The effort by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Maine Secretary of State to, in their respective states, keep Trump off the presidential race ballot in the name of enforcing the “insurrection provision” of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution is an atrocious abuse of power. So too was the last time the provision was used as a reason to bar an individual from holding an elected office in the United States government.
A little over a hundred years ago, Victor Berger was twice barred from joining the US House of Representatives after winning election to that office. Why? Eric Boehm, tells the story in a Friday Reason article:
Berger was born in Austria and immigrated to the United States as a young man. In 1910, he won a seat in Congress representing Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and served a single two-year term. After being defeated in 1912, Berger remained active in left-wing politics and opposed America’s entry into the First World War. In 1918, he was convicted (along with several other Socialist organizers) of having violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which effectively criminalized any criticism of the war effort.
Officially, Berger was found guilty of 26 “disloyal acts” related to a series of editorials published by the Milwaukee Leader, a paper Berger helped run, arguing against America’s involvement in the war.
Despite that conviction—or perhaps because of it—Berger was elected to Congress again in 1918. His campaign called for the country to respect free speech and freedom of the press, and he continued to push for an “early, general, lasting and democratic peace.” (Naturally, he also campaigned for a variety of typically terrible Socialist ideas too, like the nationalization of industries.)
Here’s where Section 3 of the 14th Amendment popped up. Congress refused to seat Berger when he showed up to work in January 1919, on the grounds that his Espionage Act conviction was tantamount to engaging in insurrection against the country. The vote was nearly unanimous, 311-1, with the lone dissenting vote cast by a Wisconsin Republican.
A special election was held in December 1919 to fill the still-vacant seat, and Berger won again—this time earning even more votes than he had a year earlier. Again, a majority in Congress voted to block Berger from taking his seat.
After his conviction was then thrown out by the US Supreme Court due to his trial judge’s prejudice preventing a fair trial, Boehm relates that Berger was elected in 1922 to the US House and “seated without controversy” before being reelected in 1924 and 1926.
Notably, no court or state election official kept Berger from running for office. The only barrier came from the House that has a history of exercising a broader discretion over its membership. This broader discretion is suggested by Article I Section 5 provisions stating that the US House and US Senate shall each “be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its Own Members” and may, “with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.”
Adam Dick worked from 2003 through 2013 as a legislative aide for Rep. Ron Paul. Previously, he was a member of the Wisconsin State Board of Elections, a co-manager of Ed Thompson’s 2002 Wisconsin governor campaign, and a lawyer in New York and Connecticut.
Google has agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit filed in 2020, claiming its Chrome browser secretly tracked the internet activity of millions of people, even when they were using the ‘Incognito’ setting, Reuters reported on Thursday.
Filed in the Northern District of California, the lawsuit accused the US tech giant of continuing to “track, collect, and identify browsing data in real time” when users thought they were doing their browsing privately.
The plaintiffs alleged that sites using Google’s analytics collected information from browsers in ‘Incognito’ mode, including web page content, device data, and IP addresses.
The complainants said this turned Google into an “unaccountable trove of information” by letting the company learn about their friends, hobbies, favorite foods, shopping habits, and “potentially embarrassing things.”
They also accused Google of taking Chrome users’ private browsing activity and then associating it with their already existing user profiles.
In August, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers rejected Google’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit, pointing out that the company had never revealed to its users that data collection continued even when using private mode.
“Google’s motion hinges on the idea that plaintiffs consented to Google collecting their data while they were browsing in private mode,” Rogers ruled. “Because Google never explicitly told users that it does so, the Court cannot find as a matter of law that users explicitly consented to the at-issue data collection.”
The lawsuit, filed by Florida resident William Byatt and California residents Chasom Brown and Maria Nguyen, covers “millions” of Google users since June 2016. It sought at least $5 billion, or about $5,000 in damages per user, for violations of wiretap laws.
According to the notice filed earlier this week, Google and the plaintiffs have reached a preliminary settlement that will result in the litigation being dismissed. Settlement terms were not disclosed, but, according to Reuters, the lawyers said they have agreed to a binding term sheet through mediation, and are expected to present a formal settlement for court approval by February 24, 2024.
As context is very important for all videos; this message is to confirm that the purpose of this video is reporting on or documenting the content. Note that we make an effort to research for context and cite our sources when necessary.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich on Friday once again turned down US request to transfer tax money collected by Tel Aviv to the Palestinian Authority as the allies remain divided on the issue, Anadolu Agency reports.
Not a single shekel (Israeli currency) will be sent to Gaza as long as “I am Finance Minister,” Smotrich said in a statement.
He has a high respect for the US, whom he describes as Israel’s best ally in the world, but the minister said, “We will never abandon our fate to others.”
“This is not an extremist position. This is a position which desires life, and which is required by the situation,” the right-wing minister added.
Since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza on 7 October, Smotrich repeatedly voiced absolute rejection of fully transferring the Palestinian taxes that Israel collects for the Palestinian Authority.
In November, he conditionally approved the transfer of taxes to Palestinians by deducting the amount allocated to Gaza by the Palestinian Authority.
On Thursday, the American Axios website reported that US President Joe Biden had “a difficult conversation” with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about withholding part of the tax revenue of the Palestinian Authority.
Axios cited a US official, who said the US administration is concerned that “an economic collapse of the Palestinian Authority could lead to a violent escalation in the occupied West Bank as a result of it not being able to pay its security forces their salaries.”
The tax revenues – known in Palestine and Israel as maqasa – are collected by the Israeli government on behalf of the Palestinian Authority on Palestinian imports and exports and Israel in return earns a commission of 3%.
The revenues are estimated to total around $188 million every month and represent the main source of income for the Palestinian Authority.
The Palestinian government uses these funds to pay the salaries of public employees and retirees, who number 140,000 and 53,000, respectively.
Closing days of the book I am writing for and with Dr. James Thorp, I tackled, this evening, the persona, the figure, the puppet, the vaccine “brand ambassador” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, who kicked off—as you know—a mass die off event of American babies at every stage of gestation, and after birth.
Once they branded the shots as “safe and effective” in pregnancy, they were able to psychologically roll in and colonize the whole world.
Naturally, Walensky came from the AIDS cabal.
I listened to this exchange between Marjorie Taylor Greene and Walensky, and felt the familiar despair of watching corporate public health murderers wriggle free because they do not recognize language. Rather, they deploy their own. They answer something not asked. They answer concrete questions about mass death with goal-post moving deflections about how great their apparatus is.
This is the stuff of very advanced narcissists. Or maybe “public health officials” are their own category of narcissists. (Presumptuous, false, no soul, no empathy, very busy cleaning up the world of all that lives.)
Still, I don’t know how to write about this person, Rochelle Walensky. It’s impossible to know anything about her.
When you watch this, if you watch it, consider my (forthcoming in 2024) new direction, which is to analyze how Monarch programming operates.
The two women sound very different. How does Walensky manage to not break a sweat, manage to say so sanguine?
Also, why didn’t she “have any plans” for a new position after leaving the CD? And why did she leave? Or why was she fired? She performed perfectly.
Here she speaks to the CDC’s desire to “vaccinate” perfectly healthy children.
MOSCOW – Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on Friday called for leveraging all the accumulated experience for solving the Middle East crisis under a Russia-proposed new mechanism of external support that would involve the regional countries.
In November, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov proposed the creation of a mechanism of external support to ensure the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying that it should be representative and involve the regional nations, which the Quartet on the Middle East had failed to do.
“A special updated mechanism is needed. You ask why is the Quartet not enough? I will quote Sergey Lavrov as saying that it has failed to represent the regional countries … The entire basis that has been built up should and can be leveraged,” Zakharova told the Rossiya 24 broadcaster.
The experience accumulated in the field includes, in particular, the results of special conferences, resolutions of the UN Security Council and meetings of the Quartet on the Middle East, the spokeswoman added.
The Middle East Quartet, comprised of the UN, the United States, the European Union, and Russia, was established in Madrid in 2002 to mediate the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. The Quartet’s activities aimed to develop the Palestinian economy and empower its institutions, as well as promote a two-state solution to the conflict.
In June 2023, Lavrov said that “collective diplomacy to facilitate the Arab-Israeli settlement has stalled,” mainly due to the decision of the US and the EU to “unilaterally suspend the activities of the Middle East quartet.”
On October 7, Palestinian movement Hamas launched a large-scale rocket attack against Israel from the Gaza Strip, while its fighters breached the border, opening fire on the military and civilians. As a result, over 1,200 people in Israel were killed and some 240 others abducted. Israel launched retaliatory strikes, ordered a complete blockade of Gaza and launched a ground incursion into the Palestinian enclave with the declared goal of eliminating Hamas fighters and rescuing the hostages. Over 21,300 people have been killed so far in Gaza as a result of Israeli strikes, local authorities said.
On November 24, Qatar mediated a deal between Israel and Hamas on a temporary truce and the exchange of some of the prisoners and hostages, as well as the delivery of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. The ceasefire was extended several times and expired on December 1.
Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine is entering a new phase. President Vladimir Putin lifted the fog of war and hinted at what can be expected going forward in a landmark speech at the National Defence Control Centre while addressing a meeting of the Russian Defence Ministry Board on December 19.
Russia has gained the upper hand in the proxy war while the United States is struggling to recreate a new narrative. For Putin, this is a moment of triumph where he has no reason to take advantage of the fog of war in Ukraine, whereas, for President Biden, the fog of war continues to serve a useful purpose of dissimulation in the crucial election ahead where he seeks a second term.
Putin’s speech exuded a buoyant mood. The Russian economy has not only regained its pre-2022 momentum but is accelerating toward a 3.5% growth rate by the yearend, marked by rising incomes and purchasing power for millions of its citizens and an increase in living standards. Unemployment is at an all-time low and Russia has beaten back the Western sanctions and the attempts to isolate it in the international arena.
The leitmotif of Putin’s speech is that this is a war that Russia never sought but was imposed on it by the US. Putin had listed last year in February five clear-cut objectives of the Russian military operation — security of the Russian population; de-nazification of Ukraine; demilitarisation of Ukraine; striving for a friendly regime in Kiev; and, non-admission of Ukraine into NATO. These are of course interlocked objectives. The US and its allies know it but continue to pretend otherwise. Their focus in the proxy war has been a military victory and regime change in Russia.
Putin’s message is that any new Western narrative on the war is doomed to meet the same fate as the previous one unless there is realism that Russia cannot be militarily defeated and its legitimate interests are recognised.
The heart of the matter is that the West all along perceived Ukraine as a geopolitical project targeting Russia. Today, even with defeat staring at its face, the West’s priority lies in forcing Russia to agree to a ceasefire on the basis of the existing line of contact without any geopolitical or strategic obligations on the part of Washington or the transatlantic alliance — which, de facto, would mean leaving the door for the rearmament of the battered Ukrainian military and for Kiev’s accession to NATO through the back door.
Suffice to say, the discredited agenda of using Ukraine as a pawn to pursue the West’s anti-Russian policy is still very much around. But Moscow will not fall for the US’ trap a second time, risking another war that may erupt at a time that suits NATO.
Unsurprisingly, Putin’s speech paid great attention to revving up Russia’s defence industry to meet any military exigencies that might arise. But towards the end of his speech, Putin also dwelt on Russia’s politico-military options under the circumstances.
On the military side, clearly, Russia will press forward the attritional war to its logical end of pushing the Ukrainian military into a strategic dead-end, which would mean seeking tactical improvements along the frontline, undermining Ukraine’s economic potential, inflicting military losses, and boosting Russia’s own defence industry on a scale that tips the balance of forces to weigh against any military adventures by NATO.
In the final analysis, Putin asserted, Russia is determined to reclaim the “vast historical territories, Russian territories, along with the population” that the Bolsheviks transferred to Ukraine during the Soviet era. However, he drew an important distinction as regards the “western lands” of Ukraine (west of Dnieper) that are a legacy of World War II over which there could be territorial claims from Poland, Hungary and Romania, which at least in the case of Poland is also linked to the transfer of “eastern German lands, the Danzig Corridor, and Danzig itself” following the defeat of the Third Reich.
Putin took note that “people who live there (western Ukraine) – many of them, at least, I know this for sure, 100 percent – they want to return to their historical homeland. The countries that lost these territories, primarily Poland, dream of having them back.”
That said, interestingly, Putin simply washed his hands of any territorial disputes that may arise between Ukraine and its eastern neighbours (all of whom are NATO countries.) Looking ahead, this is going to be a can of worms for the US. Recently, Russia’s intelligence chief Sergey Naryshkin used a powerful metaphor, warning that the US may face a “second Vietnam” in Ukraine that will come to haunt it for a long time.
The bottom line, as Putin framed it, is as follows: “History will put everything in its place. We (Moscow) will not interfere, but we will not give up what is ours. Everyone should be aware of this –- those in Ukraine who are aggressively disposed towards Russia, and in Europe, and in the United States. If they want to negotiate, let them do so. But we will do it only based on our interests.”
Putin concluded saying that if the final arbiter is military prowess, that explains why Russia is focusing on a “strong, reliable, well-equipped, and properly motivated Armed Forces” backed by a strong economy and “the support of the multi-ethnic people of Russia.”
There is a strong likelihood of Russian military operations moving further westward toward the Dnieper in the coming months, well beyond the four new territories that joined the Russian Federation last year — Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhia, and Kherson. In the absence of any negotiated settlement, Russia may choose to unilaterally “liberate” those southern regions of Ukraine that were historically part of Russia, which would presumably include Odessa and the entire Black Sea coast, or Kharkov to the north of the Donbass region.
Russia is expecting that the combat capabilities of the Ukrainian forces will sharply diminish in the near future and the army faces difficulty already to get new recruits. That is to say, through the year ahead, the balance of forces at the front will shift due to the Ukrainian military’s heavy losses and the drop in Western aid, and, at some point, Ukraine’s defences will begin to crumble.
Russia’s recent gains in military operations — eg., Soledar, Artyomovsk (Bakhmut), Avdeevka, Maryinka, etc. — already testify to a shift in the balance of forces between the two armies. This shift will further accelerate as Russia’s military-industrial complex is functioning optimally and Russia is massively deploying new types of weapons, such as gliding aviation bombs, which have altered the role of the Russian Air Force in the conflict.
Dozens ofheavy aerial bombs are dropped every single day and similarly, there is increase in the use of modern barrage ammunition and some other systems, including precision-guided munitions. T-90M tanks and new types of light armoured vehicles have also appeared on the battlefield.
In comparison, Ukraine faces a decrease in arms supplies due to limited production capacities in the West where sustainable production growth on an industrial scale is not attainable in the near term. Meanwhile, the Middle East crisis and the tensions around Taiwan become major distractions for the US.
All these factors taken into account, a decisive shift in the balance of forces against Ukraine is entirely conceivable by the end of next year, leading to an end of the conflict on Russia’s terms.
Rule changes to sexual discrimination legislation proposed by the US government designed to prevent the banning of transgender athletes in schools and colleges would violate the rights of biological women, a United Nations (UN) expert, Reem Alsalem, warned on Wednesday.
Under the landmark ‘Title IX’ legislation passed by the US Congress in 1972, it was ruled that sexual discrimination against women in education must be eradicated. It also stated that women should have the same educational rights and opportunities as their male counterparts.
In April, the US Department of Education proposed modifying the legislation so that no school or college that receives federal funding can impose broad rules that categorically ban transgender athletes from participating in sports that match their gender identity. Instead, it said such issues should be decided on a case-by-case basis.
The proposed amendment would also lead to the removal of separate facilities for men and women, including bathrooms and changing rooms, in some instances.
But on Wednesday, Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, argued that the proposed changes to Title IX would have a negative impact on biological women.
“The proposed Title IX rule changes would have detrimental effects on the participation of biological women and girls in sports,” Alsalem said in a news release. It would, she added, deny women “the opportunity to compete fairly, resulting in the loss of athletic and scholarship opportunities.”
Furthermore, Alsalem argued that an altered Title IX would “lead to the loss of privacy” for female athletes and cause “heightened exposure to sexual harassment and voyeurism.”
“If the proposed changes are adopted, they would contravene the United States’ international human rights obligations and commitments concerning the prevention of all forms of violence and discrimination against women on the basis of sex,” she added.
The participation of transgender athletes in female sporting categories has become a hot-button topic over the past several years. Perhaps most notorious is the case of the American collegiate swimmer Lia Thomas, who, in 2022, became the first openly transgender athlete to win an NCAA Division I national championship. Before transitioning, Thomas had previously ranked 462 in the male category.
However, despite media attention on Thomas’ eligibility to compete against biologically-born women, the athlete’s right to compete was backed in an open letter by 300 current and former collegiate swimmers.
In the letter, they issued “support for Lia Thomas, and all transgender college athletes, who deserve to be able to compete in safe and welcoming athletic environments.”
A final decision on the possible changes is expected in 2024.
In March, Rashid Khalidi joined Jeffrey Sachs for an exclusive conversation about Khalidi’s book “The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine.” By providing a two-sided narrative of the conflict, Khalidi opens the floor for discussion.
Want to read ahead? Join the Book Club on edX to access book excerpts, supplementary resources, a discussion forum, and more! https://www.edx.org/course/book-club-…
I don’t have anyone whom I would consider a friend who supports the genocide being carried out by Israel in Gaza. But my occasional interaction with the psychopaths who infest the US government and media and who are intimately connected by virtue of their political instincts as well as their personal interests in campaign donations and/or elevated salaries derived from Israel and its powerful lobby have plenty of sound bites to throw out to demonstrate their love of the Jewish state in all its manifestations. They mouth the Pelosi-Schumer-Biden assertion that “Israel has a right to defend itself” and that Israel is “America’s closest ally” and “best friend,” all of which can readily be exposed as a series of self-serving lies and deliberate misinterpretations of international law. Beyond that, they inevitably cite their view that critics of Israel are fully responsible for what they choose to refer to as the ultimate evil of “surging anti-semitism.” In so doing they conveniently ignore the obvious fact that anger towards Jews collectively speaking is nearly always derived from the crimes against humanity committed by the Zionist political entity that now legally defines itself as Jewish.
I sometimes ask the friends of Israel what interest the United States has that would warrant our country becoming complicit in committing war crimes that, collectively speaking, amount to precursors for the complete expulsion or killing of millions of Palestinians from what remains of their homes. They try to weasel word their way avoiding the implications of that question by observing that the United States is not directly engaged in the conflict, an evasion that I belittle by pointing out that Washington is providing funding, arming and political cover for the more powerful and lethal party engaged in the conflict while also blocking attempts to bring about a ceasefire to comply with orders from that same party, which sure looks like direct involvement to me. I also point out that Israel is working hard to get the US military engaged against Hezbollah in Lebanon and also against Iran and is likely to be able to maneuver the stoneheads in and around the White House to do its bidding vis-à-vis both objectives.
So the big question has to be “Why does the United States engage in a conflict that inter alia has utterly ruined our country’s reputation worldwide and for which there is no real compelling national interest?” The answer is, of course unpalatable to many, but has to be that the US government is in many respects and vis-à-vis some of its designated national policies completely under the control of Israel and its powerful domestic as well as international lobby. This habitual bowing to force majeure has warped the thinking of the ambitious scallywags who seem to be present wherever one turns in places like Washington. How else does one explain the infamous and quite frankly ridiculous comment delivered at the 2018 Israeli American Council meeting by leading politician Nancy Pelosi, who said that “I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid… and I don’t even call it aid… our cooperation with Israel. That’s fundamental to who we are.”
The delusional Pelosi, who appears to have no “fundamental” attachment to the interests of the American people whom she represents, is unfortunately not unique in the halls of Congress, even less so in the Joe Biden White House, which might be regarded as the illustration of what happens when you appoint Zionists to nearly all key positions running your foreign, economic and national security policies. The degree of direct Zionist/Israeli control over the hapless Biden can best be illustrated by reviewing the course of the recent redrafting of a UN Security Council resolution authored by the United Arab Emirates that sought to bring about a suspension of the fighting and the urgent resumption of humanitarian supplies for Gaza. The US forced the revisions after coordination with Israel to permit the Israelis to continue to attack civilian targets and avoid entering into anything like a ceasefire, changing the word “suspension” in the original draft to the less demanding creation of “conditions for a sustainable cessation of hostilities.” Language authorizing the lead UN role in monitoring and delivering the assistance to the Gazans was also expunged leaving to belligerent Israel the task of completely controlling the distribution of any supplies allowed entry into the areas inside Gaza, which it is also simultaneously continuing to bomb, thereby slowing the stream of urgently needed supplies to a trickle while also killing hundreds more civilians.
To be sure, it was the United States blindly supporting Israel that rendered what was a promising proposal to put an end to the multiplying civilian deaths toothless. Israel demonstrated just how highly it regarded Joe Biden when it contradicted what the president said about the US being able to moderate some Israeli offensive action in Gaza. Netanyahu denied that, saying that he and his war cabinet were continuing to make all relevant decisions based on Israel’s own interests. Israel Defense Force (IDF) Chief of the General Staff General Herzi Halevi followed on with his own assessment that finishing the job in Gaza, i.e. totally destroying Hamas by whatever means it requires, will take “many more months.” The Israeli military has indeed visibly increased its efforts by opening up new “battle zones” inside Gaza, to include directly targeting the crowded and starving refugee camps outside the cities. The civilians are paying the price while a grinning Joe Biden is spending his New Year’s holiday in the American Virgin Islands.
Allowing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a known liar and habitual war criminal to tell the US government what to do is about as low as it gets, Mr. Biden! You should not only be ashamed, but more than that, humiliated, compelled to do ghastly things in support of your own fear of possible Jewish/Israeli reaction if you do not bow down before King Netanyahu. He and the band of inhuman monsters he has assembled in his cabinet have made no secret of their intention to remove the Palestinians from Palestine, either by forced emigration or by killing them if necessary. On Christmas Day, Prime Minister Netanyahu told a meeting of his Likud bloc “that he was still working on the ‘voluntary’ immigration of Gaza’s inhabitants to other countries.” His associates Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have made it clear that the ethnic cleansing process will proceed even if it is not in any way voluntary. As Israel is the occupying power in the former Palestine, what is taking place is, as defined by the Geneva Conventions, the Genocide Convention and the UN Charter, a crime against humanity and the United States is completely complicit in it not to mention actually enabling the slaughter through its supplying of arms and money to the Israelis. It has recently been reported in the Israeli media that the United States has delivered an astonishing “10,000 tons of armaments and military equipment on 244 cargo planes and 20 ships” to sustain the Israeli homicidal assault against the people of Gaza. And to demonstrate its gratitude for the flood of weapons, America’s “best friend” and “closest ally” Israel has nevertheless complained “about a delay in the delivery of munitions.”
The total support of the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians by Washington and the media is not only shameful, it is lacking any context for a crime against humanity that has been going on with US connivance for the past 76 years. Under international law, an occupied people has a right to use force to resist occupation, but even given that, the majority of Israeli deaths on October 7th should probably be attributed to so-called “friendly fire” from the Israeli army not from Hamas. The occupied and woefully abused Palestinians rising-up and seeking both freedom and sovereignty in the land that was once completely theirs is fully justified and should be respected. Israel’s killing women and children through deliberate starvation or even by execution style is indisputably a war crime. Bombing hospitals or leaving newborn incubator babies abandoned to die is a crime against humanity. Arresting innocent Palestinians before parading them naked and even desecrating their bodies by harvesting organs that you then sell is unspeakable and almost unimaginable evil as is deliberately targeting and bombing schools and churches where people are trying to find shelter.
The genocide and destruction in Gaza is the worst crime committed in modern history and the man who could have stopped it, Joe Biden, sits on his hands and grins. No one should remain silent when confronted by this horror but the silence and the deliberate distortion of what is taking place is a tribute to Jewish power in America and elsewhere. I am including some recent commentary from the illustrious Australian Journalist Caitlin Johnstone which demonstrates perfectly the hypocrisy and inhumanity of both Biden and the leaders of Britain, France, Canada, and Germany: “Sometimes Israel’s crimes are so horrific that at first you don’t even understand what you’re looking at. You just stare at it trying to make sense of what you’re seeing for a bit, like you would if you suddenly saw a space alien or a leprechaun or something… It’s so incredibly obvious what we’re looking at here. The only thing putting a wobble on people’s perception is the immense amount of propaganda distortion the media is churning out on this issue, plus the fact that the demographics look a bit different from what history has conditioned people to watch out for. If there were two million Jewish people trapped by Christians in a giant concentration camp and placed under total siege, being told that half of them had 24 hours to relocate into the other half or be killed, nobody would have any confusion about what they were witnessing.”
And a leading American journalist Daniel Larison must have the last word of advice from his site on Eunomia: “We are witnessing one of the gravest crimes of our time. Our government is aiding and abetting the perpetrators. It is up to people in this country to make our government cut off all support for this war and to press for an end to the war itself.” Amen, Daniel!
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.
Right before the recent Christmas holiday, I received a call from a friend and colleague named Louis Conte regarding a “contact” of his with knowledge of the inner workings of Emergency Medical Services in Westchester County, New York.
Louis’s contact had been monitoring EMS dispatches in Westchester County and saw, subsequent to the jab rollout in early 2021, what he felt was a frightening number of calls from vaccine clinics or homes where general or specific “vaccine reactions” were cited as the cause of the need for an ambulance.
Last year, the contact decided to submit a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request—similar to a FOIA—to the Westchester County EMS (and the adjoining Dutchess County EMS) asking for a record of all calls whose transcripts mentioned either the word “vaccine” or “Covid-19 vaccine” in 2021.
Louis asked me to look at the documents. As difficult as it is at this point to further distress me with data on the toxicity and lethality of the mRNA platform, this dataset still managed to do this.
Before I review the data, let’s review what we know about ambulance calls timed with the roll-out of the vaccination campaign, because this issue is NOT new.
For instance, we already know from ICAN and Aaron Siri’s FOIA request of the CDC’s V-Safe data that 7.9% of all 10.1 million vaccine recipients reported requiring medical care to treat a vaccine adverse effect. Of those requiring medical care, almost 11% (87,700 people) visited the emergency room or hospital. How many travelled for this high level of urgent /emergent care by ambulance is unknown, but historically, about 15% of ER patients arrive by ambulance, so this would come out to about 13,000 patients among a population of 10 million vaccinated.
Further, an article published in the journal Nature reported:
There was an increase of more than 25% in the number of ambulance calls in response to cardiac arrests (CA) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS or “heart attacks”) for young people in the 16–39 age group during the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in Israel (January–May, 2021) compared with the same period of time in prior years (2019 and 2020).
They also found a robust and statistically significant association between the weekly CA and ACS call counts and the rates of 1st and 2nd vaccine doses administered to this age group. Note they found no observed statistically significant association between COVID-19 infection rates and the CA and ACS call counts.
They report that their findings aligned with previous studies showing that increases in overall CA incidence were not always associated with higher COVID-19 infection rates at a population level, and that the stability of hospitalization rates related to myocardial infarction throughout the initial COVID-19 wave compared to pre-pandemic baselines in Israel.
Their findings above also mirrored reports of increased emergency department visits with cardiovascular complaints during the vaccination rollout in Germany as well as increased EMS calls for cardiac incidents in Scotland.
In line with the above, anecdotal data from social media described the following:
The import of the above data/anecdotes was further supported by new, massive demands for ambulances across the world, evidenced by this compilation of TV news and print reports of shortages, compiled in another favorite substack of mine by Marc Crispin Miller. Note that although some reports blame the issue on shortages of staff and ambulance parts, the vast majority also mention… increases in the number of calls for ambulances.
And then there’s even more anecdotal data by someone who has earned my deep trust in regards to accuracy of events on the “inside of the system” (recall she is a nurse colleague of mine that works at a major academic medical center who I referred to as “My Spy On The Inside” [MSOTI] in my prior multi-part series of posts called “Nursing Reports From the Front Lines of The Vaccine Catastrophe”).
During one of her shifts referring to the ambulance/emergency services issue:
So, with the above publications and observations in mind, let’s review this new “data dump.” Maybe what it reveals is not as statistically damning as what the New Zealand Whistleblower exposed but you will see that it is equally, if not even more alarming. To me, the most shocking discovery I made when reviewing the documents, is that I found evidence of 5 different occasions where calls were made to Westchester County EMS dispatch to have ambulances “on standby”:
1. 2021-02-21 07:38:16.000 E2105940 NOTIF EMS 355 PELHAM RD NE _ROCHELLE: @WILLOW TOWERS NEW_ROCHELLE ‘WILL BE ADMINISTERING THE COVID-19 VACCINE TODAY TO 220 PEOPLE’
2. 2021-03-20 08:19:58.000 E2108926 STAND-BY EMS 210 N BROADWAY SLEEPY HOLOW: @HIGH SCHOOL- SLEEPY HOLLOW “‘73B2 & 36M3 ON STANDBY FOR VACCINE DETAIL
3. 2021-03-20 08:46:43.000 E2108930 STAND-BY EMS 168 W BOSTON POST RD MAMARONECK_V : @STT HOMAS EPISCOPALC HURCH MAMARONECK_V “‘VACCINE STANDBY UNTIL APPROX 1300HRS’
4. 2021-05-20 09:07:15.000 E2115997 STAND-BY EMS 950 PALMER A MAMARONECK_V: @MAMARONECK HIGH SCHOOL-PALMER AVE MAMARONECK_V “‘EMS STAND-BY FOR VACCINE CLINIC
5. 2021-05-20 14:09:41.000 E2116032 ALS 950 PALMER AVE MAMAR @MAMARONECK HIGH SCHOOL-PALMER AVE SIDE MAMARONEC _V “‘EMS STANDBY FOR VACCINE CLINIC
Are you kidding me? Employees at vaccine clinics in Westchester County, as early as Feb 21, 2021, were calling EMS “to be on standby?” For “vaccine detail?” One caller informed EMS dispatch that they “will be administering vaccines to 220 people today?” Note they did that as early as February 21, 2021. That is how fast some front-line workers knew how dangerous the vaccines were.
Also note how, on 5/20/21, two calls from the Mamaroneck High School clinic asked for ambulances to be on standby, the first call was made at 9:07 AM and a later one was made at 2:09 PM. For a “safe and effective” vaccine?
Again, calls with requests of this nature were being made from clinics in New Rochelle, Sleepy Hollow, and two different ones in Mamaroneck? If I was living in Westchester County at the time, I damn well would have wanted to know these calls were being made (as an aside, I lived in that county from 2008-2015 and still have lots of friends with children there).
My sense is that these calls were made by employees who were secretly, or at least, somewhat anonymously, trying to alert authorities as to how dangerous the vaccines were but without doing so in a way that would make them a target as an “anti-vaxxer” or cause them to lose their job. They were clearly smart enough to know the consequences of a more public call-out of vaccine toxicity. So instead, they called EMS to have them “on standby.” Although the attempt was well-intentioned, should they be absolved of responsibility for any subsequent injuries which occurred on their watch at that clinic? They were actively injecting people with an experimental vaccine… after calling EMS to have them “on standby”?
After I shared this article with A Midwestern Doctor, he sent me this commentary:
One of the biggest challenges people have had throughout the vaccine rollout has been coming to terms with the fact that so many people could have been complicit in letting a bad vaccine be pushed on the world (which hence leads many of them to believe the only possible explanation is that the vaccine was not in fact dangerous).
Sadly, I’ve seen numerous tragic cases of the same thing that has happened in the past. Much of this is explained by an effect in psychology known as the bystander effect:
The bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation, against a bully, or during an assault or other crime. The greater the number of bystanders, the less likely it is for any one of them to provide help to a person in distress. People are more likely to take action in a crisis when there are few or no other witnesses present.
In turn, throughout my life, I’ve found that if something is happening I know is wrong and no one is speaking out about it (e.g., because its not politically correct to do so), I can reliably predict that if I don’t speak out against it, no one will. So for this reason, I often “break” the bystander effect (once one person speaks out, others will often feel safe to do so as well) as I know otherwise it won’t happen. Likewise, I’ve seen this same thing occur again and again within organizations, especially when people’s financial livelihoods are on the line for speaking out.
One of the best illustrations of the point Kory is making here can be found within the data of vaccination deaths leaked by the brave New Zealand whistleblower Barry Young (who now faces a seven year prison sentence for his leaking). Within that data, Young noticed that there were about a dozen vaccinating doctors and a dozen vaccination sites which had a very high rate of deaths in those they vaccinated.
Barry, in turn, raised a very simple question—how could something like this happen?
Sadly, as this summary of EMS calls shows, the bystander effect can be a very real thing, especially when everyone else in a large institution going along with something makes those who want to challenge it feel even more powerless to speak out.
I believe the vaccine clinic employees who called EMS in Westchester should get some credit for, in my interpretation, trying to blow a whistle, but they did so too “softly.” Instead, as per the bystander effect, they simply hoped that “someone else,” i.e. EMS personnel or leadership would take note of these calls, and “do something” about them.
Remember, May 2021 (the day of the two calls from Mamaroneck High School) was nearing the height of the global “psy-ops” propaganda campaign where the unvaccinated and/or the vaccine hesitant were demonized and attacked widely across all mainstream media and social media. Even those who already got the vaccine and were trying to share the horrible stuff happening to them were being attacked. Never, ever forget that occurred, and more importantly, never forget just how successful that propaganda was. So, while I get the clinic employee’s hesitation, I cannot forgive their ultimate behavior.
Walking off the job would have been another option, but if there is anything I have learned in Covid and the immense, multi-faceted fraud that has occurred and keeps occurring, is that there were and are far too few real whistleblowers. The desire to remain employed is paramount to the concern for the welfare of others. Period.
Anyway, these data points above are beyond shocking, even to me at this point in my research journey. If anyone has a different or more benign interpretation of these five EMS transcripts above than I do, I am all ears. If I find such an interpretation more compelling or corrective, I will do a follow-up post.
Now, let’s review the rest of the transcripts from EMS dispatch. One set of data is from Westchester County EMS. First, know that Westchester County has a population of about 1 million, but these EMS calls do not include the City of Yonkers which has a population of about 200,000. So, for 800,000 people, the total EMS calls which specifically mentioned the vaccine as a cause of distress in 2021 was 165 calls. For Dutchess County, population of 295,000, the number of calls was an almost equally proportionate 55 calls.
However, these 220 calls across these two counties likely represent a small subset of the severe, ambulance requiring vaccine reactions because sudden death was likely never reported as a vaccine reaction and many people calling ambulances may not have initially related their medical issue with the vaccine or, even if suspected, may not have mentioned it to dispatch – thus, this dataset represents only the most tightly “temporally associated” events, ones where it was more than 100% obvious the vaccine was causative, like when it happened within minutes or hours or 1-2 days of the vaccine being administered.
What was the nature of these “reactions” which triggered calls for an ambulance? Well, from the transcript log posted at the end of this post, most simply say “reaction to Covid-19 vaccine” or “vaccine reaction” but there are also many disturbingly detailed reactions such as seizures, inability to ambulate, unresponsiveness, altered mental status, etc.
I list the more specific and disturbing ones below (or you can also just read through the actual EMS transcripts that are at the end of this post):
2-16-21 92 YO F abnormal breathing from 2nd covid-19 vaccine
2-17-21 69 YO M unable to ambulate secondary to covid vaccine
2-21-21 73 YO unable to ambulate, reaction to Covid-19 vaccine
2-17-21 female reaction to vaccine – altered mental status (AMS)
2-22-21 88 YO F low oxygen saturation, possible reaction to Covid vaccine
3-10-21 unresponsive, reaction to vaccine
3-19-21 fever and confusion post covid vaccine
3-27-21 56 YO M cancer patient possible reaction to vaccine, altered mental status (AMS)
3-27-21 2nd vaccine, sudden hypertension (HTN), back and abdominal pain
4-2-21 46 YO M disoriented, recent covid vaccine
3-24-21 56 YO F abnormal breathing from 2nd Covid vaccine
6-18-21 12 YO F experiencing chest pain after 2nd vaccine
7-11-21 13 YO F feeling weak, reaction to vaccine
4-7-21 27 YO M possible seizure
4-2-21 passed out/ reaction to Covid vaccine
4-22-21 38 Y.O female not breathing secondary to recent vaccination
4-32-21 50 YO F passing out/covid vaccine
5-13-21 49 YO M labored breathing/reaction to recent vaccination
5-19-21 89 YO M weak/speech problems
5/24/21 27 YO F fell by pharmacy
6-17-21 39 YO F difficulty breathing from 2nd vaccine
8-31-21 31 YO difficulty breathing
11-19-21 18 YO M anxiety attack, difficulty breathing from a covid vaccination
46 YO F chest pain/labored breathing, body numbness/covid-19 vaccine booster yesterday
11-19-21 18 YO F leg numbness
12-21-21 46 YO F chest pain, labored breathing, body numbness – covid 19 booster
86 YO F low 02, chest pain radiating to the left arm post 2nd covid vaccine shot
4-11-21 50 YO M syncope (passing out)
4-18-21 57 YO F severe edema (i.e swelling, water retention) possible reaction to vaccine
5-22-21 16 YO reaction to vaccine shot, semi-responsive
5-31-21 48 YO M reaction to the 2nd vaccine, difficulty breathing, right sided numbness
6-2-21 passed out after receiving Covid vaccine
6-2-21 29 YO F reaction to vaccine, unconscious
6-18-21 12 YO F experiencing chest pain after 2nd vaccine
9-24-21 44 YO M seizures after vaccine
9-25-21 Male unconscious after getting covid vaccine
11-6-21 5 YO M difficulty breathing post vaccine
11-13-21 58 YO M reaction to covid vaccine, syncope and difficulty breathing
11-3-21 81 YO M Unable to ambulate post vaccine
12-8-21 syncope (passing out) post covid shot
2-11-21 73 YO M, reaction to Covid vaccine, unable to ambulate
4-21-21 reaction to vaccine AMS (altered mental status)
Again, these were just a subset of the 220 calls in 2021 amongst a population of approximately 900,000. I am reasonably certain that there is no data to accurately estimate what a “safe” ambulance call rate per number of vaccines administered should be but that is also because I have never even heard of a threshold being established for a “safe” ambulance call rate per number of vaccines administered.
I would instead simply argue that the ambulance call rate per vaccination should be no more than one in a million or if I were generous in estimating its ability to protect people from severe disease, maybe even one per 100,000, but in reality should be zero.
I say this because vaccines are not a treatment for someone suffering from an active disease, it is an intervention given to generally healthy, functional people to theoretically protect them from becoming ill (i.e. I don’t think the dying need vaccines). An intervention which causes a generally healthy, functional person to need an ambulance directly contradicts any belief of utility or safety in this regard.
These data, to me, are simply another outrageous Covid era example of the deplorable failure of a Public Health Agency to protect the population whose literal mission it is to protect. Obtaining the data by FOIA means that no one in Westchester EMS or Dutchess County EMS leadership acted in response to paramedics or EMTs reporting repeated calls for urgent medical attention to those recently vaccinated?
Don’t you think that you, the average citizen, would have wanted to be informed if this was happening in your community? That vaccine clinics were asking for ambulances to be “on standby?” What other kinds of events request ambulances “on standby” or to be present? I have heard of having them on-site for judo tournaments, Evil Knievel stunts, American football games, (which require two on site), but never for an alleged preventative health measure.
From the webpage of a company that provides ambulance coverage for sports events:
So, apparently, vaccine clinic employees in Westchester quickly came to the perception that vaccinating people was more dangerous than a charity walk or fun run.
Here is the thing though: to many of us who are deeply studied on the data showing immense toxicity and lethality of the mRNA vaccine platform, this changes nothing about what we already know. To those still in the “safe and effective” camp, I ask how you can explain away the above in a way that can somehow still support that position. Happy to read your comments.
Finally, before we get to the EMS transcripts, for any of you who are as troubled by these data as I am, I suggest you FOIA the same from your local EMS service. I promise you that my colleagues and I are interested in studying this further.
CARACAS – Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro ordered on Thursday the armed forces to launch “the activation of a joint defensive action” in response to the deployment of a British warship off the coast of Guyana.
“I have ordered the activation of a joint defensive action of the Bolivarian National Armed Forces” off the coast of Essequibo, he said in a state televised broadcast, but did not provide more information.
Earlier this month, the British media reported, citing a British defense ministry spokesman, that the United Kingdom would deploy a patrol ship off Guyana’s coast as a sign of support for the state in the territorial dispute over Essequibo. The head of Venezuela’s defense ministry, Vladimir Padrino Lopez, called it a provocation.
Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ivan Gil had previously called on his British counterpart David Cameron not to interfere in the affairs of Latin American and Caribbean countries, and to mind his own business.
“From Venezuela, we ask the infamous failure David Cameron, foreign minister of the former imperial power of the United Kingdom, to take his hands off our Latin America and the Caribbean and to take care of his own affairs, which are very complicated,” Gil wrote on social media.
Venezuela’s territorial dispute with Britain and Guyana, a former British colony, has been ongoing since the 19th century. The Bolivarian government stepped up its actions after Guyanese authorities began handing over fossil-rich areas of the disputed shelf to oil companies for development.
Caracas held a referendum on December 3 in which an absolute majority of participants supported the annexation of the territory west of the Essequibo River, and began legislative work to legally back its actions.
Guyana’s President Irfaan Ali has since said that the country views Caracas’ actions as a threat to national security and intends to appeal to the UN Security Council as well as its international partners. During a recent news conference, Ali did not rule out that Guyana may go for a military base for its allies in the region, and on December 7, the US Army’s Southern Command carried out “flight operations” in the country.
The leaders of Venezuela and Guyana, following recent talks on the territorial dispute over Essequibo, pledged not to use force under any circumstances and to resolve it in accordance with the 1966 Geneva Agreement.
By Ali Salaam | American Herald Tribune | July 31, 2017
The New York Times, owned by the Zionist Jewish supremacist Ochs-Sulzberger family, has no problem with Iraqi suffering as long as Iran is not the one behind it.
The Iraq War was a genocide of the Iraqi people by Zionist supremacists in the Bush administration. Over 1 million innocent people were killed based on a lie. American soldiers died in an Israeli war and now an average of 22 soldiers commit suicide every day because their consciences cannot cope with the fact they committed crimes in an illegal war that served no purpose other than to benefit Israel, not America.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of the Zionist regime, once said “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.”
Paul Wolfowitz had his sights on Iraq since his time in the first Bush administration. Former Israeli official and Bush administration official Richard Perle had his eyes on Iraq since at least his authorship of the Clean Break white paper. The Zionist regime had their eyes on Iraq since the 1980s when strategist Oded Yinon wrote his white paper in support of dividing the Arab-Muslim world along ethnic and sectarian lines. The global Zionist lobby has had their eyes on Iraq since Theodor Herzl stated that Eretz Israel’s true borders go from the Nile River in Egypt to the Euphrates River in Iraq. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.