Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Dutch Farmers’ Protest and the War on Food

By Kit Knightly | OffGuardian | July 2, 2022

This week, tens of thousands of farmers have gathered from all across the Netherlands to protest government policies which will reduce the number of livestock in the country by up to a third.

In a typical example of media weasel-wording, the press reports on this all headline something like “Dutch farmers protest emissions targets”, but this is a massive lie by omission.

The government policy being protested is a 25 BILLION Euro investment in “reducing levels of nitrogen pollution” true, but it plans to achieve this by (among other things) “paying some Dutch livestock farmers to relocate or exit the industry”.

In real terms, this ultimately means reducing the number of pigs, chickens and cows by about thirty per cent.

That’s what is being protested here – a deliberate shrinking of the farming sector, impacting the livelihood of thousands of farmers, and the food supply of literally hundreds of millions of people.

THE BIG PICTURE

While the scheme is allegedly about limiting nitrogen and ammonia emissions from urine and manure it’s hard not to see this in the broader context of the ongoing created food crisis.

The Netherlands produces a massive food surplus and is one of the largest exporters of meat in the world and THE largest in Europe. Reducing its output by a third could have huge implications for the global food supply, especially in Western Europe.

Perhaps more troubling is how this could act as a precedent.

This isn’t the first “pay farmers not to farm” scheme launched in the last year – both the UK and US have put such schemes in place – but a government paying to reduce it’s own meat production? That is a first.

That it is (allegedly) being done to “protect the environment” makes it a big warning sign for the future. Denmark, Belgium and Germany are already considering similar policies.

The Western world seems to be enthusiastically embracing quasi-suicidal policies.

I mean, paying farmers to reduce the amount of food they produce… while (notionally) threatened with war… in the midst of a recession… facing record inflation as the cost of living spirals.

Does that really make any sense?

That’s almost as crazy as refusing new oil and gas leases while the cost of petrol is going up.

Indeed, in a world beset by a shortage of fertiliser due to sanctions against Russia and Belarus, it would seem almost mad to complain about a manure surplus, let alone try to reduce it.

We’re well past the point where any of this could be considered accidental, aren’t we?

Put it this way – if the collective governments of the Western world were trying to impoverish and starve their own citizens, what exactly would they be doing differently?

July 2, 2022 Posted by | Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , , , | Leave a comment

India, BRICS in cold war conditions

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | JULY 2, 2022 

The phone conversation on Friday between Prime Minister Modi and Russian President Putin conveyed a big signal, coming on the morrow of the release of the new Strategic Concept by NATO which called Russia the alliance’s “most significant and direct threat.” The readouts from Moscow and New Delhi both highlighted the two leaderships’ determination to carry forward the momentum of economic cooperation despite the western sanctions against Russia. (here and here) 

Ironically, the West’s “sanctions from hell” have given a big stimulus to India-Russia bilateral trade, giving it a dynamism that one never suspected would be recaptured in the post-Soviet era. 

Friday’s call was agreed upon in the sidelines of the BRICS summit (June 23-24). Curiously,  it has come at a time when the Western powers have stepped up their efforts to create discord among the BRICS member countries, and brainwash India, in particular, to join their bandwagon in the new Cold War conditions. India is of course cherrypicking. 

But that is understandable at a time when the economy is in “stagflation.” India’s relationship with Russia was the leitmotif of Modi’s visit to Japan in April and three visits to Europe in May as well as his two meetings with US President Biden during this period. In the West’s calculus, China and India are giving what analysts would call “strategic depth” to Russia, which nullifies its frantic efforts to “erase” Russia. Interestingly, the western attempts to create paranoia in the Indian mind about the close ties between Russia and China are no longer having the desired effect of Delhi becoming wary of Russia’s intentions. India sees, on the contrary, great opportunities to tap into Russia’s tilt to Asia-Pacific region for economic partnerships. 

Without doubt, India is “balancing” between Washington and Moscow and BRICS summit was a great occasion to monitor that trapeze act. An unabashedly pro-western internet paper from Delhi had predicted that Modi would act as a vigilante for US President Biden, blocking any BRICS statement critical of the US. Whether that was true or not, Modi made a rather anodyne speech at the BRICS summit. 

On the other hand, Putin had stated in his speech at the summit that “Considering the complexity of the challenges and threats the international community is facing, and the fact that they transcend borders, we need to come up with collective solutions. BRICS can make a meaningful contribution to these efforts.” 

Putin added, “We are confident that today, as never before, the world needs the BRICS countries’ leadership in defining a unifying and positive course for forming a truly multipolar system of interstate relations… we can count on support from many states in Asia, Africa and Latin America, which are seeking to pursue an independent policy.” 

In his speech, Chinese President Xi Jinping made an even more direct appeal to the BRICS partners: “Our world today is overshadowed by the dark clouds of Cold War mentality and power politics and beset by constantly emerging traditional and non-traditional security threats. Some countries attempt to expand military alliances to seek absolute security, stoke bloc-based confrontation by coercing other countries into picking sides and pursue unilateral dominance at the expense of others’ rights and interests. If such dangerous trends are allowed to continue, the world will witness even more turbulence and insecurity.

“It is important that BRICS countries support each other on issues concerning core interests, practice true multilateralism, safeguard justice, fairness and solidarity and reject hegemony, bullying and division.” 

Frankly, no matter the impressive-looking XIV BRICS Summit Beijing Declaration, the fact remains that the grouping is performing far below its actual potential and one principal reason for this is India’s zero-sum mindset regarding China, which makes it difficult for it to work with China collectively in any regional forum. 

However, any apprehension in the Indian mind that China would “dominate” BRICS is unwarranted. Russia undoubtedly occupies a special place in the structure of the BRICS. In fact, BRICS was Moscow’s brainchild and Russia was responsible for launching the format. The first ministerial meeting (in the BRIC format) took place at the suggestion of Putin in September 2006, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session in New York. Thus, the idea of creating BRICS matured in Russia. 

Second, BRICS is a “de-ideologised” format. It shows no animus against America although it challenges western hegemony of the international political and economic order. The very fact that the Manmohan Singh government welcomed Putin’s BRIC initiative at a most sensitive juncture when India’s negotiations for a nuclear deal with the US (with eye on Washington’s embargo on technology transfer) speaks for itself. 

Moscow conceived the BRICS concept for the strengthening of the formation of a multipolar system of international relations and the growth of economic cooperation — and it has indeed contributed to the birth of a new economic system, based on the equal access of countries to financing and sales markets, a combination of state planning and market economy. 

India has a problem to appreciate that the BRICS paradigm does not lie in expanding the capabilities or ambitions of the group’s member countries, but in fostering a qualitative change in the economic development model of the Global South. India’s dog-in-the-manger attitude — sulking and politicising the forum with extraneous issues (primarily to embarrass China) — doesn’t make sense. 

Unlike India, China takes BRICS seriously. The Chinese initiative to create a BRICS Vaccine Centre has been under development and the implementation of this project amid the current conditions can be a significant achievement that will bolster the entire format of the association. Ideally, India should cooperate with the project instead of teaming up with its QUAD partners which has turned out to be a wild goose chase.  

Again, industrial innovation is slated to be a priority for China’s BRICS Presidency in 2022. Expectations are high that during its presidency, China will come up with a number of breakthrough initiatives. Clearly, now that the construction of the BRICS’ New Development Bank headquarters in Shanghai has finished, new proposals are expected from China on the development of its operations, including possibly an expansion of the number of shareholders of the bank.

Of course, China will promote its own projects, including Belt and Road initiative. But then, China is also putting into the projects the most financial resources. It is high time for India to have a serious reassessment of values within the BRICS framework, and the changing internal balance of power in the grouping in the new Cold War conditions.

BRICS is at the crossroads and this realisation has propelled the concept of a “BRICS+” format to the centerstage of discussions. China’s BRICS chairmanship 2022 witnessed the launch of the extended BRICS+ meeting at the level of Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Participants included Egypt, Nigeria, Senegal, Argentina, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Thailand. 

During the ministerial, China also announced plans to open up the possibility of developing countries joining the core BRICS grouping. Argentina and Iran have been mentioned as candidates for BRICS expansion. Be that as it may, “BRICS+” is certain to be on the agenda of global governance in times to come. 

July 2, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

New York gun control law requires social media checks

Samizdat | July 2, 2022

New York has adopted a sweeping gun control law aiming to ban firearms from a number of “sensitive areas,” including Times Square, also requiring social media checks for gun permit applicants to ensure their “character and conduct.”

The Democrat-sponsored bill advanced through the New York legislature during a special session on Friday, with Governor Kathy Hochul signing it soon after.

“This to me is the embodiment of what it means to be an American,” Hochul said of the law soon after it passed the state Senate, adding she would sign it “in honor of our Fourth of July weekend.”

The law bans guns from a long list of “sensitive areas” around the Empire State, such as popular tourist sites in New York City, as well as schools, libraries, universities, government buildings, playgrounds and parks, public transit and stadiums. Residents will also no longer be allowed to carry firearms into private businesses unless the owners post clear signage stating it is permitted.

A more controversial measure in the bill requires those looking to obtain a gun permit to send the government “a list of former and current social media accounts… from the past three years” in order to confirm the “applicant’s character and conduct.” Additionally, they will be made to submit at least four “character references” who can “attest to the applicant’s good moral character.”

The bill was passed during a special legislative session called after the US Supreme Court shot down a century-old gun control law in New York last week. While the provision forced permit-seekers to demonstrate that they required a gun for self-defense, the court concluded that it violated the 14th Amendment “by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.”

Though Democratic supporters have said it will help “make New Yorkers safe,” the new legislation has faced intense criticism from Republicans and gun advocates, with the executive director of the New York State Firearms Association, Aaron Dorr, blasting it as “the kind of bill that the Gestapo would be proud of.”

“This will never survive a court challenge,” he added.

GOP Rep. Lee Zeldin – who won the party’s nomination for an upcoming governor’s race earlier this week – was also highly critical, arguing the law would only make residents less safe.

“Only under one party Democrat rule can criminals run amuck armed with illegal guns, while law abiding New Yorkers are stripped of their right to safely and securely carry a firearm solely for self-defense,” Zeldin said.

Debate over gun control has been rekindled by a spate of mass shootings in recent months – including a rampage in Buffalo, New York which left 10 dead in May – prompting new legislation across a number of states and on the national level. Late last week, President Joe Biden signed a major bipartisan gun bill into law, aiming to limit access to firearms from those considered dangerous, the most significant legislation of its kind to clear Congress in nearly 30 years.

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Twitter ‘Silenced’ Physicians Who Posted Truthful Information About COVID, Lawsuit Alleges

By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 30, 2022

Three physicians are suing Twitter, alleging the company violated its own terms of service and community standards when it suspended their accounts for posting “truthful statements regarding COVID-19 policy, diagnosis and/or treatment.”

Drs. Robert Malone, Peter McCullough and Bryan Tyson on Monday filed the lawsuit in Superior Court in California, San Francisco County.

The complaint alleges Twitter breached the terms of its contract when it permanently suspended the plaintiffs’ accounts, silenced their voices and failed to provide them with “verified” badges.

Plaintiffs allege Twitter’s actions were a substantial factor in causing them harm, and are asking the judge to order Twitter to reactivate their accounts.

All three doctors are represented by attorneys Bryan M. Garrie and Matthew P. Tyson (no relation to the plaintiff, Bryan Tyson).

Matthew Tyson on May 12, sent a letter to the directors and managing agents of Twitter requesting the company reinstate the accounts of five physicians, including the plaintiffs, and provide them with “verified” badges. Twitter failed to respond.

In the letter, Matthew Tyson acknowledged Twitter is a “private company” and its terms state it can “suspend user accounts for any or no reason.”

“However, Twitter also implemented specific community standards to limit COVID-19 misinformation on the platform, and Twitter was bound to follow those terms,” he added.

According to the complaint, Twitter’s content-moderation terms included removal procedures for ineffective treatments and false diagnostic criteria, and measures for “labeling” information as “misleading.”

Twitter has a “five-strike policy” as part of its COVID-19 misinformation guidelines and community standards.

Twitter’s website states:

“The consequences for violating our COVID-19 misleading information policy depend on the severity and type of the violation and the account’s history of previous violations. In instances where accounts repeatedly violate this policy, we will use a strike system to determine if further enforcement actions should be applied.”

Strike 1 is “no account-level action.” Strike 2 results in a 12-hour account lock. Strike 3 results in another 12-hour account lock. Strike 4 results in a seven-day account lock and five or more strikes lead to permanent suspension.

Plaintiffs claim they relied on Twitter to employ and enforce its terms in good faith and it was foreseeable to Twitter that plaintiffs would rely on the terms the company is obligated to follow.

According to the complaint, a “truthful tweet regarding COVID-19 policy, diagnosis and/or treatment” would not violate Twitter’s terms of service, community standards, content moderation policies or misinformation guidelines.

“None of these physicians posted false or misleading information, nor did they receive five strikes before suspension,” Matthew Tyson stated in his letter to Twitter.

“It’s no accident that Twitter violated its own COVID-19 misinformation guidelines and suspended the accounts of Drs. Zelenko, Malone, Fareed, Tyson and McCullough,” he wrote.

The letter stated:

“Twitter received express and implied threats from government officials to censor certain viewpoints and speakers, lest Twitter face the amendment or revocation of Section 230, or antitrust enforcement. This was a financial decision for Twitter.

“For the sake of profits, it chose to abandon its role as a neutral internet service provider and instead openly and intentionally collude with government to silence lawful speech.”

In an email to The Defender, lead attorney Garrie and co-counsel Matthew Tyson said:

“In this political climate, honesty is a rare commodity, and concerns over new and experimental vaccines and drug therapies and the safety and effectiveness of alternative outpatient treatments should be the subject of full and transparent public debate.

“Drs. Malone, Tyson and McCullough are highly qualified and credentialed physicians and scientists who posted truthful information on Twitter that contradicted the mainstream narrative regarding COVID-19 policy, diagnosis, and treatment.

“They shared fact-based information which furthered an important public interest as people around the world try to decide how to treat themselves and their loved ones for COVID-19. Twitter silenced them.

“Our clients seek to hold Twitter liable not as a Section 230 publisher, but as a counterparty to a contract, as a promisor who has breached the very terms it put in place to moderate tweets. We will hold Twitter accountable in court and prove the truth of our clients’ statements for the world to see.”

Twitter refused to verify physicians’ accounts

In addition to being suspended from Twitter, the company refused to verify the plaintiffs’ accounts even though the accounts met Twitter’s criteria for verification.

To be verified, an account must be “notable and active.”

Twitter defines a notable account to include “activists, organizers, and other influential individuals,” including “prominently recognized individuals.”

According to the complaint, Malone is an “internationally recognized scientist and physician” who completed a fellowship at Harvard Medical School as a global clinical research scholar and was scientifically trained at the University of California and Salk Institute Molecular Biology and Virology laboratories.

Malone is the “original inventor of mRNA vaccination technology, DNA vaccination and multiple non-viral DNA and RNA/mRNA platform delivery technologies,” and has “roughly 100 scientific publications, which have been cited more than 12,000 times.”

He holds an “outstanding” impact factor rating on Google Scholar and sits as a non-voting member on the National Institutes of Health [Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines] committee, which is tasked with managing clinical research for a variety of drug and antibody treatments for COVID-19.

The complaint states Malone used his Twitter account to post truthful statements regarding COVID-19 policy, diagnosis and/or treatment. He received no strikes for his content and he did not violate Twitter’s rules, yet his account was permanently suspended.

McCullough, according to the complaint, is a highly accomplished physician who is the founder and current president of the Cardiorenal Society of America.

He has been “published more than 1,000 times, made presentations on the advancement of medicine across the world and has been an invited lecturer at the New York Academy of Sciences, the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency.”

McCullough has also served on the editorial boards of multiple specialty journals and was a member or chair of data safety monitoring boards of 24 randomized clinical trials.

He was a “leader in the medical response to COVID-19, has more than 30 peer-reviewed publications on the infection, and has commented and testified extensively on COVID19 treatment, including before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,” the lawsuit states.

McCullough’s account was suspended, but Twitter allowed him to create a new account that is followed by more than 480,000 people. Yet, he is still unable to receive a “verified” badge.

In a June 28 tweet, McCullough said “trouble is on the horizon for the “common carrier” whose only role is to provide a platform for communications operations,” referring to the lawsuit.

Tyson is a licensed physician with15 years of hospital and emergency medicine experience. He practices with Dr. George Fareed, who also was suspended from Twitter for posting what he claimed was truthful COVID-19 information.

Tyson and Fareed have “gained international recognition for providing successful early treatment to more than 10,000 COVID-19 patients, with zero patient deaths when treatment was started within 7 days,” the complaint states.

Tyson testified in various proceedings about early treatment protocols and co-authored a book about COVID-19.

He also ran as a candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives for California’s 25th Congressional District, yet was not deemed a “notable figure of public interest” regarding COVID-19 policy, diagnosis and/or treatment, which prohibited him from obtaining a “verified” badge on Twitter.

Tyson says he posted only truthful statements about COVID-19 policy, diagnosis and/or treatment with his account, and none of his tweets were classified as a “strike” or violated Twitter’s terms of service.

Like Malone’s, Tyson’s and Fareed’s accounts were permanently suspended.

“In a nutshell, these are five [physicians] of the most knowledgeable and helpful voices in the world regarding COVID-19 treatment,” Matthew Tyson wrote in his letter. “Disturbingly, Twitter silenced all of them.”

Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Setback for US hypersonic program as another test ends in failure

Press TV – July 1, 2022

The latest test of a US hypersonic missile in the state of Hawaii failed on Wednesday, the Pentagon said, attributing the failure to an “anomaly” during the first test of the full system.

The failed test was part of the Conventional Prompt Strike (CPS) program, under which aerospace and military equipment company Lockheed Martin is trying to develop weapons capable of flying at super high speeds for use on submarines and ships.

The test, carried out at the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Hawaii, was supposed to launch the Common Hypersonic Glide Body atop a two-stage missile booster.

The booster is designed to launch the system and accelerate it to hypersonic speeds above Mach 5, at which point the glide body detaches and uses its speed to reach the target. It was the first time the entire system was tested, called an All Up Round test.

“While the Department was unable to collect data on the entirety of the planned flight profile, the information gathered from this event will provide vital insights,” Pentagon spokesman Tim Gorman said in a statement.

He did not provide any additional details on the nature of the anomaly or at what stage of the test it occurred, adding that the Pentagon is currently investigating the reasons for the failure of this missile test.

In October 2021, a similar test failed in Kodiak, Alaska. Despite the failure of both tests, the Pentagon has expressed confidence to develop offensive hypersonic capabilities by the early 2020s.

“Delivering hypersonic weapons remains a top priority and the Department remains confident that it is on track to field offensive and defensive hypersonic capabilities on target dates beginning in the early 2020s,” the Pentagon spokesman stated.

The Pentagon has focused its attention recently on hypersonic weapons development amid concerns that the country could lag behind the Chinese and Russian programs.

China successfully tested a hypersonic weapon last year that orbited the globe before striking its target. Russia has also greatly developed its hypersonic weapons in recent years.

The latest test failure, which was first reported by Bloomberg, has dealt another blow to the US in the race to develop hypersonic missiles.

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | | Leave a comment

US should pull out of NATO: Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

Samizdat | July 1, 2022

Washington should pull out of NATO instead of sending billions of taxpayer dollars to Ukraine and risking a nuclear war, according to a Republican congresswoman who has been highly critical of Washington’s response to the Ukraine crisis.

Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a strong supporter of former President Donald Trump, made the case in a series of tweets on Thursday.

Ukraine is the “new Iraq wrapped up with a pretty little NATO bow, with a nuclear present inside,” she wrote.

“The American people do not want war with Russia, but NATO & our own foolish leaders are dragging us into one. We should pull out of NATO.”

She described the provision of military aid to Ukraine, which she voted against in Congress, as a “proxy war” against Russia that Americans have no appetite for.

“Grinding up Ukraine to fight with Russia is disgusting, they could have been an ally,” she tweeted.

Marjorie Taylor Greene also listed a host of problems that she sees as more pressing for the American people, from soaring inflation to fentanyl overdoses and rampant crime. The only people vying for a conflict with Russia are “those who make money off of it,” she claimed.

“NGOs, defense contracts of all kinds, grants, business deals, even humanitarian aid, political consultants, & more,” she wrote. “War is an industry. A deadly profitable industry.”

Warmongers in Washington seeking war with Russia “should suit up and go fight it” themselves, she suggested. “Send your kids and leave ours alone. Pay for it yourself.”

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Alabama is first state to seek ban on gender-affirming treatments for children

Samizdat | July 1, 2022

The state of Alabama has called on a federal court to uphold a ban on so-called gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender youths, citing a recent Supreme Court ruling that allowed state governments to prohibit abortions.

In a 76-page brief filed with the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall insisted that a previous injunction on the state’s ban of transgender treatments should be overturned, since such care is not protected under the 14th amendment to the US Constitution as it is not “deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions.”

“The Legislature determined that transitioning treatments in particular are too risky to authorize, so it is those treatments Plaintiffs must show the Constitution protects,” the brief says. “But no one –adult or child– has a right to transitioning treatments that is deeply rooted in our nation’s history and tradition.”

The state’s argument closely resembles the reasoning behind the recent US supreme court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which removed federal abortion protections and placed the responsibility for legalizing or banning the procedure on individual states and their citizens.

Supreme Court judges that ruled in favor of overturning the legislation argued that terminating a pregnancy was not a fundamental constitutional right because it was not explicitly mentioned in the US constitution and was not “deeply rooted in this nation’s history and tradition.”

In the brief, Marshall goes on to insist that the Constitution reserves to the state, and not courts or medical interest groups, the authority to determine that “sterilizing interventions” are too dangerous for minors, adding that the State has a right to regulate or prohibit such interventions for children “even if an adult wants the drugs for his child.”

The Attorney General also noted that research regarding these “novel interventions” was poor and that they were unproven to offer lasting relief to children suffering from gender-related distress. “What research does exist is already outdated – a remarkable fact given that the seminal study on transitioning children was published less than a decade ago and has not been replicated,” he added.

Marshall also drew attention to the fact that gender-related distress has become “a tsunami” as clinics offering “‘transitioning’ treatments on kids are seeing their patient loads increase by thousands of percent,” noting that the new trend was “troubling.”

In April, Alabama governor Kay Ivey signed into law a bill which made it a felony to provide gender-affirming treatments to minors, and sought a 10-year prison sentence and a $15,000 fine for anyone providing puberty blockers, hormones or surgical procedures to transgender youths under the age of 19.

However that legislation was partially blocked one month later by a federal judge, who dismissed the state GOP leader’s claim that puberty blockers were “experimental,” and insisted that transitioning medications were “well-established, evidence-based treatments for gender dysphoria in minors” endorsed by “at least 22 major medical associations.”

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Covid-19 originated from US biolab – Lancet commission chair

Samizdat | July 1, 2022

Covid-19 did not come out of some natural reservoir but rather “out of US lab biotechnology” in an accident, world-renowned economist and author Jeffrey Sachs has claimed, speaking at a conference hosted by the GATE Center think tank in Spain in mid-June.

While introducing this “provocative statement,” Sachs suggested that he was in the loop, as he chairs the Covid-19 commission at prestigious medical journal The Lancet.

“So it’s a blunder, in my view, of biotech, not an accident of a natural spillover,” he reiterated.

The academic noted that while “we don’t know for sure” if this is the case, there is “enough evidence” pointing to this, which “should be looked into.” Sachs lamented that this version is, however, “not being investigated, not in the United States, not anywhere.”

Back in May, Sachs, along with Columbia University professor of molecular pharmacology and therapeutics Neil Harrison, penned an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggesting Covid-19 had originated in a laboratory. In the paper, the two academics called for greater transparency on the part of US federal agencies and universities, arguing that a lot of pertinent evidence was not disclosed.

Virus databases, biological samples, viral sequences, email communications, and laboratory notebooks could all help shed light on the pandemic origin, according to Sachs and Harrison. However, none of these materials had been subjected to “independent, transparent, and scientific scrutiny,” they argued.

As an indicator that Covid 19 had originated from a laboratory, the authors brought up the fact that a sequence of eight amino acids on a critical part of the virus’s spike protein is similar to an amino acid sequence found in cells that line human airways.

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

FOREIGN MERCENARIES WERE BURNED TO THE GROUND AS UNNECESSARY WITNESSES AT AZOVSTAL

The_Saker | June 29, 2022

The war reporter Andrey Rudenko is in Azovstal bomb shelter, talking about the separate place for (may be killed) mercenaries bodies.

July 1, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

FDA Panel Votes to Waive Clinical Trials for New COVID Boosters

By Megan Redshaw | The Defender | June 29, 2022

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) vaccine advisory panel on Tuesday voted 19 to 2 to recommend new COVID-19 booster shots that include the Omicron variant this fall.

The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) did not issue guidance on whether additional data would be needed to recommend an updated composition of the primary-series vaccines authorized for emergency use in the U.S., or whether it would be appropriate to continue to use a primary-series vaccine as a booster.

It is the first time VRBPAC has suggested vaccine makers modify their vaccines to target a different variant, according to CNBC, which also reported the FDA will likely accept the committee’s recommendation.

If so, the FDA would be authorizing a vaccine change without requiring additional data showing a bivalent vaccine — containing both the original 2019 Wuhan variant and one of the Omicron variants — is safe and effective for those age groups that are already authorized to receive a booster dose.

The FDA plans to decide by early July whether vaccines will target the now-dominant BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron subvariants or the BA.1 Omicron variant that led to a surge in infections last winter, Reuters reported.

At the beginning of the meeting, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, suggested a newly designed shot could begin in October, adding that it takes manufacturers around three months to choose a vaccine design and begin producing doses.

Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center and professor of pediatrics in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and Dr. Hank Bernstein, professor of pediatrics at Zucker School of Medicine, were the only two members who broke from the panel to vote against the initiative.

Offit acknowledged there’s a benefit to providing a booster in the fall to some age groups, but questioned whether Omicron was the right strain. He said the move to new-variant vaccines was happening too fast, with too little data.

“I think as a new product it should be handled as a new product,” Offit said. “I think we need a higher standard than what we’ve been given. …“I’m not comfortable enough to support the risk of a new product.”

Bernstein expressed concern over the lack of data used to justify changing the strain, and the potential that by the time a subsequent booster is approved, it will contain outdated strains.

“So, in sum, I think including an Omicron strain in the vaccine seems to have some potential, but data especially for BA.4 and BA.5 are limited at this time, and that’s why I’m struggling to even make a strain change at this time,” Bernstein said.

Bernstein also said he didn’t see a need to change the strain as the current vaccine being used is shown to be effective against severe disease — a claim made just two weeks earlier at a prior VRBPAC meeting.

Bernstein said the strain change would need to be supported by data showing improved vaccine effectiveness and he “didn’t think we really have the data to be able to say that” even though the panel looked at the immune response.

Dr. Ofer Levy, VRBPAC member and an infectious disease physician at Boston Children’s Hospital, voted “yes” to change the computation of COVID-19 boosters, despite Pfizer’s admission there is “no established correlate of protection,” referring to the level of antibodies needed to confer protection.

“You have a lot of data now,” Levy told Pfizer. “What is your relative protection?”

“I would say there is no established correlate of protection,” Kena Swanson, Ph.D., vice president of viral vaccines at Pfizer, told Levy.

Levy circled back during the meeting:

“I would like to hear from FDA what their overall approach will be around improving our understanding of correlate protection. We spend a good amount of time reviewing antibody data. We have no doubt antibody data is important. We don’t have a level of antibody that anybody is comfortable stating is correlated [with] protection.

“So yes, the antibodies are important but so are the T cells. We heard from Dr. Weir, yes, T-cell assays are trickier and they’re more diverse, but it’s not going to happen without federal leadership to have a standardization of the T-cell assay and encourage or in fact require the sponsors to gather that information.”

“So what is the effort to standardize the pre-clinical assays?” Levy asked. “This is an effort that’s critical not just now but for future cycles of vaccine revision. If we aren’t able to define a standard for correlate protection we are fighting with one arm behind our back.”

Marks acknowledged the importance of Levy’s question, but said T-cell-mediated immunity was “difficult to study” initially.

“We have been having conversations with our colleagues at the NIH [National Institutes of Health] and throughout government about how we might move forward here,” Marks said. “It is something that we don’t have an answer to yet.”

Marks said as vaccines are developed in the future, it will “become even more important” to define a standard of correlate protection because “we won’t be able to have a large naive population to vaccinate with newer vaccines.”

“We will need to understand the T-cell response better,” Marks said. “I take your point, it’s just that we haven’t solved the problem yet.“

Dr. Meryl Nass, a member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory committee, told The Defender that in her opinion, Tuesday’s meeting was a “vote to essentially approve a future framework — the future framework being a dearth of evidence required to change the booster, without clinical evidence and without a correlation of protection.”

Nass added:

“They voted on using an Omicron variant in the next booster iteration — which could contain any Omicron variant and could be either mono- or bi-valent.

“But most likely they will keep the current version and add another — which might double the amount of mRNA, or not.”

The new formulation might be for adults alone or adults and children, or only older adults and the immunocompromised, Nass said.

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., Children’s Health Defense chief scientific officer and professor of biology at Simpson University, told The Defender :

“The proposed move by VRBPAC will increase the harm to the U.S. public to unprecedented levels, as this action will further circumvent necessary clinical trials even beyond the slapdash testing of COVID-19 vaccines under Emergency Use Authorization.

“This adds to a foundation of lies used to authorize the original COVID-19 vaccines without anywhere near proper testing.”

Dr. Cody Meissner, VRBPAC panel member and professor of pediatrics at Tufts University, expressed concern about the financial risk pharmaceutical companies “are taking by making these vaccines.”

“If there’s a low likelihood the vaccines will be recommended, then they could incur significant loss,” he said.

Marks responded:

“I guess I would say that I would make recommendations here knowing the vaccine manufacturers will be kept whole by the United States government at least for some vaccines. I could be wrong but I think that’s a reasonable assumption.”

During the meeting, Moderna told the panel it would be ready with a “couple of hundred million” bivalent, or double-targeted, vaccines designed to combat BA.1 by September, but it would be late October or early November if the company needs to design a new vaccine targeting subvariants.

Pfizer said it and partner BioNTech have a significant amount of vaccine doses designed for the BA.1 variant ready and are already preparing to produce a large number of doses targeting BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron subvariants.

Pfizer said either could be ready for an early October rollout.

Multiple concerns raised during the public comment session

During the public comment session of the meeting, experts raised concerns that were largely ignored by the advisory panel.

Dr. Dustin Bryce, with Interest of Justice, said the FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization are “usurping Congress’ definition of a vaccine — which is any substance designed for the prevention of one or more disease.”

“FDA actually classifies mRNA as gene therapy, which they say is to treat or cure an existing disease by modifying your genes,” Bryce said. “Gene therapies are still being studied and are experimental at this time.”

Citing FDA documents, Bryce said gene therapy, unlike a vaccine, is so inherently unsafe the FDA says it requires 15 years of research to follow up on safety due to known risks of antibody-dependent enhancement, alteration of DNA and delayed adverse effects, such as cancer.

Bryce said:

“FDA says that gene therapy use in the mass population represents an unreasonable risk and they should limit the number of subjects who might be exposed to risk. We require due process and forbid the FDA from authorizing the proposed changes.

“We are demanding that EUA [Emergency Use Authorization] is promptly revoked because unreasonable risks are inherent in gene therapy products, as evidenced by large numbers of reports of adverse serious events linked to or suspected of being caused by an EUA product, product failure and product ineffectiveness.”

Bryce said COVID-19 vaccines fail to meet the requirements of EUA because not a single mRNA vaccine has been found to be effective for the prevention or treatment of an existing disease.

Michael Briskin pointed out in his public comment that the FDA receives approximately 75% of its budget from pharmaceutical companies, which he believes represents a conflict of interest.

Briskin challenged the use of the phrase “safe and effective” to describe COVID-19 vaccines, given the FDA has done no long-term testing to determine whether these products are safe.

Briskin presented data showing a significant rise in reported deaths among working-age Americans following COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

He said:

“In the short-term, 2021 was a very interesting year. We saw a stark increase [in death] among working-age adults from 18 to 64 and specifically in Q3 and into Q4, so something new for the working-age demographic partly through 2021 would be the clear correlation.

“With comparable trends in BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] data, children’s health insurance data, Israeli ambulance data, and of course we have the [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)] data — which the CDC tried to minimize but a recent FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request forced them to reveal that they never once did the PRR calcification that was supposed to be their tool for spotting safety signals, according to their posted documents.”

“And what do we do when people get injured from these vaccines?” Briskin asked the panel. “We leave them in the mud.”

Briskin chastised the panel for authorizing boosters for infants two weeks earlier when data showed two doses weren’t effective and only 10 cases were used to assess efficacy.

“Three-quarters of the severe COVID in the trial was in the vaccine arm, as was the only hospitalization case which was accompanied by a seizure,” Briskin said. “And Moderna is so dangerous in young people Nordic countries won’t allow it to be used in anyone under the age of 30.”

Briskin said:

“In fact, the director of health of Denmark just admitted that vaccinating children was a mistake, whereas our officials only ever doubled down. And now we’re about to double down so hard we are about to lose the pretense of holding these pharmaceutical companies to any statistically meaningful regulatory standards for formula modification.

“For people following at home, what this agency is proposing is not just modifying the genetic code in the vaccine and the structure of the proteins produced to chase variants, but even things like doubling the microgram count for Pfizer — all without doing any statistically powered safety studies.”

“And to be clear,” Briskin added, “the companies we’re giving carte blanche to include Pfizer, the world’s largest criminal organization having paid the world’s largest criminal fine, and Moderna, which never made a safe product before we did away with long-term safety testing.”

Dr. Eric Feintuch, a chiropractor, asked the FDA if the agency knows how long mRNA from COVID-19 vaccines and the spike protein stay in the body, whether they know what the rate of protein production is and whether the FDA is aware of the consequences of the methylpseudouridine substitutions at the codon optimization step.

“For anyone on this panel who says it doesn’t go anywhere, tell me what proof you have of that,” Feintuch said, referring to the spike protein.

Feintuch said COVID-19 vaccines are associated with prion disease, noting 26 people have reported experiencing sudden onset of a severe and fatal brain disorder within one month of the second mRNA vaccine dose.

“This information needs to be researched and seen,” Feintuch said.

“A thousand peer-reviewed studies question the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. Doesn’t anyone see the safety signals? Is there anyone here who will stand up?” he asked. “Some of you know this, you need to stand up and you need to help us.”

Dr. David Wiseman, a research scientist with a background in pharmacy, pharmacology and experimental pathology, said VRBPAC is once again being asked to opine on inadequate information.

Wiseman said the FDA recently waived efficacy requirements for COVID-19 vaccines and has ignored its experts, notably Levy, who “has called for federal efforts to validate and standardize a correlate of protection.”

“Recent vaccine decisions were based on irrelevant Wuhan immunobridging,” Wiseman said. “Omicron assays are unvalidated and unverified by FDA.”

Wiseman said safety questions surrounding COVID-19 vaccines remain unanswered:

“We have shown correlations between vaccination and all-cause mortality. FDA says VAERS is under- and misreported. A FOIA disclosure reveals that CDC has not conducted safety signal analyses, which we have provided to FDA. Neurologic adverse events are finally being acknowledged [but there are] still no cancer studies.”

Wiseman further pointed out that FOIA requests show vital studies involving the spike protein have not been done:

“A Stanford study in [the journal] Cell showed vaccine message and antigen persisting for at least eight weeks. Does spike accumulate? Is this why myocarditis rates after boosting match or best primary series rates for some ages?

“Does spike persistence contribute to immune suppression, imprinting and negative efficacy? What is the toxicity of multiple doses? How will sameness of the manufacturing process be defined? Are the guidelines talking about monovalents or bivalents?”

Pfizer has dismissed concerns about the spike protein as “academic,” Wiseman said, “but it is certainly not.”

Booster formulation should be changed to combat waning efficacy, committee said

During the meeting, which occurred two weeks after the panel signed off on the primary COVID-19 vaccine series for the nation’s youngest children, a change in booster composition was deemed necessary due to waning effectiveness.

Dr. Mahesh Shenai, neurosurgeon and data analyst, said in a tweet:

“After many months of extolling benefits of vax and booster, now they are criticizing its efficacy and durability. . . to set the stage for a new updated booster!?”

In a briefing document published ahead of Tuesday’s meeting, FDA officials predicted a major COVID-19 outbreak will occur in the fall “due to the combination of waning immunity, further evolution of variants and increased indoor activity.”

A similar committee that advises the WHO recently suggested COVID-19 vaccines be reformulated to include both the original SARS-CoV-2 Wuhan variant and the first version of Omicron, BA.1 — although this variant has since been replaced by other strains of BA.4 and BA.5.

Moderna and Pfizer studied Omicron-specific vaccines in preparation for fall boosters, but efforts have been complicated by new subvariants.

If the government decides it wants a booster shot that targets BA.4 and BA.5 — two strains derived from the Omicron variant that are becoming dominant — vaccine manufacturers will have to race to produce the doses by fall, The New York Times reported.

Vaccines produced by Pfizer, Moderna, Novavax and Johnson & Johnson were developed against the original Wuhan COVID strain that emerged in 2019, but as the virus has rapidly evolved, these vaccines have become less effective.

COVID-19 vaccines target the spike protein the SARS-CoV-2 virus uses to invade human cells, but as the virus mutates away from the original strain, it has trouble “recognizing and attacking the spike,” CNBC reported. The Omicron variant has more than 30 mutations.

Marks said during the meeting he hopes changing the booster will “convince people to go get that booster,” adding the FDA plans to begin a booster campaign in October.

Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.

© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

June 30, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Doctor who sounded the alarm on jabs in ICU after plane crash

Free West Media | June 30, 2022

American doctor and vaccine critic Carrie Madej was seriously injured in a plane crash on Sunday. She is in hospital with several broken bones. Her boyfriend was also involved in the crash and has a broken back and skull. On her website there is a call to prayer.

The website SonsOfLibertyMedia.com mentioned that Madej had sent a text message on Thursday saying that she would not be giving lectures in the coming months because the medical disciplinary tribunal had been harassing her.

The US aviation authority FAA is currently investigating the crash in Meriwether County in the state of Georgia. The plane crashed at Roosevelt Memorial Airport in Warm Springs after engine problems. The doctor and her friend came down in a field north of the airport.

The small plane was en route from St. Petersburg in Florida to Newnan-Coweta County Airport. It was headed for Warm Springs. It was confirmed that Madej was in the ICU.

The doctor has been highly critical of Corona vaccines for some time. She sounded the alarm on side-effects but was censored by YouTube. “People need to know that this is not a safe vaccine,” she said. “They mess with the RNA and the DNA, the genome, the genes. That can eventually result in cancers, mutagens and autoimmune diseases.”

Madej also linked the jabs to depopulation. “Bill Gates thinks there are too many people, he wants to thin out the world population. People, wake up! This man does not want us all to stay alive. He has said it so many times in so many different ways. He is not a scientist, not a doctor, not an epidemiologist. Why are we giving him this power?”

The doctor had previously lashed out at Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum. Last year he said, “No one will be safe until everyone is vaccinated.” Madej shared the response to Schwab’s statement: “Over my dead body, Klaus.”

June 30, 2022 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Sanctions can be perceived as casus belli – Medvedev

Samizdat – June 30, 2022

Unilateral sanctions can be perceived as an “act of international aggression” and invoke Russia’s right to self-defense, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has warned.

Speaking at the 10th International legal forum in Saint Petersburg, Medvedev blasted the “cynical practice of unilateral restrictive measures against Russia, the illegality of which has been repeatedly emphasized at all levels.”

This practice is “somewhat akin to a declaration of economic war, as our opponents themselves say,” he added.

“Under certain circumstances, such hostile steps can be perceived as an act of international aggression. And even as a casus belli. In response to them, the state has the right to individual and collective self-defense.”

However, Moscow still holds “weak hope” that the West will abandon its “vicious practices” and “repent of its own stupidity,” Medvedev stated. “It is our hope that our former Western partners will have the courage to admit their strategic miscalculations, which, according to the UN itself, have affected more than 1.5 billion people and provoked a surge in global inflation, food shortages, and the growth of poverty,” he said.

Should such hopes not materialize, Russia “will live” on its own without the West, the ex-president explained. “Today’s world is not at all limited to the borders of Western countries,” he said.

Over the past few years, Russia has repeatedly been subjected to assorted sanctions by the US and its allies. The sanctions pressure began to grow exponentially after Moscow launched its large-scale military operation in neighboring Ukraine in late February. Since then, Russia has been hit by several waves of restrictions, ultimately becoming the most-sanctioned country in the world.

Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”

June 30, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »