Iran’s Foreign Minister on Missile Strike on Israel: Tehran Warned US Not to Interfere
Sputnik – 02.10.2024
TEHRAN – Tehran has sent Sweden a message for Washington saying that Iran’s missile attack on Israel on October 1 was Iran’s right to self-defense, while the Iranian side has separately warned the US not to interfere, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Wednesday.
On Tuesday, Iran launched several hundred ballistic missiles toward Israel in response to the killings of Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh, and senior IRGC commander Abbas Nilforoushan. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said that his government was not seeking a war with Israel but would confront any threat in a resolute manner.
“An exchange of messages does not mean [the existence] of agreements, and before the response [of Iran to Israel’s actions in the region] there was no exchange of messages. After the response, a warning was issued to Sweden to pass it on to the United States, and it was said [in this message] that this [missile attack against Israel] was our right to self-defense, and we have no intention of continuing [the strikes]. We also issued a warning to the United States to step aside and not to interfere,” Araghchi was quoted as saying by the Tasnim news agency.
There is a possibility of conflict in the Middle East, but Tehran believes that the situation in the region will stabilize in the coming days, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Wednesday.
“I see the coming days as bright. The possibility of conflict exists, but our forces are fully prepared. Last night, we only hit military and security targets and, unlike the Israeli side, did not affect the civilian sphere. We believe that we will see a kind of gradual stabilization of the situation in the region in the coming days,” Araghchi was quoted as saying by the Tasnim news agency.
Iran’s armed forces are ready for any possible actions of Israel, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Wednesday.
“Our armed forces are prepared for possible actions by the Israeli regime. If any new steps are taken by the [Israeli] regime and those who support it, they will face a tougher response from Iran,” Araghchi was quoted as saying by the Tasnim news agency.
Possible Escalation Scenarios
Iran has prepared hundreds of missiles that it could use if Israel or the United States decide to strike back, The New York Times reported, citing two members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps familiar with the matter.
Iran is ready to launch these missiles from western borders, the newspaper said.
Israel may strike oil production facilities inside Iran and other strategic targets within days in response to Tehran’s massive missile attack and will consider other options, including hitting its nuclear facilities, if Tehran attacks again, the Axios news portal reported, citing Israeli officials.
At the same time, Israel has not yet decided on specific steps to respond to Iran’s missile strike, as it wants to coordinate these measures with the US, the news portal reported.
According to a US official, Washington has made it clear to Israel that it supports its intention to respond to Iran’s shelling, but believes the response must be measured, Axios said.
US warships in the Mediterranean Sea shot down a handful of missiles during Iran’s attack on Israel, The Washington Post reported.
On Tuesday, the IRNA news agency reported that US Navy ships failed to intercept missiles fired by Iran towards Israel.
Flights Cancellation
All flights in Iran have been canceled until Thursday morning in connection with the situation in the Middle East, Jafar Yazerlu, a spokesperson for Iran’s Civil Aviation Organization, said on Wednesday.
On Tuesday, the spokesperson said that Iran had grounded all flights until Wednesday morning over security concerns.
“In order to maintain flight safety and [taking into account] the situation in the region, all flights throughout the country are canceled until 5 a.m. [local time, 01:30 GMT] tomorrow,” Yazerlu was qouted as saying by the Tasnim news agency.
Amazon Retracts Ban of Dr. Paul Marik’s “Cancer Care”
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | September 30, 2024
This evening I received an e-mail from Dr. Marik, who explained that Amazon’s ban of his book “Cancer Care” has been retracted. The e-book is again available for purchase. This great news comes almost exactly a week after I wrote about the ban in my post Amazon Excommunicates Dr. Paul Marik. I’d like to think that my protest, which was very widely shared, may have contributed to the retail Leviathan’s decision to retract the ban.
I hope that our oligarchic overlords will come to understand that—as much power and money as they possess—they won’t get away with banning books by great scholars while also pretending to be benevolent. Everyone who still has his brain will see this for what it is—namely, a brutal act of tyranny that ONLY the bad guys in history have done.
Congratulations, Dr. Marik, for your victory for free speech and for providing helpful and possibly life saving information to cancer patients. Put one in the win column for the good guys!
US deploys thousands of troops to Middle East as tensions rise
Al Mayadeen | October 1, 2024
Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh told reporters on Monday said the US is increasing its military presence in the Middle East by deploying a “few thousand” additional troops.
According to a statement, this includes bringing in new units and extending the stay of those already stationed there.
“A certain number of units already deployed to the Middle East region… will be extended and the forces due to rotate into theater to replace them will now instead augment” those that are already there, Singh said.
“These augmented forces include F-16, F-15E, A-10, F-22 fighter aircraft and associated personnel,” Singh added, noting that there will be “an additional few thousand” personnel in the region as a result.
This comes in light of heightened escalations amid the start of “Israel’s” “localized and targeted” aggression of Lebanon.
The latest attacks on US positions in the region include a strike on the US military’s Victoria base near Baghdad Airport, occurring late Monday into Tuesday.
The Yemeni Armed Forces have also struck Israeli military targets earlier today using long-range multi-purpose one-way assault Samad 4 drone.
Meanwhile, Hezbollah continues its operations targeting Israeli movements within the occupied Palestinian territories.
Iran also launched a response to the Israeli assassinations of martyrs Haniyeh, Sayyed Nasrallah, and General Nilforooshian earlier, launching hundreds of rockets toward occupied Palestine.
Heightened escalations
On Monday, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed support to Israeli Security Minister Yoav Gallant for “dismantling attack infrastructure” belonging to Hezbollah.
Austin also warned Iran of “serious consequences” should it directly strike “Israel” in retaliation for attacks on the Lebanese Resistance group.
On Tuesday, Hezbollah Political Council member Mahmoud Qomati said in an interview with Al Mayadeen that Hezbollah’s allies “will intervene if the battle expands.”
Qomati warned that southern Lebanon “will become a graveyard for the occupation forces” should they enter, highlighting the Resistance’s vast arsenal of unused weapons and the fighters’ readiness to engage with Israeli forces.
Addressing observers, Qomati said the Resistance was rebuilt immediately following the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
The legacy of Sayyed Nasrallah is well-maintained, he said, adding, “his trust is in our hands and will remain so with every leader and fighter.”
Qomati also reiterated Hezbollah’s stance, which had been affirmed by the late Secretary-General since the beginning of the Israeli occupation’s war on Gaza, stressing that the party “will not halt its support unless a comprehensive proposal is put forward, including a ceasefire in Gaza.”
American Atrocity: Remembering the Shenandoah Burning
By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | September 30, 2024
George Orwell wrote in 1945 that “the nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” This week is the 160th anniversary of one of the worst atrocities of the American Civil War, a barbarous episode that vanished long ago from history books. Union General Philip Sheridan laid waste to a hundred mile swath of the Shenandoah Valley, leaving vast numbers of women and children on the edge of starvation.
Before the summer of 1864, the Civil War was primarily fought on battlefields. After failing to decisively vanquish Confederate forces in pitched clashes, the Union leadership widened the war, trying to destroy the South’s economy—with the civilian population increasingly a target. William Tecumseh Sherman, the commander of the Union forces menacing Atlanta in 1864, telegrammed Washington saying that in the South, “There is a class of people men, women, and children, who must be killed or banished before you can hope for peace and order.”
On July 15, 1864, supreme Union commander Ulysses S. Grant signed an order that the Shenandoah Valley should be made into a “desert” and “all provisions and stock should be removed, and the people notified to move out.” His troops would “eat out Virginia clear and clean as far as they go, so that crows flying over it for the balance of the season will have to carry their provender with them.” In August 1864, Grant ordered Sheridan to “do all the damage to railroads and crops you can. If the war is to last another year, we want the Shenandoah Valley to remain a barren waste.” Sheridan set to the task with vehemence, declaring that “the people must be left nothing but their eyes to weep with over the war” and promised that, when he was finished, the valley “from Winchester to Staunton will have but little in it for man or beast.”
Because people lived in a state that had seceded from the Union, Sheridan acted as if they had automatically forfeited their property, if not their lives. Many who lived in the Shenandoah Valley, such as Mennonites, had opposed secession and refused to join the Confederate Army, but their property was also looted and burned.
Stephen Starr, author of Union Cavalry in the Civil War, wrote, “The deliberate planned devastation of the Shenandoah Valley has deservedly ranked as one of the grimmest episodes of a sufficiently grim war. Unlike the haphazard destruction caused by Sherman’s bummers in Georgia, it was committed systematically, and by order.” Historian John Heatwole, author of The Burning: Sheridan’s Devastation of the Shenandoah Valley, recounted, “From a hill near Mt. Jackson Union cavalrymen counted 168 barns burning at one time. When it was all over Sheridan’s men had systematically destroyed around 1,400 barns, countless other farm structures, seventy mills, several factories, three iron furnaces, warehouses and railroad buildings, and hundreds of thousands of bushels of wheat, oats and corn, and crops standing in the fields. In Rockingham County alone, over 10,000 head of livestock were driven off.”
Some Union soldiers were aghast at their marching orders. A Pennsylvania cavalryman lamented at the end of the fiery spree, “We burnt some sixty houses and all most of the barns, hay, grain and corn in the shocks for fifty miles [south of] Strasburg. It was a hard-looking sight to see the women and children turned out of doors at this season of the year.” An Ohio major wrote in his diary that the burning “does not seem real soldierly work. We ought to enlist a force of scoundrels for such work.” A newspaper correspondent embedded with Sheridan’s army reported, “Hundreds of nearly starving people are going North not half the inhabitants of the valley can subsist on it in its present condition.” After one of Sheridan’s favorite aides was shot by Confederates, Sheridan ordered his troops to burn all houses within a five-mile radius. After many outlying houses had been torched, the small town at the center—Dayton—was spared after a federal officer disobeyed Sheridan’s order.
By the end of Sheridan’s campaign, the former “breadbasket of the Confederacy” could no longer even feed the women and children remaining there. An English traveler in 1865 “found the Valley standing empty as a moor.” Historian Walter Fleming, in his classic 1919 study The Sequel to Appomattox, quoted one bedeviled local farmer, “From Harpers Ferry to New Market, which is about eighty miles, the country was almost a desert…The barns were all burned; chimneys standing without houses, and houses standing without roof, or door, or window.” Historian Heatwole concluded, “The civilian population of the Valley was affected to a greater extent than was the populace of any other region during the war, including those in the path of Sherman’s infamous march to the sea in Georgia.” Unfortunately, given the chaos of the era at the end of the Civil War and in its immediate aftermath, there are no reliable statistics on the number of women, children, and other civilians who perished.
Some defenders of Union tactics insist there was no intent to harshly punish civilians. However, after three years of a bloody stalemate, the Lincoln administration had adapted a total-war mindset to scourge the South into submission. As Sheridan was finishing his fiery campaign, General Sherman wrote to Grant, “Until we can repopulate Georgia, it is useless to occupy it, but the utter destruction of its roads, houses and people will cripple their military resources.” President Abraham Lincoln congratulated both Sheridan and Sherman for campaigns that sowed devastation far and wide. But Lincoln’s cheerleading for collective punishment vanished from the history books thanks to his hypocritical call for “malice towards none” in his second inaugural address.
The carnage inflicted by Sheridan, Sherman, and other northern commanders made the South’s post-war recovery far slower and multiplied the misery of both white and black survivors. At the end of the war, four million ex-slaves were largely left to fend for themselves. The horrific suffering of the former slaves was swept under the rug by historians for much of the twentieth century. However, as Professor Jim Downs noted in his 2012 book, Sick from Freedom, roughly 25% of freed slaves died or became gravely ill in the first years after the war. Ex-slaves suffered violence from the Ku Klux Klan, but even more suffered because they were liberated into an economic landscape that had been desolated by four years of increasingly destructive war. Sherman’s devastating march through Georgia and the Carolinas, for instance, resulted in “a large contraction in agricultural investment, farming asset prices, and manufacturing activity. Elements of the decline in agriculture persisted through 1920,” according to a 2018 National Bureau of Economic Research analysis. Harvests collapsed in the south during and after the Civil War; cotton output fell by half between 1860 and 1870. A 1997 analysis in theJournal of Economic History concluded that “the legacy of the Civil War was far more severe and long lasting than what has been previously supposed” for both blacks and whites, especially regarding illnesses such as hookworm spread in part by poverty.
After the Civil War, politicians and many historians consecrated the conflict as a moral crusade and its sometimes-grisly tactics were consigned to oblivion. The habit of sweeping abusive policies under the rug also permeated post-Civil War policy toward the Indians (Sheridan famously declared, “The only good Indian is a dead Indian”) and the suppression of Filipino insurgents after the Spanish-American War. Later, historians would often ignore U.S. military tactics in World War II, Vietnam, and Iraq that resulted in massive civilian casualties.
The U.S. government’s targeting of civilians in the final campaigns of the Civil War signified a radical change in the relation between citizens and government that endured long after the South’s surrender at Appomattox. An 1875 article in the American Law Review noted, “The late war left the average American politician with a powerful desire to acquire property from other people without paying for it.” Ironically, a war that stemmed in large part from the blunders and follies of politicians on both sides of the Potomac resulted in a vast expansion of the political class’s presumption of power.
In the post-war era in the late 1800s, Republican politicians were notorious for invoking the “bloody shirt” of wounded veterans to demonize political opponents who did not tow the GOP line. After the September 11 terrorist attacks, America saw the same political vilification of anyone who dissented from the Bush administration’s wars. Will the same groveling reflex occur from any wars launched by the next president?
Since 1864, no prudent American should have expected this nation’s wars to have happy or uplifting endings. Unfortunately, as long as people rarely if ever hear of the atrocities their government commits, citizens will underestimate the odds that wars will spawn debacles and injustices that return to haunt us.
US universities losing hundreds of billions as top Chinese scientists and researchers go home
Inside China Business | September 29, 2024
Research and Development (R&D) is a major profit center for the top universities in the United States. Besides the nearly $100 billion they earn in grants from the US government and private sources, university-based researchers create patents and inventions that generate many more billions annually.
China is the largest foreign source of scientists and researchers, and they are concentrated in the hard sciences and in engineering, where over 95% of R&D spending takes place. But since 2018, Chinese scientists are increasingly deciding to return to China to set up new research departments. Of those who are still in the US, over 60% admit they are strongly considering moving, and over half now refuse to work on projects that involve funding by US government sources.
To American universities, the loss of these scientists, along with future contributions to scientific research and commercial applications and market value, are incalculable. But losses probably already exceed a trillion dollars, given the departures of so many top scientists in Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, medicine, biochemistry, materials science, nanotechnology, and quantum computing.
Resources and links:
More Chinese Students Are Staying in China to Study https://erudera.com/news/more-chinese…
Surge in Chinese Scientists Leaving US for Home Institutions https://erudera.com/news/surge-in-chi…
Caught in the crossfire: Fears of Chinese–American scientists https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas…
Scientists of Chinese descent leaving the US at an accelerating pace https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/s…
Reverse Brain Drain? Exploring Trends among Chinese Scientists in the U.S. https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-…
Resources on the Patent Revenue Budget Model https://financeandbusiness.ucdavis.ed…
R&D Expenditures at U.S. Universities Increased by $8 Billion in FY 2022 https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf24307
South China Morning Post, Nanotech pioneer Wang Zhonglin leaves US to work in China ‘full time’ https://www.scmp.com/news/china/scien…
SCMP, The Chinese scientists leaving top US universities to take up high-profile roles in China, boosting Beijing in its race for global talent https://www.scmp.com/news/china/scien…
Closing scene, Suzhou, Jiangsu
Germany Should Pursue Charges for Nord Stream Blasts & Point Out US Role – Bundestag MP
Sputnik – 30.09.2024
The German federal government should immediately bring charges for the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines and point out the violation of anti-terrorism treaties by the United States or other countries involved, Bundestag member Steffen Kotre told Sputnik.
In a conversation on the sidelines of Russian Energy Week, he suggested that Washington had probably been involved in the destruction of the gas pipelines. Kotre does not know to what extent Kiev was involved, but, from his point of view, it is difficult to believe that Ukraine could have carried out such an action without outside help. Kotre also believes that the German authorities know who is guilty of what happened, and if not, then the information will certainly be found in the Swedish, Norwegian or US intelligence services.
“That is why the federal government must immediately press charges and, of course, point out that the United States or other countries have violated international treaties, namely agreements aimed at preventing terrorism. And anyone who helps and encourages this violates these international agreements aimed at preventing the spread of terrorism. And all this must be said. And, of course, claims for damages in international courts and much more,” the lawmaker emphasized.
The explosions on two Russian export gas pipelines to Europe — Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 — occurred on September 26, 2022. Germany, Denmark and Sweden have not ruled out deliberate sabotage. Nord Stream AG, the operator of Nord Stream, said that the destruction of the gas pipelines was unprecedented, and it was impossible to estimate the repair time. The Russian Prosecutor General’s Office initiated a case on an act of international terrorism. Russia has repeatedly requested data on the explosions on Nord Stream, but has never received it, according to Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
The Russian Energy Week was held in Moscow from September 26 to 28. Sputnik acted as the forum’s media partner.
30 Lawmakers Sponsor Bill to End Liability Protection for Vaccine Makers
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 30, 2024
A bill introduced late last week in the U.S. House of Representatives would end the liability protections Congress gave vaccine makers under the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
Thirty Republican lawmakers signed on as co-sponsors to House Bill 9828, End the Vaccine Carveout Act. The proposed legislation would end the broad protection from liability for injuries resulting from vaccines listed on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Childhood Immunization Schedule.
“The … vaccine makers are criminal enterprises that have paid tens of billions in criminal penalties over the past decade,” Children’s Health Defense (CHD) founder and chairman on leave Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a statement on the bill.
Kennedy, who has long advocated for eliminating liability protection for vaccine manufacturers, added, “By freeing them from liability for negligence, the 1986 statute removed any incentive for these companies to make safe products. If we want safe and effective vaccines we need to end the liability shield.”
CHD, React19 and The American Family Project also supported the development of the bill, the press release said.
REACT19 founder Brianne Dressen, who experienced a debilitating COVID-19 vaccine injury as a volunteer in AstraZeneca’s clinical trial, announced the bill and its co-sponsors in a post on X, formerly Twitter.
“People harmed are long overdue for a compensation process that actually works, and it’s time for the drug companies to pick up the tab,” she said.
‘Complex sham compensation program’ in place since 1986 act
Congress passed the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to address the risks of vaccines — which Congress and vaccine makers acknowledged had “unavoidable” side effects.
The act set up a “no-fault” system whereby instead of suing the manufacturers, people injured by vaccines can file a claim with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which adjudicates the claims.
The VICP was meant to insulate vaccine makers from lawsuits that could bankrupt them while ensuring that injury victims had a straightforward, non-adversarial and fair path to compensation.
The program is funded by a 75-cent-per-dose tax, paid by vaccine makers, for every vaccine included in the program.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services administers the VICP, also known as the “vaccine court.” Court-appointed “special masters” — typically lawyers who previously represented the U.S. government — manage and decide the individual claims.
The proceedings are more informal than a typical courtroom. There is no judge or jury, and the rules of evidence, civil procedure and discovery do not apply.
In practice, getting compensation through the VICP has been notoriously difficult. Critics say the program has devolved to protect government agencies and corporations rather than the health of vaccinated children.
CHD CEO Mary Holland said the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Injury Act effectively left parents and children injured by vaccines with no substantive way to get any compensation while giving vaccine makers a free pass.
“For over 35 years, parents of children injured and killed by government-recommended vaccines have been left with no meaningful redress — only a complex, sham compensation program that pits grieving families against the government, while Big Pharma enjoys no liability,” she said.
“During that same time, chronic health conditions in children — autism, ADHD [attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder], severe allergies, asthma — have skyrocketed,” Holland said.
In some cases, people who are dissatisfied with the outcome of their case in the VICP, or who don’t get a timely decision, can sue the manufacturer for limited causes of action, such as fraud — as is the case in many of the over 200 gardasil injury lawsuits currently being argued against Merck in federal court.
Special protections for COVID drugmakers
Vaccines administered under emergency use authorization (EUA), such as the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, aren’t covered by the VICP.
Instead, COVID-19 vaccine makers are protected from all liability by the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which grants producers of vaccines, medications and medical devices total freedom from liability for any injuries arising from “countermeasures” used to address a public health or national security threat.
The PREP Act directs such “countermeasures” to be covered by the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).
While the FDA fully licensed versions of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines for people ages 12 and up, it’s unclear if the fully licensed formulations are being administered, or if some people are still receiving EUA formulations.
COVID-19 vaccines for infants and children ages 6 months through age 11 have not yet been fully licensed — however, they were added to the childhood schedule.
Still, all COVID-19 vaccine injuries — whether from a fully licensed or EUA formulation — remain covered only through the CICP.
However, for the tens of thousands of people injured by the COVID-19 vaccine, compensation through this program has proven nearly impossible.
To date, the CICP has paid only 16 claims for COVID-19 vaccine injuries, totaling $425,301.55. Except for one payment, all of the claims resulted in compensation of $8,962 or less.
The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines were fully approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for people ages 12 and up, however those vaccines continue , and added to the childhood schedule, they are still not even included in the VICP process.
During the pandemic, Pfizer and Moderna generated the largest profits in history for a drug from their COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Pfizer made $37 billion in 2021, and slightly more in 2023 from the COVID-19 vaccine alone. Moderna generated over $18 billion in profits in 2021 and $19 billion in 2022.
The most current data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) show that between Dec. 14, 2020, and Aug. 30, 2024, a total of 1,602,516 total adverse events related to the COVID-19 vaccine were reported to VAERS, including 37,390 deaths. There were 311,544 serious injuries reported.
Research also shows that VAERS tends to provide an underestimation of vaccine injuries. Most people don’t report their vaccine injuries to VAERS. Research also has shown that many VAERS reports are delayed or deleted from public view for reasons that are not transparent.
Several lawsuits are currently challenging the constitutionality of the PREP Act, and others have made legal arguments that the PREP Act doesn’t apply in particular cases. However, recently many of these cases have been dismissed in state and federal courts.
Last week, after the Nevada Supreme Court dismissed a case against a man injured by remdesivir, a drug covered by the Prep Act, Kim Mack Rosenberg, general counsel for CHD, told The Defender the decision highlighted “that we need legislative action to undo the damage created by acts such as PREP and the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.”
What the ‘urgently needed’ legislation will do
Holland said the End the Vaccine Carveout Act is “urgently needed”:
“This legislation will help end Big Pharma’s reign over government. The corrupt public-private partnership of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has suppressed science, stacked the deck against families, subverted the democratic marketplace of checks and balances, and removed citizens’ rights to a trial by jury.
“Americans deserve better.”
The bill proposes to remove the requirement for vaccine-injured people to pursue compensation in the vaccine court. Under the law, someone injured by a vaccine would be able to pursue civil action against a vaccine maker, and to seek compensation through the VICP or both.
However, once a person is awarded compensation in civil court, they will no longer be eligible for compensation through the VICP.
The 1986 law also set a short statute of limitations for seeking injury compensation to two or three years of the death or injury, respectively. However, it often takes longer than that for people to realize that a vaccine caused their injury or illness.
The proposed law would allow anyone injured since the program became effective in 1988 to file a lawsuit.
Finally, the bill would end the protection from liability for the COVID-19 vaccines, allowing people injured by the vaccine to sue the vaccine makers in court.
“COVID-19 vaccines must be redefined as vaccines and not ‘countermeasures,’ so that the PREP Act’s liability carveout can no longer apply,” according to a white paper that provided justification for the bill.
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.
Facebook Gave CDC ‘Backdoor’ Access to Help Remove Millions of Social Media Posts
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | September 30, 2024
Facebook provided the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “backdoor” access to its platform so the CDC could submit requests to remove COVID-19 “misinformation,” according to an internal Facebook document made public for the first time as part of an ongoing legal case.
America First Legal filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2021, after then-White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki revealed the Biden administration was flagging purported “disinformation” on social media platforms, including content posted by members of the so-called “Disinformation Dozen.”
When the Biden administration didn’t comply with the FOIA request, America First Legal sued, leading to the release of the documents as part of the discovery process.
According to Reclaim the Net, in 2021, Facebook developed a “Content Request System” (see pages 54-72) — also called a “Government Reporting System” — accessible to CDC staff. The documents show Facebook “was operating as the de facto enforcement arm of the US government’s thought control initiative.”
The Facebook-CDC partnership helped Facebook remove millions of posts, the documents show.
Gene Hamilton, executive director of America First Legal, told The Defender, “These documents show precisely how one of the social media platforms facilitated the federal government’s engagement in unconstitutional censorship activities.”
“The federal government cannot violate the First Amendment by outsourcing censorship to the private sector, yet these documents clearly show that Facebook and the Biden-Harris administration collaborated and colluded on removing speech that did not comport with the federal government’s preferences,” Hamilton said.
Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, told The Defender that following the release of the “Twitter Files,” it should not come as a surprise “that the government has been actively trying to censor citizens through back doors and loopholes.”
“This censorship effort is yet another example of a public-private collaboration that fuses corporation and state,” Hinchliffe said. “Where the government can’t legally censor, it has the private sector to do its bidding. The question here is how much coercion was needed for Facebook to provide the backdoor?”
These latest revelations come as other entities ramp up their own efforts to target purported “misinformation” and “disinformation.”
On Thursday, the World Health Organization (WHO) and TikTok announced a new partnership to promote “science-based information.” Meanwhile, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), a Big Pharma lobbying group, this month urged the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to “expand drug manufacturers’ powers to correct misinformation about their products.”
‘Red-carpet treatment’ for government to ‘silence critics and manage dissent’
Calling it a “fast lane for speech suppression,” Reclaim the Net reported that Facebook “built a slick ‘end-to-end workflow’ tailored to the White House’s censorship needs,” which provided CDC staff with a four-step process to flag COVID-19 “misinformation” for removal.
“This was the red-carpet treatment for anyone in the Biden Administration looking to silence critics and manage dissent,” Reclaim the Net reported. “The system could handle up to twenty censorship requests simultaneously.”
The Facebook document stated, “We empower and safeguard users with policies that are: Principled, Operable, Explicable.” These policies were aligned with Facebook’s “community standards” and adopted “a multi-pronged approach to combating COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation.”
The policies — aimed at “bringing 50 million people a step closer to vaccinations” — included the removal of “false information that has been debunked by public health experts.”
Other types of content Facebook explicitly targeted include claims that COVID-19 is no more dangerous to people than the common flu or cold, and content discouraging “good health practices” — such as wearing a face mask, social distancing, getting tested for COVID-19 and getting vaccinated against COVID-19.
Claims about the COVID-19 vaccines’ safety, side effects and efficacy also were targeted for removal, as were “widely debunked vaccine hoaxes” — including claims that vaccines cause autism.
The document also revealed that as of 2021, Facebook and Instagram had removed “more than 16 million pieces of content … for violating our COVID-19 and vaccine policies.”
Repeat offenders faced restrictions, including (but not limited to) reduced distribution, removal from recommendations, or “removal from our site.”
The platform also allowed government officials to bypass federal transparency laws.
“By using this specialized portal, and not email, the government could skirt those pesky federal record-keeping laws. FOIA requests? Public oversight? Forget about it. The new system made sure government actions were neatly tucked away in proprietary software,” Reclaim the Net reported.
‘The closest thing to a Ministry of Truth’
According to Reclaim the Net, Robert Flaherty, then-White House director of Digital Strategy and now a member of Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign, was “barking orders at Facebook to tighten the leash.”
“Twitter Files” documents have shown that Flaherty pressured social media platforms to censor the accounts of public figures such Robert F. Kennedy Jr., then-chairman and chief litigation counsel of Children’s Health Defense (now chairman on leave). Kennedy was one of the figures named in “The Disinformation Dozen” report.
“The bureaucratic whims of entrenched CDC personnel and leadership determined what Americans could and could not say — the closest thing to a Ministry of Truth you can imagine in the United States,” Hamilton said.
Author Naomi Wolf, Ph.D., co-founder and CEO of DailyClout, told The Defender, “This shocking new revelation of still more unlawful pressure by the U.S. government on social media companies to strip Americans of First Amendment rights, also fails to shock as it is evidence added to a mountain of documentation of such collusion.”
According to Hamilton, these and other documents may affect several ongoing lawsuits against the Biden administration on First Amendment grounds.
“As more records are uncovered through our lawsuit and other open records requests, as well as discovery in litigation, we are confident that courts will have the definitive links necessary to show the government’s facilitation of an unconstitutional censorship enterprise,” Hamilton said.
The latest revelations came just a month after Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta — parent company of Facebook and Instagram — admitted that Biden administration officials pressured Meta to censor content related to COVID-19 during the pandemic.
“If the government can exert that much pressure on one of the largest platforms and its CEO, then it can do it to anybody,” Hinchliffe said.
In an interview earlier this month on “The Kim Iversen Show,” former U.S. State Department official Mike Benz, founder and executive director of the Foundation for Freedom Online, said the U.S. government coerced social media platforms to use “weapons of mass deletion” to censor content and as a workaround to the First Amendment.
According to Benz, this includes government coercion obliging these platforms to adopt automated censorship tools which employ artificial intelligence to sweep platforms for specific keywords or narratives. Benz said many of these tools were initially developed a decade ago for the fight against ISIS.
Benz said the U.S. government urged authorities in the United Kingdom and European Union (EU) to pass censorship laws, in order to then sidestep the First Amendment at home by obliging social media platforms to comply with more restrictive foreign laws.
Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst told The Defender the EU uses legislation such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) “to stop free speech outside EU borders.”
“According to the EU, the DSA prevents illegal and harmful activities online and protects fundamental rights,” Terhorst said. This means that the EU Commission can decide what is right and what is wrong, including ‘harmful disinformation.’”
TikTok ‘a propaganda arm’ of the United Nations?
TikTok and the WHO on Sept. 26 announced a new collaboration targeting health-related “misinformation.” The year-long partnership is “aimed at providing people with reliable, science-based health information.”
According to the WHO, the new collaboration will promote “evidence-based content and encourage positive health dialogues.”
The WHO quoted Chief Scientist Jeremy Farrar, who said, “This collaboration can prove to be an inflection point in how platforms can be more socially-responsible.”
Farrar collaborated with Dr. Anthony Fauci and key virologists to draft “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2,” published March 2020 in Nature Medicine. The paper has been used by media and the U.S. government to debunk the lab-leak theory of the COVID-19 outbreak and accuse its proponents of being “conspiracy theorists.”
According to public health physician Dr. David Bell, partnerships like the one between the WHO and TikTok are inappropriate. He told The Defender :
“WHO, as an organization subject to member states and with no direct standing over their citizens, should not be involved in such direct messaging. This is a clear infringement of the rights, role and sovereignty of the states themselves.
“WHO acts increasingly like a tool of colonialist corporate interests as it pushes their messages over the top of legitimate authorities and interferes in the running of health systems within countries.”
According to Hinchliffe, this is not the first TikTok partnership with the United Nations (U.N.). As part of a previous project, Team Halo, “the U.N. trained scientists and doctors on TikTok and worked with TikTok to boost their profiles in an effort to combat ‘misinformation’ while promoting ‘authoritative sources’ during the pandemic.”
“This latest partnership shows that TikTok is honored to once again be a propaganda arm for the U.N.,” Hinchliffe said.
The WHO previously established similar partnerships with other social media platforms, including YouTube, which last year revised its “medical misinformation” policy to allow for the deletion of content that contradicts WHO guidance.
The announcement of the TikTok partnership with the WHO — a U.N. agency — comes just days after U.N. member states passed the Pact for the Future.
The pact’s “Information Integrity on Digital Platforms” policy brief addresses “threats to information integrity,” such as so-called “misinformation” and “disinformation,” calling for the promotion of “empirically-backed consensus around facts, science and knowledge” — without clarifying how this “consensus” would be determined.
The TikTok partnership with the WHO also comes before the January 2025 legislative deadline for TikTok to divest its U.S. operations or face shutdown in the U.S.
Pharma wants expanded powers to ‘correct misinformation’
In another related development lobbyists for Big Pharma earlier this month asked the FDA “to expand drug manufacturers’ powers to correct misinformation about their products, including by allowing them to respond to opinions, value judgments or personal experiences and communications made offline,” Fierce Pharma reported.
The call was a response to the FDA’s draft guidance on “Addressing Misinformation About Medical Devices and Prescription Drugs.” Released in July and now open for public comment, the guidance would allow pharmaceutical companies to issue “tailored” responses to internet-based posts about their products, and “general medical product communications” that would address “misinformation.”
According to Fierce Pharma, “The FDA proposed prohibiting companies from posting tailored responsive communications in response to misinformation spread offline and in response to an individual’s posts about their own experience, opinion and value judgments. PhRMA wants the FDA to lift those restrictions.”
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.
Joe Biden Is Responsible for Burning Lebanon
By Daniel Larison | The Libertarian Institute | September 30, 2024
The Joe Biden administration claims to be pushing for a “temporary ceasefire” between Israel and Hezbollah to avert a larger conflict, but this is very late in the day and it is not a serious effort to prevent a new war in Lebanon. It is at best a desperate, last-minute exercise in going through the motions of diplomacy. The administration would like to pretend that it is a passive bystander pleading from the sidelines instead of the chief patron and arms supplier of the main belligerent in the conflict, and it designs its entreaties to be toothless so that Israel can safely ignore them.
The United States has refused to exert any pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government for the last eleven months, and it has continued supplying Israel with weapons no matter how those weapons have been used to commit war crimes against Palestinians. Now American officials say that they don’t want further escalation in Lebanon, but once again the administration won’t back up those words with action. The U.S. could use its leverage to rein Israel in and insist on the de-escalation that the administration says that it wants, but the president has shown that he has no interest in doing that.
The empty Gaza ceasefire negotiations prove as much. The ceasefire talks have become an interminable process designed to lead nowhere. The administration has catered to the Netanyahu government’s preferences at every turn. Each time that Netanyahu adds new deal-breakers or otherwise seeks to derail negotiations with new attacks, the administration has dutifully taken his side and pretended that Hamas is the sole obstacle to securing an agreement. The United States cannot be a credible diplomatic actor in the region when its primary role is acting as Netanyahu’s PR agent.
The Israeli government assumes that the U.S. won’t withhold weapons, diplomatic support, or military protection under any circumstances, and that has encouraged Netanyahu to pursue increasingly aggressive goals. Because the U.S. shields Israel from military reprisals, as it did earlier this year during Iran’s missile and drone strikes, it has given Netanyahu free rein to lash out whenever and wherever he wants. The administration has dressed all of this up as preventing a wider regional war, but the reality is that they have simply delayed the conflagration while making it more likely that it will be even more destructive when it occurs.
The total failure of the administration’s policy is there for all to see. The region is likely facing a new Israeli invasion of Lebanon, and that invasion will have serious destabilizing effects on the wider region. This is the disaster that the United States has claimed to oppose all along, but in practice it has done nothing to stop it. Had the U.S. truly wanted the war in Gaza not to spread, it would have demanded a lasting ceasefire months ago. Had the U.S. wanted to prevent escalation in Lebanon, it would be cutting off arms transfers and pulling back its forces from the region rather than rushing more troops to the Middle East. Instead the United States has done everything that one would expect it to do if it wished to set the region ablaze.
The U.S. is at great risk of being ensnared in this larger war. It is imperative that our country avoid direct involvement in Israel’s conflicts. The U.S. has no vital interests at stake in these fights. The president has no authority to involve American forces directly. It is not the responsibility of the United States to bail out a reckless client state when it gets in over its head. The quickest way to force the Israeli government to deescalate is to deprive it of the support and protection that it takes for granted.
Once the current crisis is over, U.S. foreign policy in the region has to be radically overhauled. To avoid future entanglements in the wars of client states, the U.S. should downgrade its relationships with the Middle Eastern governments that rely heavily on American weapons supplies and protection. The United States has no formal commitments to defend these states, and it should not extend security guarantees to any of them. The U.S. also needs to reduce its military presence in the region to the bare minimum required to secure our embassies. Decades of extensive American military involvement in this part of the world have been ruinous for the countries of the region and for American interests, and it is in the best interests of all concerned for the United States to get out.
“under the Intermediate Scenario”
Tony Heller | September 24, 2024
NOAA has launched a new sea level website which is based on unsupportable claims and appeals to authority.
Of Cool Heads and Hot Heads
By Philip Kraske • Unz Review • September 29, 2024
Ever more desperate, Israel is working hard to start a world war with the United States on its side. The elimination of Hassan Nasrallah won’t make much difference to Hezbollah’s fight; the new leader will soon step up. But Israel might regret the absence of the cool-headed Nasrallah.
Cool-headedness has actually been the norm this past year, and is among the few hopeful notes on the international scene. Lots of leaders are keeping calm, holding back the factions in their governments that would love to take a crack at the folks thumbing their military noses at them.
China merely tut-tuts about foreign navy ships traversing the Strait of Taiwan, Hezbollah keeps its big missiles in their silos, Iran responds to Israeli attacks with a few half-hearted firecrackers, and Vladimir Putin frowns and issues warning after warning when Ukraine, with Nato help, hits Russian refineries and radar installations. Meanwhile Egypt, Jordan, Iran, Syria, and Turkey — and I’ve probably missed a few — itch to put holes in Israeli runways.
But restraint is the watchword. Unlike before World War One, when governments decided to declare war from one day to the next, countries are looking before they leap. Why? To what do the world’s citizens owe this clear shift to reluctance among national leaders to jump into conflict? It’s often been observed that nuclear weapons have kept the peace among the great powers. Nowadays, however, other elements keep the peace just as well. Here are the three most important ones.
The first is economic. It’s true that capitalist consumerism has atomized the citizenry, but it also keeps people quiet. National leaders figure that the only way to keep everybody fed and employed and hypnotized by Netflix series is to keep the economy running. Take tourism, for example — a labor-intensive industry that absorbs a lot of workers with little formal education. Israel’s has been hammered. Who wants to retrace the steps of Christ in the Holy Land amidst the squall of sirens announcing incoming missiles from Hezbollah? Israel now has to rotate its forces in and out of the military just to keep the economy going. But they’re finally going to throw the Palestinians out, and figure it’s worth the tradeoff.
Other touristy countries have much less to gain. In Turkey, tourism makes up more than ten percent of the economy, and is still growing. In Egypt, it’s 24 percent. Take that away, and the ensuing unrest will topple governments. But their leaders have less to gain from tackling Israel.
The second element is strategic. Just over the last several years, war has turned into a video game of missiles and missile-defenses and drones of all different kinds. As the commentator Alistair Crooke has observed, American aircraft carriers parked in the eastern Mediterranean look like something out of the 1950s. A couple of missiles sent from Crimea would send them to the bottom of the sea in a question of minutes.
Conventional war has all but disappeared. Imagine what would happen to American troop and supply ships traversing the Atlantic. If German U-boats sank nearly three thousand, Russians would sink every one of them, and not from a dank submarine but from a cosy office in Moscow. And crossing the Pacific to attack China would be a suicide mission.
National governments see the destruction wrought by Russian missiles — not its army shelling villages, but the attacks from afar on major cities and infrastructure — and they quickly figure that restraint is the better part of valor.
The third element that makes governments hesitate to get into a fight is that societies are far more fragile than before. Imagine what would happen if the Chinese got mad at the Americans and dropped a few missiles on highway overpasses, which then collapsed highways, between San Diego and San Francisco. Of course, hackers could wreak havoc on just about everything, but if software defenses proved troublesome to them, a couple of missiles — or just bombs placed by hired thugs — on data centers would quickly affect the internet in all kinds of random ways. Well-paid jokers could send drones flying around Atlanta and Chicago airports — or Istanbul’s or Frankfurt’s or Tokyo’s — closing them down. And if some leader were in a bloody frame of mind, he could order the downing of just two commercial airliners, one taking off in Paris and the other in Miami — and watch every flight reservation in the the western hemisphere get canceled in an hour. Citizens of the world’s poorest countries would finally have the last laugh.
In fact, there is a never-declared Mutually Assured Destruction that restrains governments, or quasi-governments like Hezbollah. All to the good, except that conventional war seems to be morphing into terrorism. Now that Israel has opened the Pandora’s box of booby-trapping consumer items, how long will it be before desk lamps — or shoes or avocados — begin to explode in Tel Aviv? Will Kurds need to take apart their Turkish-made earphones? As readers of Unz.com know, attacking China is far more cost-effective through untraceable biological attacks against its people and livestock, and invites no revenge — at least for the moment.
Israel’s attack with pagers and radios, Ukraine’s worthless drone strikes on Moscow apartment buildings, America’s aimless pecking at “terrorists” in Syria and Iraq — these are harbingers of the terrorist world to come.
And as defeat approaches, the losers are bound to raise the ante — especially the Israelis and Ukrainians. As in World War Two, the years of war have corroded their last vestige of ethics, and they know that the Washington elite will ultimately excuse their tactics. The western media would give nothing but dashing accounts of how Zelensky and Netanyahu — harried, exhausted, yet persevering — listened to their advisers, rubbed their necks, and gave the green lights to “limited” chemical or nuclear attacks against advancing enemies. For an excellent example of how flexible, how downright protean, mainstream journalists can be, read New York Times columnist Amanda Taub’s article on the legality of Israel bombing of the Iranian consulate in Damascus: “Israel Bombed an Iranian Embassy Complex. Is That Allowed?” She concludes that it was.
In short, if Hezbollah’s next leader, not so restrained as Nesrallah, unleashes missile hell down the whole length of Israel, Netanyahu and his hard-eyed friends may come to regret finishing him off. Doesn’t history tell the best jokes?
Featured Video
Did the 9/11 Hijackers Really Fly the Planes?
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Excerpt
Biden’s Closed Circle on Russia
An excerpt from ‘The Great Betrayal’
By James W. Carden | The Realist Review | June 14, 2026
Joe Biden’s presidency may ultimately come to be seen as a cautionary tale. Here was a president who showed little interest in entertaining arguments that might have contradicted his most deeply held assumptions.[1] And there were precious few within the upper ranks of the administration who might have attempted to do so, after all, only policy hands and political operatives who had come up through the ranks of the Clinton and Obama administrations or had longstanding ties to the citadels of the foreign policy community were invited into the fold. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- UN: Israel continues to violate Lebanon airspace in defiance of Iran-US MoU
- Araghchi: Israeli occupation of Lebanese land a violation of MoU
- Hezbollah fighters confront intruding Israeli forces in southern Lebanon
- The Straight of Hormuz is Open for Iranian Business… Oil is Moving and Iran is Getting Paid
- Biden’s Closed Circle on Russia
- Lebanon Accuses Israel Of Violating The Chemical Weapons Convention By Spraying Toxic Herbicide Over Farmland
- Did the 9/11 Hijackers Really Fly the Planes?
- ‘Jewish lobby’ deceived Putin – Lukashenko
- The UK Joins the Pirates
- Israeli government plans to fund extremist occupier group in occupied West Bank with $1.89M: Report
- If Americans Knew
- Israel’s former defense minister compares settler ideology to Nazism
- The Pro-Israel Lobby’s Quiet Cash Shuffle
- Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) Propagandizes for Israel’s Wars
- A grim milestone: Gaza’s death toll surpasses 73,000 – Daily Update
- Jared Kushner’s Israel-linked island, and other dubious projects
- Why Are Crypto Billionaires and AIPAC Spending $8+ Million to Elect Adrian Boafo?
- Why the Mainstream Media Should Stop Using the ADL as Their Go-To Antisemitism Source
- Censorship and Thuggery Won’t Save Israel’s Reputation
- Israel Searches for a Red Sea Foothold in Somaliland
- They Weren’t Convicted of Terrorism, But These Palestine Activists Got Sentenced as Terrorists Anyway
- No Tricks Zone
- Beyond The Pitch: Why FIFA’s World Cup Is One Of Humanity’s Best Investments
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
- Germany’s Ecological Holocaust… Once Fairy Tale Forests Getting Cleared For Wind Turbines
- A Grand Solar Minimum Has Arrived…Global Cooling Of At Least 1°C Is Expected By The 2030s, 2040s
- European “Expert Commission” Urges COVID-19-Like Global Climate State Of Energency!
Aletho News 