hegseth’s book, American Crusade, Our Fight to Stay Free (2020) includes “Simply put: if you don’t understand why Israel matters and why it is so central to the story of Western civilization—with America being its greatest manifestation—then you don’t live in history. America’s story is inextricably linked to Judeo-Christian history and the modern state of Israel. You can love America without loving Israel but that tells me your knowledge of the Bible and Western civilization is woefully incomplete… If you love America, you should love Israel. We share history, we share faith, and we share freedom. We love free people, free expression, and free markets.”

Of course, Hegseth is not plausible as neither the US nor Israel appear any longer to love either free people or speech. An over-the-top Christian Zionist, Hegseth, whose body is covered with Christian crosses tattoos, denies that Palestine or even the Palestinians actually exist. He calls the West Bank Samaria and Judea. He is also a so-called Third Temple activist who believes that the al-Aqsa mosque and other Muslim holy sites on the Temple mount in Jerusalem should be torn down to rebuild the Judaean Temple allegedly destroyed by the Romans in the Second Century. As al-Aqsa is a major Islamic religious site, such a move would automatically trigger a massive sectarian war in the Middle East, but it is also seen by Christian Zionists like Hegseth as a precursor step in the development of the Armageddon conflict that will lead to the rapturing of all true believers (Christians only!) into heaven and the Second Coming of Christ. Basically, we are looking at a Secretary of Defense who heads the largest military organization in the world wanting there to be a war which would destroy the world as we know it.

Evangelical Christian Zionist Huckabee and Congresswoman Stefanik are in some ways just as scary. Trump, clearly unconcerned about appointing senior officials possessing dual loyalty, said in a statement regarding Huckabee that “Mike has been a great public servant, Governor, and Leader in Faith for many years. He loves Israel, and the people of Israel, and likewise, the people of Israel love him. Mike will work tirelessly to bring about Peace in the Middle East!” Huckabee believes God gave historic Palestine to the modern state of Israel, and is an outspoken advocate of Israel’s planned expansion in the occupied West Bank, which he calls Judea and Samaria. While visiting an Israeli West Bank settlement in in 2017, Huckabee claimed the land was not Israeli occupied. “I think Israel has title deed to Judea and Samaria. There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank. It’s Judea and Samaria. There’s no such thing as a settlement. They’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There’s no such thing as an occupation.” In 2008, during his own presidential campaign, Huckabee said there was “really no such thing as a Palestinian.”

Another leading Israel Firster is Elise Stefanik, Congresswoman from New York, who will be United States Ambassador to the United Nations, where she will no doubt follow in the glorious footsteps of Nikki Haley, Trump’s totally Zionist first appointee to that organization back in 2016. Stefanik has been stridently using her bully pulpit on the House Education and Workforce Committee to destroy free speech on America’s college campuses, particularly when that freedom is used to criticize Israel and its behavior, which she liberally describes as antisemitism even when the protests are triggered by Israeli atrocities directed against Palestinians and Lebanese. Her witch hunt has led to several top resignations of college presidents and universities across the country have clamped down on pro-Palestinian protesters, who, for the record, Trump has pledged to deport together with all “Jew haters.” Per Australian Journalist Caitlin Johnstone “She’s a hawkish swamp monster whose political career was primed in some of the most odious neoconservative think tanks in Washington, and opposes placing any limits on US military support for Israel. Earlier this year Stefanik actually flew to Israel to give a speech before the Israeli Knesset vowing to help stop the ‘antisemitism’ of protesters against Israel’s genocidal atrocities at American universities.” Stefanik will undoubtedly be relied upon to represent Israeli interests at the UN and State Department rather than those of the United States or of American citizens. The same goes for the new president’s Middle East envoy, Jewish real estate mogul Steve Witkoff, who is a golfing partner of Trump but reportedly has no diplomatic or political experience. A Times of Israel profile describes Witkoff as a “conduit to the Jewish business community.” That is great news as in Washington those who have the most money are always able to speak loudest.

And so it goes. Turn a page in Washington and you find out that someone else has bought up all the remaining pages so all you can do is keep re-reading the same thing. Gosh, Presidents Biden and Trump, doesn’t it bother you to know, as you surely do, that another country owns us and that it carries out near continuous war crimes against an occupied people that are enabled through the use of our arms and money? Do you have no sense of shame? Where is the proud and honorable America that was once a beacon of liberty among all nations? Gone and forgotten, apparently.

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.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

Can China Rise Peacefully?

By Professor Glenn Diesen | November 15, 2024

The spectacular rise of China will inevitably spark security competition with the US and create tensions between the two leading economies in the world. The peaceful rise of China is, however, not solely the responsibility of Beijing as the US must also manage the security competition by accommodating shifts in the international distribution of power. The US constructed an international system based on unipolarity / global dominance after the Cold War, and attempting to preserve this system when it no longer reflects realities on the ground will make it near impossible to manage the security competition.

A temporary strategy

China’s peaceful rise in its previous format was to a large extent a temporary strategy. China’s peaceful rise involved rapid industrialisation and building its strength without engaging much in international affairs to avoid attracting unwanted concerns from other great powers. In Deng Xiaoping’s own words, a peaceful rise meant that China’s objective was to “bide our time and hide our capabilities”. China pursued an export-driven development model to rapidly industrialise, build up vast amounts of foreign reserves, and gradually climb up global value chains. What would happen when China could no longer hide its capabilities?

This “mutually beneficial” partnership with the US was not sustainable as China would incrementally increase its industrial competitiveness vis-à-vis the US and the US would continue to send more money to China to buy Chinese goods. At some point, the US would want to exit the relationship as debt levels become untenable and the loss of production power prevents recovery. The Chinese side would similarly seek to restructure the partnership as the growing US debt becomes a vulnerability as the US would not be able to pay its debts. As John Maynard Keynes succinctly put it: “If you owe your bank a hundred pounds, you have a problem. But if you owe your bank a million pounds, it has…”.

The breaking point for the relationship became the Global Financial Crisis in 2008-09 when the US discovered that borrowing and spending was not a sustainable economic model, while the Chinese took note that the US would not restore its fiscal discipline. Washington’s policy to “borrow and consume” its way back to prosperity implied that China could either invest more in an increasingly insolvent US, or alternatively accept the devaluation of its existing investments since the US Federal Reserve would print the money. The US effectively blackmailed China by demanding that China either lend them more money or the US would print the money. Washington also began to recognise that interdependence should not be measured by absolute gain, but by relative gain.

China was destined to outgrow the US-led international economic system and thus challenge the dominant position of the US. China would need to diversify away from the excessive reliance on the US by connecting with the other Eurasian giants, making inroads into Africa and even entering Latin America as the US “backyard”. The US would naturally view this challenge to its dominant position as a threat, at which point it would be very dangerous to be too reliant on the US. Chinese excessive dependence on US technologies meant that Washington could disrupt Chinese supply chains, excessive dependence on transportation corridors and choke points under the control of the US Navy meant China could be severed from the arteries of international trade, and excessive reliance on US banks, payment systems and the dollar meant that the US could shut down China’s finance. Furthermore, the US would begin to challenge China’s sovereignty over Taiwan, destabilise Hong Kong and Xinjiang with “human rights NGOs”, and pull China’s neighbours into a confrontational US alliance system. A confident US hegemon seeks to build trust in reliance on its international economic architecture and the possibility for peaceful coexistence, but a declining US hegemon is predictably extremely vicious and uses its administrative control over the international economic system to weaken or destroy rivals.

What would be good advice to China after the Global Financial Crisis? China should diversify its economic partners to reduce dependence on the US and prepare for increasingly aggressive US policies aimed at cutting China down in size. China subsequently began to launch ambitious industrial policies to take leadership in the most advanced technologies associated with the Fourth Industrial Revolution, it developed the Belt & Road Initiative to connect with the wider world, and new financial instruments such as alternative development banks, payment systems and trade in national currencies. Furthermore, China began building a powerful military deterrent and prepared to push through the containment of the US island chains.

America Shared Responsibility

A “peaceful rise” can be considered a dual process, as China must be willing to integrate itself into the rules and structures of the international order, while concurrently the power dominating the existing system must be prepared to reform and adjust to accommodate China. Preserving a hegemonic strategy in a multipolar world entails abandoning any efforts to mitigate the security competition, as unipolarity requires the containment, weakening or destruction of rising rivals.

Washington has not accommodated China sufficiently in the existing structures, which compelled China to develop alternative economic structures. The US has for example been reluctant to accommodate China by relinquishing the mechanisms of US primacy within institutions such as the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development Bank. China’s technological development is sabotaged with economic coercion that clearly violates the rules of the WTO. The US no longer abides by the rules of the US-led international economic system.

The US is developing new rules that the other side cannot agree to and thus disrupts stability. The intention of marginalising China was made explicit in an op-ed by Obama in 2016, where he posited that “the world has changed. The rules are changing with it. The United States, not countries like China, should write them”. The economic warfare that further intensified under the Trump presidency and then Biden presidency was rooted in the failure to manage shifts in the international distribution of power. The efforts to build a Europe without Russia as the largest European state predictably led to conflict, and the effort to construct an Asia where China is a spectator will have the same consequences.

A New Format for a Peaceful Rise?

For decades, China has been open about its critical view of a system based on US hegemony, as it is inflexible in accommodating the rise of other powers and shifts in the international distribution of power. The mere rise of other powers threatens to disrupt a system of hegemony. China’s desire to develop alternatives is also not new. In 1990, Deng Xiaoping told members of the Central Committee that the world was moving towards multipolarity:

“The situation in which the United States and the Soviet Union dominated all international affairs is changing. Nevertheless, in the future when the world becomes three-polar, four-polar or five-polar, the Soviet Union, no matter how weakened it may be and even if some of its republics withdraw from it, will still be one pole. In the so-called multi-polar world, China too will be a pole. We should not belittle our own importance: one way or another, China will be counted as a pole. Our foreign policies remain the same: first, opposing hegemonism and power politics and safeguarding world peace; and second, working to establish a new international political order and a new international economic order”.

China has not necessarily abandoned its “peaceful rise”, but merely reformulated it. Peaceful rise no longer entails building and hiding its strength within the US hegemonic system to avoid unwanted attention. Rather, peaceful rise entails developing a multipolar economic system that is more capable of managing changes in the international distribution of power and thus harmonising its interest with other great powers.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

China Dubs US ‘Greatest Threat’ to Space Security, ‘Biggest Instigator of Space Arms Race’

By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 15.11.2024

In 2008, China and Russia put forward the Proposed Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS) Treaty – a comprehensive draft arms control pact designed to ban the deployment of all sorts of weapons in space. Successive US administrations have rejected PAROS as a “diplomatic ploy” designed to give the countries a “military edge” over the US.

The United States is the biggest global threat to security in outer space, and the greatest single instigator of an arms race in the celestial body, the Chinese military said Friday in a response to recent allegations by a senior US Space Force commander about the “mind-boggling” pace of China’s space-based military buildup.

“The United States’ deployment of anti-satellite weapons under the pretext of the so-called ‘Chinese space threat’ is a complete distortion of the facts and is like a thief crying ‘catch the thief’,” Defense Ministry spokesman Zhang Xiaogang said in a briefing, referencing the US’s controversial Meadowlands satellite jamming program.

“The facts have shown repeatedly that the United States is the greatest threat to security in space, and the biggest supporter of an arms race in outer space,” Zhang said, highlighting the US military’s repeated references to space as a “war-fighting domain,” and Pentagon efforts to continually enhance its space capabilities, and even create space-based alliances.

These actions pose “grave” risks to the security and development interests of all nations, the spokesman suggested.

“We urge the US side to stop spreading irresponsible remarks, stop expanding its arsenal and making war preparations in space, and contribute its due share to maintaining lasting peace and security in space,” Zhang said.

The Chinese military spokesman’s comments follow recent remarks by Space Force chief of space operations General Chance Saltzman accusing China of engaging in a rapid build-up of its space-based military capabilities.

“The number of different categories of space weapons that [China has] created and… the speed with which they’re doing it is very threatening,” Saltzman said during a European tour designed to boost support among allies for US military activities in space.

“One of the reasons you have a Space Force in the US now is in recognition of the last 20 years [Russia and China] have developed and demonstrated the ability to conduct war fighting in space,” Saltzman suggested, referencing the creation of Space Force as a separate branch of the US military in 2019.
The US wants to help “lay the foundations” for European NATO allies’ space forces, the general added.

US officials and media have regularly accused China and Russia of menacing space-based activities, from anti-satellite satellites, to nuclear and missile defense components (capabilities which the US itself has admitted to working on on-again off-again since the 1980s).

The US Space Force has about 10,000 personnel under its employ and a $29 billion budget. The military branch reportedly plans to evaluate weapons systems for the suppression of satellites between January and March 2025. This includes a $120 million ‘Meadowlands’ system – a powerful satellite jammer designed to blind enemy satellites in the event of conflict.

Marine Corps General Matthew Glavy made clear in no uncertain terms what the Space Force’s aspirations were last December, saying space was “the most resilient capability we have,” and that the US must “win the space domain” to win the wars of the future.

China and Russia have repeatedly returned to their proposed PAROS Treaty over the years as a means to escape a space-based arms race, with the draft agreement proposing a comprehensive prohibition on the placement of arms, anti-satellite and other advanced military technology in space. The US has so far refused to consider the agreement, even as a starting point for further negotiations on the subject.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

FACT-CHECKING MSM: RFK JR.’S TRUE PLANS FOR HEALTH REFORM

The HighWire with Del Bigtree | November 14, 2024

Legacy media have already launched hit pieces on RFK Jr. in an attempt to sew division, and generate opposition to his role in the Trump Administration. Hear what he actually has said on his plans for helping clean up the corruption in our health agencies.

#MAHA #MakeAmericaHealthAgain

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | | Leave a comment

Congressional Investigation into Authors of ‘Disinformation Dozen’ Intensifies

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 15, 2024

The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), authors of the “Disinformation Dozen,” faces a Nov. 21 deadline to provide Congress with documents related to its alleged collusion with the Biden administration and social media platforms to censor online users.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, on Nov. 7 subpoenaed CCDH as part of an ongoing congressional investigation, launched in August 2023, into the nonprofit’s censorship-related activities.

The subpoena requests all communications and documents “between or among CCDH, the Executive Branch, or third parties, including social media companies, relating to the identification of groups, accounts, channels, or posts for moderation, deletion, suppression, restriction, or reduced circulation.”

The subpoena also requests all records, notes, and other “documents of interactions between or among CCDH and the Executive Branch referring or relating to ‘killing’ or taking adverse action against Elon Musk’s X social media platform.”

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1854563397859193136

CCDH previously included Kennedy on its “Disinformation Dozen” list, published in March 2021, of the 12 “leading online anti-vaxxers.”

Leaked CCDH documents released last month by investigative journalists Paul D. Thacker and Matt Taibbi revealed that CCDH sought to “kill” Twitter and launch “black ops” against Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President-elect Donald J. Trump’s nominee for secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

CCDH included Kennedy, founder of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), on its list of “The Disinformation Dozen” when he was still chairman of CHD.

Black ops” are defined as a “secret mission or campaign carried out by a military, governmental or other organization, typically one in which the organization conceals or denies its involvement.”

A subsequent report by Taibbi and Thacker showed that CCDH employed tactics it initially developed to help U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and the U.S. Democratic Party, to target Musk, Kennedy and others.

CCDH used ‘explicit military terminology’ to target speech

Thacker told The Defender the leaked documents “definitely spurred” Jordan’s subpoena.

Sayer Ji, the founder of GreenMedInfo, was also listed among “The Disinformation Dozen.” He said the leaked documents were “chilling” and that CCDH’s efforts were part of “the largest coordinated foreign influence operation targeting American speech since 1776.”

Ji told The Defender :

“The leaked documents confirm what we experienced firsthand: CCDH wasn’t just targeting 12 individuals — we were test cases for deploying military-grade psychological operations against civilians at scale.

“Just as the British Crown once used seditious libel laws to silence colonial dissent, CCDH’s operation expanded to silence hundreds of millions globally, from doctors sharing clinical observations to parents discussing vaccine injuries.”

Ohio physician Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, also on “The Disinformation Dozen” list, told The Defender, “The exposure of the manipulation that went on behind the scenes to silence us is what we suspected, and now we know … We have the sad last laugh against their attacks. They are the ones with blood on their hands.”

Ji said CCDH’s internal communications reveal not just bias, “but explicit military terminology — ‘black ops,’ ‘target acquisition,’ ‘strategic deployment’ — coordinated between Five Eyes networks and dark money interests to target constitutionally protected speech.”

Writing on GreenMedInfo, Ji said, “CCDH’s ‘black ops’ approach includes coordinated media smears, economic isolation, and digital censorship.” Ji said CCDH’s activities represent “a new level of institutionalized power directed at civilian targets, often bypassing constitutional safeguards.”

Thacker said Jordan’s investigation should expand to include CCDH’s “black ops.”

“I don’t want to speculate on what CCDH was doing with ‘black ops’ against Kennedy,” Thacker said. “I think that should be explored by a congressional committee, with CCDH CEO Imran Ahmed put under oath,” Thacker said.

CCDH facing multiple lawsuits, possible Trump administration investigation

Jordan’s subpoena is the latest in a series of legal challenges for CCDH. According to GreenMedInfo, the organization faces several lawsuits and government investigations.

Following last month’s CCDH document leak, the Trump campaign said an investigation into CCDH “will be at the top of the list.”

The campaign also filed a complaint against the Harris campaign with the Federal Election Commission, “for making and accepting illegal foreign national contributions” — namely, from the U.K. Labour Party.

This followed the release of evidence indicating that the Biden administration coordinated with the U.K. Foreign Office as part of what GreenMedInfo described “as a systematic censorship regime involving CCDH and affiliated organizations.”

A lawsuit Musk filed against CCDH in July 2023 for allegedly illegally obtaining data and using it in a “scare campaign” to deter advertisers from X will likely proceed on appeal. A federal court initially dismissed the lawsuit in March.

Discovery in the Missouri v. Biden free speech lawsuit may also “shed further light and legal scrutiny on the critical role that CCDH played in allegedly suppressing and violating the civil liberties of U.S. citizens,” according to GreenMedInfo.

CCDH, others flee X in protest

Earlier this week, CCDH deleted its account on X, the platform it wanted to “kill.”

Writing on Substack, Ji said CCDH’s departure from X, during the same week Trump nominated Kennedy to lead HHS, represents a “seismic shift” and marks “a watershed moment, signaling the unraveling of entrenched systems of control and the rise of a new era for health freedom and open discourse.”

Several other left-leaning organizations and individuals, including The Guardian and journalist Don Lemon, also said they will stop using X, after Trump tapped Musk to lead a federal agency tasked with increasing government efficiency.

According to NBC News, many ordinary users are also fleeing X, citing “bots, partisan advertisements and harassment, which they all felt reached a tipping point when Donald Trump was elected president last week with Musk’s support.”

But according to Adweek, X’s former top advertisers, including Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery and Lionsgate Entertainment, resumed ad spending on the platform this year, but at “much lower rates” than before.

“Elon Musk’s ties with Donald Trump might spur some advertisers to think spending on X is good for business,” Adweek reported.

Thacker said CCDH’s deletion of its X account was “aligned” with the departure of “other organizations and ‘journalists’ aligned with the Democratic Party.” He said it appears to have been a “coordinated protest.”

Ji said organizations like CCDH view X “as an existential threat.” He added:

“Having experienced both Twitter 1.0’s AI-driven censorship system and X’s more open environment, I understand exactly why CCDH sees X as an existential threat. X represents what Twitter 1.0’s embedded censorship infrastructure was designed to prevent: a truly free digital public square.

“Under Musk’s commitment to free speech, their tactical advantage disappeared. They’re not leaving because X is toxic. They’re leaving because they can’t control it.”

Online censorship ‘may no longer be sustainable under intensified scrutiny’

According to GreenMedInfo, CCDH’s departure from X “appears to reflect an internal recognition that their operational model — characterized by critics as a US-U.K. intelligence ‘cut-out’ facilitating unconstitutional suppression of civil liberties — may no longer be sustainable under intensified scrutiny.”

In recent months, several mainstream media outlets have corrected stories that relied upon CCDH reports claiming “The Disinformation Dozen” was responsible for up to two-thirds of vaccine-related “misinformation” online.

According to Thacker, this reflects an increasing awareness by such outlets that readers are turning their backs on such reporting.

“The outlets that promoted CCDH propaganda are being investigated by their own readers, who are fleeing in droves. Readers are voting against this type of propaganda by refusing to subscribe to these media outlets,” Thacker said.

Yet, “many outlets continue to host these demonstrably false narratives without correction,” Ji said.

According to Ji, these false narratives resulted in medical professionals fearing the loss of their licenses for expressing non-establishment views, self-censorship among scientists “to avoid career destruction,” suppression of “critical public health discussions” and the labeling of millions of posts as “misinformation.”

“This isn’t just about suppressing speech. It’s about establishing a new form of digital control that echoes the colonial-era suppression our founders fought against,” Ji said.

“CCDH has polluted political discourse by pretending there is some absolute definition of the term ‘misinformation’ and that they hold the dictionary,” Thacker said. “That’s nonsense. They spread hate and misinformation to attack perceived political enemies of the Democratic Party.”

Ji called upon Congress to investigate “The full scope of those silenced beyond the ‘Disinformation Dozen,’” the “systematic suppression of scientific debate,” “media organizations’ role in amplifying foreign influence operations” and “dark money funding networks” supporting such organizations.

Thacker said Congress should examine possible CCDH violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. “We need to also look at how much foreign money they took in and whether we as a nation are comfortable with foreign influence trying to alter the law and political discussions.”

“The fight isn’t just about correcting past wrongs or personal vindication. It’s about preserving fundamental rights to free speech and scientific inquiry in the digital age,” Ji said. “If we don’t address this systematic abuse of power, we risk surrendering the very freedoms our founders fought to establish.”

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

November 15, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment