Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Poland expands offer of tanks for Ukraine

RT | January 27, 2023

Poland is ready to send 60 more tanks to Ukraine to help fight Russia, besides the 14 German-made Leopard 2 vehicles already pledged, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki has said.

“If we don’t want Ukraine to be defeated, we have to be very much open and brave in supporting Ukraine,” Morawiecki told Canada’s CTV News broadcaster on Friday.

According to the prime minister, Poland is trying “to lead by example,” showing its allies what should be done to help Kiev.

“Right now, we are ready to send 60 of our modernized tanks, 30 of them PT-91. And on top of those tanks, 14 tanks, Leopard 2 tanks, from in our possession,” he said.

Morawiecki also noted that last year Warsaw provided about 250 of its modernized Soviet-era T-72 tanks to the Ukrainian military.

Mikhail Podolyak, an adviser to Ukraine’s President Vladimir Zelensky, confirmed on Telegram on Friday that 60 more Polish tanks will be heading Ukraine’s way. According to Podolyak, the shipment consists of PT-91 Twardys, upgraded Soviet T-72M1 main battle tanks. “Thanks to our allies,” he wrote.

Morawiecki did not specify when the additional tanks will be supplied.

On Thursday, Poland’s Deputy Defense Minister Wojciech Skurkiewicz said Warsaw plans to provide 14 Leopard 2s to Kiev after Ukrainian troops finish training with them, which could happen in “several weeks.”

The delivery of Leopard 2s by Poland to Ukraine became possible on Wednesday after Germany officially approved the supply of 14 tanks from its own stocks to Kiev, and allowed other countries to re-export the German-made weaponry to the Zelensky government.

On the same day, the US agreed to supply Kiev with 31 of its M1 Abrams main battle tanks. Earlier this month, the planned delivery of Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine was announced by the UK.

Russia’s deputy envoy to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Maksim Buyakevich, warned on Thursday that arming the Ukrainian military with Western tanks “is a straight path into a full-blown conflict in Europe.”

Earlier this month, Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov insisted that German, US and British military hardware will not change the outcome of the conflict, and that the tanks will “burn” if they arrive on the battlefield.

January 27, 2023 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

The Pentagon’s Perpetual Crisis Machine

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | January 26, 2023

Given President Biden’s decision to send 31 of its top-ranked M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine, it is clear that the Pentagon has decided to escalate its war against Russia. Biden’s decision was followed by Germany’s decision to deliver 14 Leopard 2 A6 tanks to Ukraine. I’ll guarantee you there isn’t a Russian alive who doesn’t know about the time in the 1940s when Germany sent its tanks deep into Russia, killed millions of Russians, and almost succeeded in conquering the country.

If the increasing pressure that the Pentagon is putting on Russia does not result in a nuclear war between the United States and Russia, the advocates of this highly dangerous interventionist and escalatory strategy will later exclaim, “You see, we told you that there was never a risk of nuclear war.” But what’s interesting about the Pentagon’s strategy is that if it does result in nuclear war, there won’t be anyone around to point out how wrongheaded it was.

This is obviously no way to live. But this is what life is like under a national-security state form of governmental structure. The military-intelligence establishment needs a constant stream of crises to keep people agitated, hyped-up, afraid, anxious, and tense. In that way, they’ll look to the military-intelligence establishment to keep them “safe.” Without the constant stream of crises, people might be apt to ask, “Why do we need a national-security state? Why can’t we have our limited-government republic back?”

Moreover, a constant stream of crises ensures ever-increasing taxpayer-funded largess for the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA, which are the three principal components of the national-security establishment. That amount will soon reach $1 trillion per year. I’ll guarantee you that the manufacturers of tanks are uncorking the champagne bottles today. After all, those tanks being sent to Ukraine have to be replaced. Hard-pressed American taxpayers will pay for them, either directly through taxes or indirectly through more federal debt (now at $31.5 trillion and climbing every day) and inflation.

That’s what the entire Cold War racket was all about — keeping Americans agitated, hyped-up, afraid, anxious, and tense. Everyone was inculcated with the notion that the Russian Reds were coming to get us. Only the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA could save us from a communist takeover. The only president who has ever been willing to confront this scam was President Kennedy, and we all know what happened to him.

When the Cold War came to an end, unfortunately the Cold War racket didn’t. The national-security establishment kept their old Cold War dinosaur NATO in existence. Breaching their promise to Russia, the Pentagon began using NATO to absorb former members of the Warsaw Pact. The Pentagon knew precisely what it was doing — setting the stage for the continuation of its old Cold War racket, at least with respect to Russia.

When the Pentagon ultimately crossed what Russia had repeatedly emphasized was a “red line” by threatening to absorb Ukraine into NATO, the Pentagon achieved what it wanted — the continuation of its old Cold War racket, except for the part that the Reds were coming to get us.

But they’re still not willing to let go of the Red part of their Cold War racket. That’s why they’re now doing their best to gin up a crisis with China over Taiwan. That crisis will enable them to exclaim, “See, you need us to protect you from both Russia and the Chinese Reds.”

And don’t forget — they still have their perpetual war-on-terrorism racket. Sure, they’re not killing people en masse anymore in Afghanistan and Iraq, but they still are killing people in the Middle East and Africa. The potential terrorist retaliation from those continuous killings are enough to justify the continuation of their forever war-on-terrorism racket as well as the continuous destruction of our rights, liberties, and financial security here at home, as part of the process of keeping us “safe” from the terrorists who supposedly hate us for our “freedom and values.”

The important thing is that a life of permanent, perpetual crises is neither necessary nor inevitable. There is a way to restore normal life to America — one that isn’t based on a continuous stream of crises. That way is to dismantle the national-security state form of governmental structure and restore our founding governmental system of a limited-government republic. The only question is whether Americans have the will and the fortitude to do this. One thing is for sure: Our freedom, well-being, and possibly even our survival depend on it.

January 26, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Weapon Manufacturers Record Skyrocketing Profits From US Arm Sales in 2022

By Ian DeMartino – Sputnik – 26.01.2023

War has always been big business in the United States. According to the seminal anti-war essay “War is a Racket,” gunpowder manufacturer Du Ponts saw their profits increase by more than 950% during The Great War.

US arms sales to other countries skyrocketed in 2022, providing a tidy sum of profits for weapon manufacturers, according to data released by the State Department on Wednesday.

US weapon sales to other countries, largely driven by NATO’s response to Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine and increased tensions in Asia, jumped from $35.8 billion in 2021 to $51.9 billion in 2022.

Direct weapon sales from US-based weapon manufacturers also saw a massive increase, jumping from $103.4 billion in 2021 to $153.7 billion in 2022.

In Europe, the largest purchasers include Germany, which ordered 35 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter airplanes for $8.4 billion, and Poland, which spent $6 billion on 250 M1 Abrams tanks.

The United Kingdom, Spain, and new NATO member Bulgaria also made significant purchases in 2022.

Meanwhile, tensions in Asia over Taiwan and competing claims in the South China Sea have also been a boon for weapon manufacturers. Significant weapon sales in the area include $13.9 billion from Indonesia for 36 F-15ID fighter jets and a $1.95 billion purchase from Australia for 40 Black Hawk helicopters and other equipment. South Korea and Japan also made significant military purchases, totaling $790 million and $588 million respectively.

The Biden administration also approved a $1.1 billion weapons package for Taiwan in an effort to deter China from militarily seizing the island.

The Middle East, always a reliable profit center for military contractors has continued to be so. The two countries pushing the brutal war in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, have asked for $3 billion and $2.2 billion in military weapons and equipment from the United States respectively.

During the 2020 campaign, the Biden administration pledged to stop sending weapons to Saudi Arabia because of its war in Yemen.

Unsurprisingly, this has led to significant revenue gains by weapon manufacturers.

Revenue for Lockheed Martin, which develops the F-16, F-22, and F-35 fighter jets rose 7.13% to $19 billion in the fourth quarter of 2022. Northrop Grumman, which also makes F-35 fighter jets, is expected to report 11.8% revenue growth compared to fourth quarter earnings when it issues its financial reports on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Raytheon, the maker of the Patriot Air Defense System the Biden administration recently announced it will supply Ukraine with, saw its Q4 profit rise of nearly 18% compared to last year.

January 26, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Judge calls California’s medical misinformation law “nonsense,” blocks it

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | January 25, 2023

A federal judge questioned the new  law that penalizes doctors for sharing COVID-19 “misinformation.”

The new law, which came into effect on January 1 this year, prohibits doctors from spreading what the state deems to be misinformation to patients, or risk being penalized for “unprofessional conduct,” which could result in their licenses being revoked.

Here’s a summary of the case so far if you’re not up to date.

The law has been challenged through separate lawsuits filed by two organizations and a group of doctors on the grounds of  violations. They filed a motion at the US District Court of Sacramento to hold the law until the cases are concluded.

In a hearing, Senior Judge William Shubb described the law’s definition of misinformation as “nonsense.”

We obtained a copy of the order for you here.

“Because AB 2098 [the misinformation law] implicates [plaintiff’s] First Amendment right to receive information, she has standing,” the court wrote.

“Vague statutes are particularly objectionable when they involve sensitive areas of First Amendment freedoms because they operate to inhibit the exercise of those freedoms,” the court added, referring to a 2001 case, California Teachers Association v. State Board of Education.

“When the challenged law implicates First Amendment rights, a facial challenge based on vagueness is appropriate.”

The court granted the plaintiffs a hearing to challenge the law and blocked the enforcement of the law until the case is decided.

The law defines misinformation as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”

Shubb noted that “standard of care” is not a new principle, but argued, “contemporary scientific consensus” is.

According to Deputy Attorney General Kristin Liska, who is representing Gov. Gavin Newsom, a medical professional has to violate all three aspects of the definition of misinformation for punishment to be applicable; share misinformation, contradict scientific consensus, and go against the standard of care.

However, she refused to give examples of statements that would fit the definition, saying that it would depend on the circumstances. Shubb then asked how she expects medical professionals to know what would violate the law.

January 26, 2023 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Why are the intelligentsia so stupid about vaccine injuries?

By Niall McCrae | TCW Defending Freedom | January 25, 2023

Educated stupidity is what failed us. Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert comic strip, now admits that his previous stance of promoting the Covid-19 vaccine was wrong, and that the ‘anti-vaxxers’ have been proved right. In his latest video, Adams opines that the decision on whether to take the shot was best made by ignoring doctors and experts. 

Adams sees an inverse correlation between intelligence and an objective understanding of Covid-19 and climate change. Truth is found not at Davos, scene of the World Economic Forum’s annual conferences attended by the high and mighty, but in Walmart. Indeed, an alternative ‘Dumb Davos’ (by which he meant a gathering of people with no letters before or after their names) would be more enlightening than listening to the arrogant, self-serving class who regard themselves as the ‘elite’.

What to follow – rules or reality? One meaning of ‘observe’ is to adhere to ritualistic practice, as demonstrated by the religiously devout, and also by followers of political ideology. There is no need to think but act dutifully. The other meaning of the verb is to watch what is happening, in a focused rather than passing manner. This is the endeavour of scientists, artists, satirists and (at least in principle) journalists. It is what you would expect of intelligent people, but the Covid-19 regime has shown an incredible observational deficit.

The last three years have shown that a large grey mammal with tusks and trunk can stand incongruously in the room, and intellectual eyes and ears cannot see it. The authorities’ radical response to a purported coronavirus pandemic should have raised questions about the inevitable harm and dubious rational of lockdown, about the dehumanising and ecological damaging mask mandates, and about the experimental injections administered to most of the global populace. But the intelligentsia saw no problem with the draconian regime; indeed, many wanted harsher restrictions. The medical profession uncritically accepted the official narrative, denigrating any practitioner who spoke out.

At a rally outside the BBC headquarters last Saturday, a series of vaccine-injured people told the audience of their dual battle with debilitating symptoms and with unsympathetic doctors who deny the obvious cause. Of course, this event was not reported by the public broadcaster. Instead, the Sunday newspapers continued the campaign against dissidents. In the Sunday Times, in response to Tory MP Andrew Bridgen coming out as a vaccine critic, Josh Glancy warned of a rise of conspiracy theorists peddling dangerous disinformation.

In logical absurdity, people who took the vaccine and suffered as a result are smeared as ‘anti-vaxxers’, a weaponised term prepared in advance of the mass vaccination programme. Other absurdities abound, such as the vaccinated reacting to a subsequent illness and positive Covid-19 test as a sign that the vaccine is working (because without it, they would have needed hospital treatment). Highly intelligent people seem to have lost their critical marbles.

During a silent march from the BBC to Downing Street on Saturday, in respect for the dead and injured, the comments of shoppers ranged from supportive sentiment to bemusement and insults (‘nutters’, I heard). It is quite startling how many people have been so indoctrinated by Covid-19 that they cannot begin to empathise with unfortunate victims of the vaccine. Claims of injury, to them, are heresy.

Two months ago, a poll in the US found that Democrat voters were less likely than Republicans to have experienced adverse effects from the vaccine.

‘More Democrats (83 per cent) than Republicans (65 per cent) or those not affiliated with either major party (58 per cent) have gotten the Covid-19 vaccine. While 80 per cent of Democrats believe Covid-19 vaccines are at least somewhat effective at preventing infection with the virus, only 40 per cent of Republicans and 45 per cent of the unaffiliated share that confidence. Similarly, only 43 per cent are at least somewhat concerned that Covid-19 vaccines may have major side effects, compared with 74 per cent of Republicans and 56 per cent of the unaffiliated.’

An important factor here is the politicisation of Covid-19 in American society. Linked to this is the generally higher education level of Democrats, who perceive their Republican opponents as callous, stupid and anti-science. A Democrat voter may have a strong suggestive effect from the shot, perceiving any bodily abnormality not as an adverse reaction but a sign that the vaccine is working. They may also have more political investment in their unquestioning compliance. By contrast, a Republican voter coerced by occupational mandate may be more likely to complain.

Or were more potent doses administered in red states? It sounds too sinister to believe, but there seems to be little doubt that vaccine strength varied. Mike Yeadon, former chief scientist at Pfizer, has highlighted the concentration of reported serious adverse events in about a tenth of the batches.

As pharmaceutical products are normally produced in a tightly controlled process, Yeadon suggested deliberate differentiation (though the vaccine industry is not without a history of contamination). Yeadon is not alone in voicing concerns about differences in quality. Leaked documents from the European Medicines Agency showed that regulators had serious concerns, finding low quantities of intact mRNA in commercial preparation. 

Whatever the reason for polarisation in vaccine outcomes, we cannot rely on scientific expertise or authority for answers. As Scott Adams realises, the more intelligent the person, the more miseducated into conformity. ‘Anti-vaxxer’, intended as a slur, has become a badge of honour for the awakened.

January 26, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , | Leave a comment

Pfizer Exposed For Exploring “Mutating” COVID-19 Virus For New Vaccines Via ‘Directed Evolution’

Pfizer Director Speaks Giddily About Manipulating SARS-CoV-2

Introduction by John Leake

Watching a Project Veritas undercover sting operation invariably leaves me with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I’m struck with admiration for yet another one of James O’Keefe’s bold strokes against the corrupt empire that now dominates our world. On the other hand, I’m shocked by the disclosure that the Empire is staffed by such moral and intellectual lightweights.

Though incredible, it appears that the subject of O’Keefe’s latest sting, Jordon Walker, really is a Pfizer Director of Research & Development Strategic Operations.

Here he is giddily talking about deliberately mutating SARS-CoV-2 by means of “directed evolution” in order to keep Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine gravy train going:

Debate About Purported Pfizer Exec’s Identity

John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 26, 2023

This morning I woke up to conflicting messages about the true identity of Dr. Jordon Trishton Walker—a purported Pfizer executive who is the subject of Project Veritas’s latest sting. Some commentators have suggested that James O’Keefe failed to perform his due diligence—i.e., that instead of stinging a real Pfizer executive, a Project Veritas operative got a date with a drunk and boasting young man who grossly overstated his position and knowledge.

As I noted in my post of last night, it does seem incredible that a major corporation—one that has played a key role in perpetrating a global criminal fiasco—is staffed with an executive who seems to have been recruited at a frat party. On the other hand, the Pfizer internal documents tweeted by James O’Keefe appear to be authentic.

Additional documents were posted this morning by internet sleuth and fellow Substack author, Brian O’shea.

One of the strangest features of the Hall of Mirrors in which we now live is that the public facade of powerful institutions and corporations is staffed with people who seem stunningly incompetent and unserious. I’m thinking about Karine Jean-Pierre, Rochelle Walensky, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden.

Consider the irony that one of the great idols of the West—Volodymyr Zelensky—was, just a few years ago, a TV actor “who played a high school history teacher who wins the presidential election after a viral video created by his pupils shows him ranting against government corruption in Ukraine.”

The show (Servant of the People) was so popular—and Zelensky so charming—that he was anointed by the oligarchs who run Ukraine to be the next President.

Igor Kolomoisky,the billionaire oligarch who owned 70% of the media company that created the hit show, has been indicted in the United States on charges of large-scale bank fraud. Kolomoisky’s personal attorney served as Zelensky’s campaign manager. Again, who is really making the decisions that now affect all of mankind?

Project Veritas | January 25, 2023

Donate: https://www.projectveritas.com/donate

Get emails: https://confirmsubscription.com/h/j/EC8A17570A033FCC

Follow:
Telegram: https://t.me/project_veritas
FB: https://www.facebook.com/ProjectVeritas
IG: https://www.instagram.com/project_veritas/
Telegram: https://t.me/JamesOKeefeIII
IG: https://www.instagram.com/jamesokeefeiii/

Mission Statement
Investigate & expose corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions in order to achieve a more ethical & transparent society.

Core Values
MORAL COURAGE – Courage is the virtue that sustains all others. We choose to overcome our fears.

WE ARE ALL LEADERS – Turning people into leaders. Completed staff work. Ownership.

COLLABORATION – Best not to work in silos. No one individual is as smart as all of us.

RESILIENCE – Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. Never, ever, ever give up. We don’t let mistakes or setbacks discourage us. Pursue perfection, knowing full well you will never attain it.

MISSION DRIVEN – The best people are motivated by purpose. We are passionate and truly believe in our cause. We must be externally focused, not internally focused.

MAKE THE STATUS QUO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE – We move mountains. Failure is not an option. We do whatever it takes.

THE TIP OF THE SPEAR – We are a loss leader. We do not shy away from conflict or litigation.

Ethical Values
Rule #1 – Truth is paramount. Our reporting is fact based with clear and irrefutable video and audio content. Truth is paramount. We never deceive our audience. We do not distort the facts or the context. We do not “selectively edit.”

Rule #2 – We do not break the law. We maintain one-party consent when recording someone is inherently moral and ethical. We never record when there is zero-party consent. In areas where we are required to have consent from all parties, we seek legal guidance regarding the expectation of privacy’s impact on our right to record.

 Rule #3 – We adhere to the 1st Amendment rights of others. During our investigations we do not disrupt the peace. We do not infringe on the 1st Amendment rights of others.

Rule #4 – The Zekman Test. The undercover investigations we pursue are judged by us to be of “vital public interest” and “profound importance.” The Zekman Test is our baseline. Undercover investigative reporting is necessary because, “… there’s no other way to get the story…” Whereas the Society of Professional Journalists allows for undercover techniques, if undercover techniques are necessary to expose issues of vital public importance; we believe they are not only allowed but required.

Rule #5 – We Protect the Innocent When Possible – Embarrassing private details are not to be investigated. We stay away from irrelevant embarrassingly intimate details about private citizens personal lives. We look for individual wrong-doing and judge its public importance. The irrelevant religious or sexual dispositions of our targets are not to be investigated.

Rule #6 – Transparency. Our methods & tactics must be reasonable and defensible. We use the “Twelve Jurors on Our Shoulder” rule. The work has to be done with such a degree of integrity that it can withstand scrutiny in both law & ethics. We are comfortable with transparency. We must be willing to be ready to disclose our methods upon publication.

Rule #7 – Verifying and Corroborate Stories – Evaluate impact on third parties and Newsworthiness of Statements Alone.We consistently consider the probable truth or falsity of statements, examine any reasons to doubt the veracity of underlying assertions and whether the assertions are newsworthy. When possible, we will confirm with our subjects that their statements captured on video are accurate & truthful. At the very least, we will give our subjects an opportunity to elaborate and/or respond. In all matters, we rely on the 1st Amendment to protect our ability to publish newsworthy items after our internal deliberations. On whether there is an obligation to ensure the veracity of statements made on video, 1.) consider whether the remarks may potentially impact an innocent third party. (Factors in support of releasing the content) and 2.)The Newsworthiness of the statement alone by itself. (Factors against releasing the content).

Rule #8 – Raw Video. In certain circumstances we may release the “raw” video to the press and or the public. But as a rule, we do not.

Rule #9 – Subject Anonymity. We investigate & question sources before promising anonymity. Once we confirm, we will do everything in our power to protect the identity of our confidential sources.

Rule #10 – Being Accountable. Admit mistakes & correct them promptly.

Rule #11 – We do not manufacture content. We do not put words in our investigative subjects’ mouths. We do not lead the horse to water. Our purpose is to elicit truth.

Rule #12 – With Great Power comes Great Responsibility.

January 26, 2023 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

COVID Vaccines ‘Opened the Floodgates’ for New Wave of mRNA Vaccines for Livestock

The Defender | January 19, 2023

Several new government – and industry – funded studies are underway to develop mRNA vaccines for livestock, part of the massive expansion of the animal vaccine industry projected to be worth $26.12 billion by 2030.

Researchers at Iowa State University are undertaking a project funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

Pharmaceutical company Zoetis developed an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine for animals that was administered to animals at zoos throughout the country.

And researchers in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service experimented with vaccinating captive-bred black-footed ferrets against COVID-19. They also experimented with social distancing and quarantine of ferrets.

“Third generation vaccines,” including DNA, RNA and recombinant viral vector vaccines, are not only administered to livestock — but they also are being developed for companion animals and wild animals.

A peer-reviewed study in the journal Viruses last year reported, “The successful application of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 has further validated the platform and opened the floodgates to mRNA vaccine’s potential in infectious disease prevention, especially in the veterinary field.”

Citing the need for biosecurity, in September 2022, the New South Wales (NSW) government fast-tracked the world’s first mRNA vaccines for foot-and-mouth disease and lumpy-skin disease, in a five-year multimillion dollar deal with U.S. biotech company Tiba Biotech.

Announcing the deal, Deputy Premier and Minister for Regional NSW Paul Toole said:

“I have now written to vaccine manufacturers to take up my challenge to develop both vaccines ready for use and manufacture in NSW by August 1 next year.

“COVID-19 demonstrated to us that all possible avenues in developing vaccines must be explored and we will leave no stone unturned.”

Dugald Saunders, NSW minister for agriculture, emphasized how important it was to “protect [NSW’s] livestock sector” and said the agreement with Tiba Biotech to create mRNA vaccines, “would be a game-changer for the industry.”

But experts have raised concerns. Holistic veterinarian Dr. W. Jean Dodds, told The Defender in an email:

“Not enough is known at this time if mRNA vaccines can generate any long-term effects on reproduction or lifespan of domestic farm stock.

“As livestock become part of the human and animal food chain, we need to be sure that no abnormal cellular or molecular changes to the animal could be induced by this type of vaccine.”

‘Good health starts with biosecurity’

According to a report published last year by Grand View Research, the market for animal vaccines is expected to grow at a 9.3% compounded annual growth rate, because “the growing incidence of food-borne zoonotic diseases and increasing animal husbandry are boosting the demand for vaccines.”

The paper pointed to the potential of the mRNA platform to treat diseases like African swine fever, porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus, porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, foot-and-mouth disease virus, bovine viral diarrhea virus, lumpy skin disease virus, bovine leukemia virus and peste des petits ruminants virus, among others.

A recent white paper, “The Future of Livestock Vaccines,” by researchers at the Livestock Research Innovation Corporation, Ontario, Canada, summed up the shift in thinking about animal vaccines:

“New technologies (e.g. mRNA, artificial intelligence) will have dramatic impact on the availability and effectiveness of vaccines available to producers. …

“The current COVID-19 pandemic has taught us many lessons, including the fact that the development, mass production and approval process of vaccines could be shortened from several years (or decades) to 8-9 months.”

“Good health starts with biosecurity,” the authors stated.

Iowa State teams up with Merck — with help from the U.S. government

Iowa State University and Merck last year announced a four-year strategic alliance to research “emerging technologies” in animal health.

Their joint research project to develop mRNA vaccine technology to prevent bovine RSV, as stated above, is funded in part by the U.S. government.

The study aims to develop a novel mRNA platform that is cost-efficient and thermostable in order to “open the door for vaccinating production animals with this technology.”

The project seeks to develop the platform for a bovine RSV vaccine “as a proof of principle for development of vaccines against this pathogen but also as a platform technology for other vaccines as well.”

In 2018, Merck Animal Health introduced Sequivity technology, “a revolutionary swine vaccine platform,” according to its website, to customize vaccines for various swine viruses using RNA particle technology.

The technology consists of creating electronic gene sequences for a given disease, synthesizing them into RNA, inserting them into the platform and injecting them into the animal. The RNA provides instructions to the immune cells to translate the sequence into proteins, which act as antigens.

Merck scientists developed the technology in partnership with Iowa State’s College of Veterinary Medicine.

Gates Foundation among funders of vaccines for livestock

For decades, concentrated animal feedlot operations, known as CAFOs, used antibiotics to help prevent bacterial infections from spreading through farm spaces densely packed with animals. The antibiotics also make animals grow faster.

After years of growing public concern about the use of antibiotics in meat production — particularly for the antibiotic residues they leave and their role in the development of drug-resistant “superbugs” — the World Health Organization in 2017 developed a set of guidelines and best practices on the use of medically important antimicrobials in animals raised for food.

That same year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began regulatory measures to prevent the use of livestock antibiotics for growth purposes and required farmers who wanted to use antibiotics to get them from veterinarians.

The FDA finalized that guidance in 2021.

In an effort to reduce the use of publicly spurned antibiotics and to deal with the problem of viral infections common in industrial livestock production, meat producers turned to vaccines.

“Vaccines and other alternative products can help minimize the need for antibiotics by preventing and controlling infectious diseases in animal populations, and are central to the future success of animal agriculture,” according to a 2018 article in Veterinary Research.

Animal vaccines commonly require a lower level of scrutiny than vaccines for humans.

According to a 2016 Bloomberg report, industry leaders like Elanco, Eli Lilly, Merck Animal Health and Zoetis began shifting billions of dollars of research investments from antibiotics to vaccines in advance of the 2017 FDA regulatory measures.

Experts predicted the new regulations would cause the market for vaccines to explode.

A 2022 report by Acumen showed that other major pharmaceutical companies, including Ceva, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Neogen Corporation, Intas Pharmaceuticals, Zoetis, Biogénesis Bagó and Pfizer are heavily investing in the animal vaccine industry.

“The future of our company is heavily grounded in vaccine development,” Dr. Rick Sibbel, a veterinarian who ran Merck’s technical services for cattle, poultry and swine, told Bloomberg.

The U.K.’s Department for International Development partnered with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to fund livestock vaccines around the world, the department tweeted in 2018.

That partnership included a $40 million grant in 2017 to develop new livestock vaccines. Gates Foundation funding to CGIAR, “global research partnership for a food-secure future dedicated to transforming food, land, and water systems in a climate crisis,” continues to focus on shifting livestock producers from using antibiotics to vaccines.

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.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , | Leave a comment

EcoHealth Alliance Gets Fresh $3 Million DOD Grant

Business as usual for key developer of SARS-CoV-2

By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 25, 2023

Just last month, Dr. Andrew Huff—former senior scientist and vice president at EcoHealth Alliance—published The Truth About Wuhan, in which he details how SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in a lab, and how its leak from the lab was covered up by EcoHealth Alliance president and CEO Dr. Peter Daszak in collaboration with NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci.

That SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a lab is no secret. Even the U.S. Senate acknowledged this reality last October. In 2015, Dr. Ralph Baric published a paper in which he plainly stated that he and his colleagues at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were performing gain of function work on bat coronaviruses in order to make them transmissible to humans.

It is surely one of most bizarre events in history that none of the men who developed SARS-CoV-2 are even the subject of an official investigation. On the contrary, they remain in business and continue to receive taxpayer money. As Rutgers University Professor, Richard H. Ebright recently tweeted, EcoHealth Alliance just got another $3 million Department of Defense Grant. For years, Dr. Ebright has been warning about the extreme danger of gain of function research. In 2017, he raised the alarm about lax security at the BSL-4 lab in Wuhan. No one in our government listened to him then, and it seems he continues to be ignored.

For a long time I have suspected that the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex of international foundations and U.S. federal agencies is now operating outside of the law. The key players in this Complex are untouchable. No legislator or law enforcement officer has the heart to challenge their power. The latest Eco-Health Alliance grant is further evidence that “We the People” no longer count.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

Biden Document Discovery Doesn’t Add Up

By Greg Orman – Real Clear Wire – January 24, 2023

Last week, CBS “Face the Nation” host Margaret Brennan asked Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman why President Biden would dispatch his personal attorney, who didn’t have proper security clearance, to his Delaware home to search for classified documents. Presumably, Brennan believed that when searching for classified documents, one should have the credentials to actually read them. Brennan’s focus on who was reviewing Biden’s papers touched on a potentially interesting line of inquiry. The question hanging in the air, however, relates to the discovery that started this whole process: Why would lawyers be “packing up” Biden’s office in the Penn Biden Center in the first place?

Not unlike other politicians, Joe Biden has done a terrific job of turning political success into a financial windfall. But someone who considered himself “middle-class Joe” for decades should realize the wastefulness of having lawyers perform a task that a trusted intern or aid could perform. As many big-time East Coast lawyers now routinely charge $1,000 an hour, it’s an awfully expensive packing crew – unless the intent wasn’t truly to “pack” but rather to purge.

The timing here is suspicious as well. Apparently, this moving crew was at Biden’s University of Pennsylvania office a week before midterm elections that were widely anticipated to turn control of the House over to the Republicans. As Republicans had signaled that they were going to be spending considerable time wearing out the subpoena powers of various House committees to investigate Biden and his family, it would be an auspicious time to get rid of anything damaging. By using lawyers to carry out the document purge, Biden would be able to attach attorney-client privilege to their efforts, thereby avoiding damaging testimony about the contents of any shredded documents.

To be clear, there’s nothing illegal about getting rid of musty records in the absence of a valid document retention request. The Biden administration made it clear that it would not consider any such request valid until the new Congress was sworn in and the various committee chair gavels handed out. In a response to document requests made in December from Reps. Jim Jordan and James Comer, an administration lawyer responded, “Congress has not delegated such authority to individual members of Congress who are not committee chairmen, and the House has not done so under its current Rules.” In short, you’ll have to start over. Biden was effectively setting a hard deadline for when document purges go from being propitious to being illegal.

Unfortunately for the president, the attorneys tasked with shutting down his University of Pennsylvania office stumbled across top secret government documents and understood the consequences. Had they not made those discoveries, we likely would have never heard of these high-priced packers.

Republicans, including Donald Trump, have been quick to point out the timing of the initial discovery and the lack of prompt public disclosure. They believe the midterm elections might have been more favorable to Republicans if it was clear that Trump wasn’t the only one potentially breaking the law. Maybe. But the timing and process does lead to questions about what more the current president might have to hide.

For now, President Biden wants us to take him at his word that this whole classified documents mess is nothing more than an honest mistake. As he says, “There’s no there, there.” That may be true, but the activities that preceded the classified document discoveries raise different questions. From a man who campaigned on elevating the standards at the White House, this is disappointing to say the least.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | | Leave a comment

Hawley Introduces ‘PELOSI Act’ To Stop Insider Trading In Congress

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | January 25, 2023

Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced legislation Tuesday aimed at preventing insider trading by members of Congress by barring them from trading individual stocks.

The Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments (PELOSI) Act would require lawmakers and their immediate family members to use qualified blind trusts – a method of investing in which an independent manager buys and sells assets without the knowledge or consent of the owner in order to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest.

Under Hawley’s act, members who refuse to do so would be required to forfeit their stock to the US Treasury.

“For too long, politicians in Washington have taken advantage of the economic system they write the rules for, turning profits for themselves at the expense of the American people,” Hawley said in a statement. “As members of Congress, both Senators and Representatives are tasked with providing oversight of the same companies they invest in, yet they continually buy and sell stocks, outperforming the market time and again.”

Last July, former Dallas fed president Richard Fisher slammed then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and her husband Paul over allegations of insider trading.

“Clearly people have taken advantage of inside information forever,” Fisher told CNBC, responding to a report from Punchbowl News. “I’m sorry to see that Paul Pelosi and Nancy Pelosi and others appear to have taken advantage of inside information.”

The Pelosis have repeatedly come under fire for the trades which appeared to be based on nonpublic information.

Recall, the last we wrote about Pelosi’s suspiciously good timing with her stock trades, we noted she had punted on several names heading into 2023. Prior to her trades being carefully scrutinized, Pelosi had a knack for minting cash from her stock trades, which we detailed here.

In March of 2021, the Pelosis scored $1.95 million on Microsoft call options less than two weeks before the tech giant secured a $22 billion contract to supply US Army combat troops with augmented reality headsets, while in January of the same year, Paul Pelosi bought up to $1 million of Tesla calls before the Biden administration announced plans to push electric vehicles.

Pelosi notably opposed bans on stock trading in the 117th Congress.

Although some Democrats, including Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger and Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley, supported a ban on trading in the 117th Congress, Democrats ultimately postponed voting on a package and did not pass legislation. Then-House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy promised the issue would be a priority for the GOP in the 118th Congress. -Daily Caller

The former Speaker has of course denied everything.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Corruption | | Leave a comment

Goodbye empire? US sanctions are failing in the face of multipolarity

By Felix Livshitz | RT | January 25, 2023

Foreign Affairs, a highly influential US magazine – effectively a US empire house journal – has published an article detailing how sanctions are quickly losing their efficiency as a weapon in Washington’s global arsenal.

Published by the Council on Foreign Relations NGO, Foreign Affairs provides space for officials within the US military industrial complex to communicate with one another on matters they believe to be of the utmost significance. Therefore, it is important to pay attention when the magazine makes major pronouncements on any issue.

It recently published an appraisal of US sanctions – the conclusion being that they are increasingly ineffective, have prompted Beijing and Moscow to create alternative global financial structures to insulate themselves and others from punitive actions, and that Washington and its acolytes will no longer be able to force countries to do their bidding, let alone destroy dissenting states, through such measures in the very near future.

The article begins by noting that “sanctions have long been the US’ favored diplomatic weapon,” which “fill the void between empty diplomatic declarations and deadly military interventions.” Despite this, it predicts “the golden days of US sanctions may soon be over.”

These “golden days” were the immediate post-Cold War era, when Washington was “still an unrivaled economic power,” and therefore could at the press of a button cripple each and every overseas economy, in theory. This was due to “primacy of the US dollar and the reach of US oversight of global financial channels.”

As international trade was overwhelmingly conducted using dollars, Washington could stop any country from exporting or importing any and all goods it wished, whenever it liked. Even then, Foreign Affairs recalls, US leaders themselves worried if sanctions were applied too liberally. In 1998, then-President Bill Clinton claimed his government was “in danger of looking like we want to sanction everybody who disagrees with us.”

The Foreign Affairs article says Clinton’s fears were “overblown,” but this is precisely what came to pass. Governments, and the countries they represented, have been sanctioned for pursuing the wrong policies, refusing to be overthrown in US-backed coups and military interventions and showing any degree of independence in their domestic or foreign dealings whatsoever. In the process, millions have died, and even more lives have been ruined for no good reason.

This approach has backfired, and badly. In response, states “have begun to harden their economies against such measures.” For example, after the US cut off Iran from the SWIFT global banking system, many other countries took note. Restricting China’s access to numerous technologies as part of the new Cold War has also served to place both Washington’s allies and adversaries alike “on notice their access to crucial technology could be severed.”

Beijing and Moscow lead the way in the push to create “financial innovations that diminish US advantage,” creating a raft of “currency swap agreements, alternatives to SWIFT, and digital currencies” that serve as “preemptive measures” against any “potential penalties” down the line.

Currency swaps, which connect central banks directly to each other and eliminate the need for trades between them to be dollar-backed, have been eagerly embraced by China. It has signed deals of this kind with more than 60 countries across the world, thereby enabling its companies “to circumvent US financial channels when they want to.”

In 2020, Beijing settled more than half its annual trade with Moscow in currencies other than the dollar, making the majority of these transactions totally immune to US sanctions, and that figure has only risen ever since. In March that year also, the China and Russia-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization officially prioritized development of payments in the local currencies of its members.

Beijing and Moscow are also, Foreign Affairs reports, “busily preparing their own alternatives” to various Western-dominated international systems. Their alternative to SWIFT, the Cross-Border Interbank Payment System, isn’t yet a match in terms of transaction volume, but that’s not the point. It prevents them, and any state or organization enrolled in the framework – 1,300 banks in over 100 countries already – from being unable to make international financial transactions, should they be cut out of SWIFT.

Similarly, China is expanding the reach of the digital renminbi, the currency issued by Beijing central bank, at home and overseas. More than 300 million of its citizens already use it, and a billion are forecast to by 2030. The currency is completely sanctions-proof as the US has no ability to prevent its use, and Beijing has encouraged several countries to pay for its exports exclusively using it – “other such deals will probably follow,” Foreign Affairs predicts.

The American empire’s obsessive reliance on sanctions has now created a Catch-22 situation, by the magazine’s reckoning. The already hostile relations between the USA, China and Russia mean Moscow and Beijing are pushing ahead with this revolutionary effort no matter what. If “things get worse,” they’ll simply “double down on their sanctions-proofing efforts,” taking more and more countries with them.

“These innovations are increasingly giving countries the ability to conduct transactions through sanctions-proof channels. This trend appears irreversible,” the article bitterly concludes. “All this means that within a decade, US unilateral sanctions may have little bite.”

It is all these developments, along with Moscow’s economic pivot eastwards after the 2014 Ukraine coup, and move towards self-sufficiency in energy and food and in other vital resources, which account for the embarrassing failure of US-led sanctions against Russia.

Western leaders, academics, journalists, pundits and economists promised when these sanctions were imposed that they would soon lead to Russia’s total political, economic and military collapse. They have not, demonstrating that elites in Europe and North America do not understand the global economy they claim to rule. They should get to grips with the new reality they inhabit in short order, though – for a multipolar world has begun to emerge in 2022, and it is here to stay.

How rapidly US elites are reckoning with the radically different reality in which they are now forced to operate is ironically underlined by how quickly the author of the Foreign Affairs article, Agathe Demarais, seems to have completely changed her tune on the subject of sanctions. On 1 December, less than a month earlier, she authored a piece for Foreign Policy – another US empire in-house journal – that offered a radically different take on the matter.

Boldly declaring “sanctions on Russia are working” in the headline, Demarais dismissed suggestions punitive Western measures were intended to “force Putin to back down and pull out of Ukraine,” or to provoke “regime change” in Moscow, or to prompt “a Venezuela-style collapse of the Russian economy,” despite the fact every single one of these outcomes was explicitly cited as a motivating factor behind the sanctions by Western officials, pundits, and journalists at the time.

Instead, she argued, sanctions were effective in the quest to “send a message to the Kremlin” that “Europe and the United States are standing with Ukraine.”

Whether or not Kiev will be thrown under a bus by its Western backers in due course, and the anti-Russian measures will endure after the war is over, seems to not matter so much, though – for, as Demarais was herself forced to acknowledge less than four weeks later, the effectiveness of sanctions is rapidly diminishing. The speed of this about-face could well be an indication of how irresistibly the multipolar world is coming to be.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Subjugation - Torture | , , , , | Leave a comment

90 Seconds to Midnight?

By Scott Ritter | January 24, 2023

The Russian guided missile frigate, the Admiral Gorshkov, is in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, ostensibly heading toward the east coast of the United States, part of a planned journey which began on 4 January 2023 and is expected to transit the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, as well as the Mediterranean Sea. The Admiral Gorshkov is outfitted with 16 vertical launch tubes, each of which, in theory, could be armed with nuclear-capable Zircon hypersonic missiles capable of covering 1,000 kilometers in less than 10 minutes.

To put it bluntly, soon Russia will be in a position where a single ship could, in a matter of minutes, fire 16 nuclear armed hypersonic missiles at the United States which not only cannot be intercepted by anything in the US arsenal, but also would impact their respective targets before any meaningful evacuation could be conducted. It is, literally, a decapitation weapon.

Current Russian nuclear doctrine does not allow for a nuclear first strike; indeed, Russian President Vladimir Putin has made it clear that Russia would not be the first nation to use nuclear weapons in any future nuclear conflict. But he also emphasized that Russia would not be the second, either, meaning that Russia would release its nuclear arsenal without waiting for any US first strike to impact Russian soil.

The Admiral Gorshkov is sending a clear signal to the US leadership that there will be no survivors in any nuclear exchange between the US and Russia.

Amid this muscle flexing, the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a disarmament advocacy group founded in 1945 by Albert Einstein and University of Chicago scientists who helped develop the first atomic weapons in the Manhattan Project, and which currently maintains what is known as the “Doomsday Clock” that reflects the risk of nuclear conflict, decided to move the hands of the clock ten seconds forward from the current 100 seconds to midnight. In a statement announcing this decision, “A time of unprecedented danger: It is 90 seconds to midnight,” the board declared the following:

“The war in Ukraine may enter a second horrifying year, with both sides convinced they can win. Ukraine’s sovereignty and broader European security arrangements that have largely held since the end of World War II are at stake. Also, Russia’s war on Ukraine has raised profound questions about how states interact, eroding norms of international conduct that underpin successful responses to a variety of global risks.

“And worst of all, Russia’s thinly veiled threats to use nuclear weapons remind the world that escalation of the conflict—by accident, intention, or miscalculation—is a terrible risk. The possibility that the conflict could spin out of anyone’s control remains high.”

The ignorance of this statement is manifest. What the Board calls “Russia’s war on Ukraine” ignores the fact-based historical truth that the Ukraine conflict was, and is, solely the byproduct of a concerted plan by the United States and NATO to use Ukraine as a foil to generate conflict designed to bring down the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

This plan has been in place since at least 2008, when the former US Ambassador to Russia (and current Director of the CIA), William Burns, warned that any effort by NATO to bring Ukraine into its ranks would precipitate an eventual Russian military intervention. Despite this stark warning, NATO extended an invitation to Ukraine in November 2008, clearly initiating a known cause-effect relationship that defined NATO’s policy toward Russia as being one which sought a proxy conflict using Ukraine as a stand-in for NATO.

This policy as furthered by the US, EU and NATO all acting in concert to precipitate a coup in Ukraine in February 2014 designed to oust the constitutionally elected president, Victor Yanukovych, and replace him with a new, ultra-nationalist government dominated by adherents of the odious ideology of Stepan Bandera. The coup succeeded, and in April the new Ukrainian government declared war on the ethnic Russian population of the Donbas. This action triggered the Russian annexation of Crimea and the provision of military support by Russia to the Donbas, triggering the very military intervention William Burns had warned about six years prior.

Ukraine and its NATO allies then sued for peace, initiating negotiations that led to the adoption of the Minsk Agreement, which put in place a ceasefire in exchange for guarantees regarding Ukrainian sovereignty over the Donbas as well as relative autonomy for the ethnic Russians of the Donbas, protecting their language, religion, culture, and traditions.

The Minsk Accords floundered for eight years, with Ukraine failing to implement the required constitutional changes necessary to secure the rights of the ethnic Russians of the Donbas. The reasons for this delay are today well known, thanks to the public confessions of former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and former French President Francois Hollande, all three signatories to the accords. These three national leaders have acknowledged that the Minsk Accords were simply a sham designed by Ukraine to buy time to build a NATO proxy military capable of reclaiming both the Donbas and Crimea.

Russia’s decision to invade Ukraine on February 24, 2022 was not an unprovoked act of aggression, but rather a legitimate exercise of its right, together with the newly independent republics of Lugansk and Donetsk, of preemptive collective self-defense in the face of the imminent threat of aggression by Ukraine’s newly trained army which was, by design, little more than a NATO proxy.

The fact that the esteemed members of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists – which includes among its ranks ten Nobel laureates – seem ignorant of this history, colors their ability to comprehend the true nature of the threat facing the world today, and from whence that threat comes.

The United States, having deliberately provoked a pre-meditated conflict with Russia, is now trying to implement a two-tracked policy designed to trigger a Maidan-like moment in Moscow (named after Maidan Square, in Kiev, where US-backed neo-Nazi’s staged a violent coup against former Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych) where the Russian population would rise up against the government of President Vadimir Putin, overthrowing him and installing a pro-western leader who would return Russia to the colonial-like existence of the 1990’s, when Boris Yeltsin allowed the collective west to rape Russia economically and dominate Russia politically.

The two-tracks of this policy involve the imposition of economic sanctions linked to Russia’s decision to militarily intervene in Ukraine, and the prosecution of a proxy conflict in Ukraine designed to bleed Russia white. The goal of this policy is to engender massive unrest among a demoralized Russian population which would in turn rise and remove President Putin from power.

The insanity of such a plan is incomprehensible. Imagine for a moment that Russia embarked on a plan of action designed to strip away Mexico from the US sphere of influence and, in doing so, promulgated a conflict the goal of which was to have Mexico re-take by force the territory encompassing the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. The idea that the United States would sit idly in the face of such a threat is ludicrous. So, too, is any concept that Russia should do the same.

A quick history lesson for the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists:

  • It was the US, not Russia, that withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile and Intermediate Nuclear Forces treaties.
  • It is the US, not Russia, that has frozen talks on the extension of the New Strategic Arms Treaty.
  • It is the US, not Russia, that has recently promulgated a nuclear posture policy which allows for the preemptive use of nuclear weapons in a non-nuclear scenario.
  • It is the US, not Russia, that has deployed a low-yield (i.e., “usable) nuclear warhead (the W-76-2) on Trident submarine launched ballistic missiles, and conducted war games where the Secretary of Defense has practiced the communications procedures necessary to launch this weapon where Russia was the named target of the missile.
  • It is the US, not Russia, that is building a Ukrainian proxy army designed by intent to be able to capture territory Russia claims as its own (the four former Ukrainian provinces annexed by Russia in September 2022, and Crimea), knowing full well that one of the triggers for release of Russian nuclear weapons is any conventional military force that threatens the existential survival of Russia.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists would have to be deaf, dumb, and blind not to know these underlying facts, and not to see them as truth.

Which means they are complicit in the nuclear terror being perpetrated by the United States, and indifferent to the consequences thereof.

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists is therefore fundamentally wrong in its assessment of it being 90 seconds until midnight.

The truth is the world is one second to midnight, and the clock can strike at any time, something the presence of the Admiral Gorshkov off the coast of the United States proves only too well.

January 25, 2023 Posted by | Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »