Where did the richest man in the world come from?

In the Middle Ages a single civilization boasting unparalleled riches linked the Sahara to the Arab world and Europe

Empire of salt and gold: Where did the richest man in the world come from?

By Daria Sukhova, research fellow, Intexpertise research center

The pre-colonial history of African countries deserves close attention. The African continent became a place where great trading empires were born and flourished during the Middle Ages. The Sahel zone, the African ‘sandy coast’, which is a belt of land stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea, became a kind of civilizational center for the continent. It was here that some of the first African countries arose.

The Mali Empire, which covered the territories of modern Mali, Guinea, Senegal, Niger, and Mauritania, existed from the 13th to the 16th centuries. Originating in the vicinity of West Africa’s main trade and logistics artery, the Niger River, the empire became known throughout the world and reached its peak of prosperity thanks to one of its rulers, Mansa Musa.

According to various studies, Mansa Musa was in power for more than two decades – from 1307/1312 to 1332/1337 – and became the ninth ruler, or mansa, of the empire. Translated from the Maninka language, mansa means ‘king’ or ‘ruler’. Despite his relatively short reign, his rule led to the rapid economic development of the Mali Empire, the expansion of its territory, and a rise in science and culture.

The ruler gained worldwide fame due to his untold wealth – even in the 21st century, Mansa Musa is recognized as the richest man in the history of mankind. In 2014, the publication Celebrity Net Worth estimated that, by modern standards, the ruler’s fortune would amount to $400 billion, which exceeds the capital of the Rothschild family and such figures as American entrepreneur John D. Rockefeller.

Sources of wealth

It is rather difficult to make an accurate assessment of Mansa Musa’s total personal wealth, since in the Middle Ages the concepts of a ruler’s personal wealth and the general state of the empire are generally closely intertwined.

In the 14th century, just as in the 21st, untold wealth was accumulated due to the country’s strategic location. Covering most of the Niger River valley and the surrounding areas of the Sahara Desert, the Mali Empire controlled the main routes along which the lucrative gold and salt trade with both Arab and Mediterranean countries took place. At that time, gold had already become both a symbol of prestige and a settlement currency, while salt was necessary for preserving food. This made these commodities essential for meeting the key needs of that time.

Deposits of basic commodities were also located on the empire’s territory, and Mali’s geographical location allowed its ruler to set taxes and trade duties, as well as to regulate the logistics chains of that time. The former brought the largest revenues to the state coffers.

Thus, the Mali Empire occupied a central position in trans-Saharan trade, connecting West Africa, the Mediterranean, and the Arab world.

Pilgrimage to Mecca and world fame

In 1324, after more than a decade in power, Mansa Musa fulfilled the duty of every wealthy Muslim – he carried out the Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca. It was through this journey that the world learned about the wealth of both the Mali Empire and the ruler himself.

Mansa Musa went to Mecca accompanied by a large retinue. The size of the entire procession was 60,000 people, while Mansa’s personal escort numbered 12,000 slaves. The most striking part of the procession was 500 slaves, each of whom held an ingot of gold or a staff decorated with gold. In addition, the delegation was accompanied by 80 camels, which were also loaded down with gold. Michael A. Gomez, a professor at New York University and a specialist in the history of West Africa, suggests that the volume of gold taken on the Hajj could have been up to 18 tons.

Such a procession could not go unnoticed. An equally important purpose of the pilgrimage was to demonstrate one’s wealth and power. On the way to Mecca, the delegation passed through the territory of modern Mauritania, Algeria, and Egypt. Throughout the journey, Mansa Musa generously shared his wealth and distributed gold to all the poor and needy he met on the road. Upon his arrival in Cairo, which was capital of the Mamluk Sultanate at that time, the emperor’s huge outlays of gold even drove down its price, disrupting the stability of local markets.

Mansa Musa’s pilgrimage led to unprecedented growth in the power of the empire and increased trade turnover. Gold began to course through the markets of Mediterranean countries, undermining their economies, which only contributed to developing the trans-Saharan trade routes, while elevating the role of the Mali Empire as its main trading center.

Culture and science flourishing

Thanks to its success in the economic sphere and the growing number of foreign traders arriving in Mali, the empire’s territory expanded and developed. New cities emerged, built in accordance with the latest architectural trends. There was active construction of religious buildings – mosques and madrasas, where scientific centers were established.

After the end of Mansa Musa’s Hajj, the port cities of Timbuktu and Gao became part of the Mali Empire. For their construction, the emperor attracted Muslim architects from the Middle East and continental Europe. Among them was Abu Ishaq al-Saheli, a native of the Al-Andalus region, a Muslim territory on the Iberian peninsula now known as the Spanish region of Andalusia.

Under the leadership of al-Saheli, five mosques were built, among them the Djinguereber Mosque, built in Timbuktu in 1327, which has been partially preserved to this day.

Other notable historical and cultural monuments include the Sankore Mosque, which was built in the same period, and the Sidi Yahia Mosque, which was completed after the end of Mansa Musa’s reign. Along with the Jingereber Mosque, these formed a local scientific cluster – the University of Sankore.

Quranic education began to develop in the region in the 11th century. However, during the heyday of the Mali Empire, Muslim scholars began to flock to the region from all over the world, which contributed to the development of a local scientific school. By the end of Mansa Musa’s reign, the University of Sankore had the largest library on the continent, with an extensive collection of books and manuscripts.

The city of Timbuktu became the main Islamic scientific center in West Africa. First and foremost, scientists worked on manuscripts, especially in Arabic, using the Ajami script, which is based on Arabic graphics and adapted to African languages. The collection of manuscripts includes works on astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and philosophy, as well as religious works and numerous transcriptions of the Quran.

Manuscripts from Timbuktu are still being translated and studied to this day. Over the past decades, a number of international projects have been launched, aimed at preserving and deciphering manuscripts. Three of them have become the most ambitious. These are the Norwegian Timbuktu Manuscripts Project (University of Oslo), Timbuktu Manuscripts (governments of Luxembourg and Mali), and the Timbuktu Manuscripts Project by the University of Cape Town, implemented with the support of the African Union’s New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and the government of South Africa. The entire collection of manuscripts numbers from 400,000 to 500,000 copies.

FILE PHOTO. An old manuscripts in Juma Al Majid Centre for the manuscripts conservation and restoration of Timbuktu on January 19, 2010 in Timbuktu, Mali. ©  Andrea Borgarello/Getty Images

Legacy and fall of the empire

The reign of Mansa Musa is often called the Golden Age of the Mali Empire. According to estimates by the Oxford Centre for Global History, he ruled over the territories of modern Senegal, Mali, Guinea and Guinea-Bissau, as well as Mauritania, Burkina Faso, Gambia, and Ivory Coast.

Not only the empire’s territorial expansion, but also its cultural flourishing – the rapid development of construction, international relations, and science, which subsequently continued – testify to the high level of Mansa Musa’s managerial and diplomatic abilities.

However, despite the continued growth in the cultural sphere, with the death of Mansa Musa, the political development of the state began to experience a crisis. Under Mansa Musa’s heirs, the power of the empire was significantly reduced, which was facilitated by both internal socio-economic discrepancies and external pressure, which the new leaders were unable to cope with well enough to hold the empire’s vast territory the together.

The territories sought to separate from the center in order to pursue their own economic policies and increase prosperity, and the disorder of the succession led to internal strife and the weakening of the state. The lands in the east of the country and then the cities of Timbuktu and Gao, the main economic and cultural centers, were absorbed by the Songhai people, who were strengthening their power at that time.

By the middle of the 15th century, the Mali Empire had lost most of its territory to the north, suffered frequent attacks on trade routes, and faced pressure from the east from the growing Songhai Empire, which later completely absorbed Mali.

FILE PHOTO. University of Sankore ©  Ellen Mack / Contributor/ Getty Images

The fall of the Mali Empire as Europe’s main gold supplier led to changes around the world, and to some extent prodded European countries into expanding into both Latin America and Africa’s coastal areas in search of new sources of precious metals.

Portugal, the largest maritime power of the time, was highly dependent on gold coming from Mali through Morocco. It was these funds that were used to explore the lands of the New World. The destruction of the usual trading network and the establishment of colonies in West Africa’s coastal zone after the fall of the Mali Empire allowed the Portuguese to mine gold in the region without the need for intermediaries.

Despite the demise that all great empires come to sooner or later, the period of Mali’s heyday under the leadership of Mansa Musa is enshrined in the material wealth of that era, as well as the collective memory of the Mande peoples that formed the basis of the country’s population.

Mali sending Gold Diggers packing back

For Mali, achieving sustainable sovereignty goes beyond winning compensation disputes with foreign companies – it’s also about strengthening the regulatory framework and local expertise in gold mining

Westerners came for gold. Now this nation is sending them packing

By Vsevolod Sviridov, deputy director, expert at the Centre for African Studies, Higher School of Economics, Moscow

1 May, 2025

Over the past two years, Mali has been steadily tightening its grip on the gold mining sector while justifiably increasing pressure on foreign investors, including the leading Canadian mining company Barrick Gold. In mid-April, the company’s office in Bamako was closed due to a tax dispute.

The results of this policy are already evident: in 2024, Mali received 40% more payments from gold mining companies, totaling $1.4 billion. In the long run, such policies could significantly strengthen macroeconomic stability and serve as a model for other countries in the Sahel region and across Africa.

Golden identity

Gold is an integral part of Mali’s historical and economic identity. The country is often associated with the image of Mansa Musa, the 14th-century ruler of the Mali Empire, known as one of the wealthiest individuals in history. His legendary pilgrimage to Mecca was marked by the lavish distribution of gold which, according to legend, even affected the region’s economy. Estimates of how much gold Musa took on his pilgrimage vary widely, ranging from more realistic figures of around half a ton to fantastical claims of up to 20 tons.

Today, gold remains crucial to Mali’s economy, accounting for 7% of GDP and serving as a vital source of foreign currency and export revenues – making up three-quarters of the country’s total exports by value.

During the colonial era, gold mining in Mali was primarily carried out using artisanal methods. Industrial mining began to develop only after the country gained independence, as the Malian government recognized gold as a means to diversify an economy largely dependent on agriculture and cotton exports.

The Soviet Union was a significant contributor to the development of Mali’s gold mining sector. In 1984, the USSR helped launch the Kalana mine which produced half a ton of gold annually. Beyond technical support, the USSR helped establish a national geological school in Mali and promoted the development of the processing industry.

How much gold is there?

Today, Mali’s gold reserves are estimated at nearly 900 metric tons, and are primarily concentrated in the southern and western regions of the country. Alongside South Africa, Ghana, Tanzania, and Sudan, Mali stands as one of Africa’s leading gold producers, with an annual output of 50-60 metric tons. Major players in the field include Barrick Gold (operating the Loulo-Gounkoto mine) and Resolute Mining (Syama mine).

While most of the production is conducted through industrial methods, an artisanal gold mining sector also exists, particularly in northern and southwestern Mali. It is often linked to illegal activities – such as smuggling and financing terrorist groups – that continue to pose a threat to regional stability.

Mali became a key player in the global gold market during the 1990s, as foreign investors entered the sector amid market reforms. Within a decade, these investors increased production thirty-fold, reaching 30 tons by the year 2000, and later boosted it to 50 tons.

Liberal reforms: cui bono?

The period of increased gold production coincided with legislative reforms carried out in 1991- 1999 with the help of the World Bank. These reforms were characterized by a liberal approach, offering foreign investors tax deductions and exemptions for certain categories. For example, a law enacted in 1991 exempted investors from all taxes for the first five years of production. This led operators, driven by the quest for windfall profits, to extract as much gold as possible at the expense of Mali’s ecology and long-term interests before tax obligations kicked in.

The subsequent reforms were also inconsistent. As a result, Mali’s government missed out on significant tax revenue due to numerous exemptions and foreign operators underreporting their production, exports, and profits. Consequently, the industry remained export-oriented and did not meaningfully contribute to Mali’s socio-economic development.

Like many developing nations where mining is largely “delegated” to foreign investors, Mali’s government passively collects income from the gold sector through a mix of fiscal tools: royalties (a fixed fee per tonne extracted), corporate income tax, special levies (for licensing or license renewals), dividends from state holdings in mining ventures, and export tariffs and licenses. Thus, the government’s revenues heavily depend on foreign companies and, crucially, on the regulatory environment – whether regulators can compel these companies to pay what they owe and whether they have the means and will to verify the data submitted by mining operators.

What the tax disputes are about

In Mali, as in many African countries, it’s common for foreign companies to underpay taxes, leading to frequent disputes. Every five to ten years, the government conducts an “audit” of the sector and assesses back taxes owed by foreign companies. Often, the government lacks real tools to determine how much has gone unpaid, making precise amounts subject to negotiation between regulators and investors. Typically, a company agrees to pay a certain sum in exchange for the right to continue operating in the country. This serves as an informal version of a windfall tax. For example, in the mid-2010s, ExxonMobil faced a $74 billion fine for unpaid taxes in Chad, while in 2019, Canadian firm Barrick paid $300 million to Tanzania to resolve a tax dispute.

A similar situation has unfolded in Mali. Following the 2020 coup, the new authorities shifted toward gradually sovereignizing the economy and reducing reliance on external borrowing. In this context, gold presents the primary and most straightforward opportunity to boost the budget. In 2023, Mali introduced a new mining code aimed at increasing sector revenues. This legislation raised royalties from 6% to 10.5% and increased the state’s and local private investors’ shares in projects from 20% to 35%, along with the removal of several tax incentives.

In 2022, revenues from the sector reached 763.7 billion CFA francs ($1.3 billion), but by 2023, they had fallen by 26%. Despite a 23% decline in industrial production in 2024, government revenues soared to a record $1.4 billion, according to Reuters. This increase was driven by higher taxes and payments from foreign companies.

The new mining code marked a significant shift in the Malian government’s approach to the sector and set the stage for a conflict with Canadian company Barrick Gold –  the world’s second-largest mining company and the main investor in the mining sector. Following an audit of the period from 2020 to 2022, Malian authorities accused Barrick of underpaying taxes and dividends, demanding over 300 billion CFA francs (approximately $512 million). Barrick contested the legitimacy of these claims and sought international arbitration.

In October 2024, Barrick paid $85 million as a “gesture of goodwill” and by February 2025, it agreed to pay an additional $438 million to resolve the dispute. However, the payment has yet to be completed, and negotiations continue, likely revolving around the tax regime that will apply to Barrick’s assets. The closing of the company’s office on April 15 and the government’s threat of putting Barrick’s Loulo-Gounkoto mine under temporary administration signal an escalation in the ongoing negotiations.

Similar tax demands were made against Australian-British company Resolute Mining, which agreed to pay $160 million at the end of last year.

For Mali’s long-term sustainability, one-time compensation payments are not enough. The new legislation and the government’s firm stance toward foreign investors must be accompanied by strengthened regulatory and fiscal frameworks, along with the development of local expertise in industrial gold mining and exploration – such as enhancing the capabilities of the state mining company. Gold can serve not only as a buffer against potential macroeconomic risks but also as a foundation for national currencies, helping prevent excessive inflation and exchange rate volatility.

President Becomes a Dictator via Executive Orders

How a President Becomes a Dictator: By Executive Order
By John & Nisha Whitehead
The Rutherford Institute
April 25, 2025

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.” — Ayn Rand

130 executive orders in under 100 days.

Sweeping powers claimed in the name of “security” and “efficiency.”

One president acting as lawmaker, enforcer, and judge.

No debate. No oversight. No limits.

This is how the Constitution dies — not with a coup, but with a pen.

The Unitary Executive Theory is no longer a theory — it’s the architecture of a dictatorship in motion.

Where past presidents have used executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements to circumvent Congress or sidestep the rule of law, President Trump is using executive orders to advance his “unitary executive theory” of governance, which is a thinly disguised excuse for a government by fiat.

In other words, these executive orders are the mechanism by which we finally arrive at a full-blown dictatorship.

America’s founders established a system of checks and balances to prevent the concentration of power in any single branch.

To this end, the Constitution establishes three separate but equal branches of government: the legislative branch, which makes the law; the executive branch, which enforces the law; and the judicial branch, which interprets the law.

And yet, despite this carefully balanced structure, we now find ourselves in a place the founders warned against.

Despite Trump’s attempts to rule by fiat, the president has no unilateral authority to operate outside the Constitution’s system of checks and balances — no matter how urgent the crisis or how well-meaning the intentions.

This is what government by fiat looks like.

Where Congress was once the nation’s lawmaking body, its role is now being eclipsed by a deluge of executive directives — each one issued without public debate, legislative compromise, or judicial review.

These executive orders aren’t mere administrative housekeeping. They represent a radical shift in how power is exercised in America, bypassing democratic institutions in favor of unilateral command. From trade and immigration to surveillance, speech regulation, and policing, the president is claiming broad powers that traditionally reside with the legislative and judicial branches.

Some orders invoke national security to disrupt global markets. Others attempt to override congressional control over tariffs, fast-track weapons exports, or alter long-standing public protections through regulatory rollbacks. A few go even further — flirting with ideological loyalty tests for citizenship, chilling dissent through financial coercion, and expanding surveillance in ways that undermine due process and privacy.

Yet here’s where these actions run into constitutional peril: they redefine executive authority in ways that bypass the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution. They centralize decision-making in the White House, sideline the legislative process, and reduce the judiciary to an afterthought — if not an outright obstacle.

Each of these directives, taken individually, might seem technocratic or temporary. But taken together, they reveal the architecture of a parallel legal order — one in which the president acts as lawmaker, enforcer, and judge. That is not how a constitutional republic operates. That is how a dictatorship begins.

Each of these orders marks another breach in the constitutional levee, eroding the rule of law and centralizing unchecked authority in the executive.

This is not merely policy by another name — it is the construction of a parallel legal order, where the president acts as lawmaker, enforcer, and judge — the very state of tyranny our founders sought to prevent.

This legal theory — the so-called Unitary Executive — is not new. But under this administration, it has metastasized into something far more dangerous: a doctrine of presidential infallibility.

What began as a constitutional interpretation that the president controls the executive branch has morphed into an ideological justification for unchecked power.

Under this theory, all executive agencies, decisions, and even enforcement priorities bend entirely to the will of the president — obliterating the idea of an independent bureaucracy or impartial governance.

The result? An imperial presidency cloaked in legalism.

Historically, every creeping dictatorship has followed this pattern: first, undermine the legislative process; then, centralize enforcement powers; finally, subjugate the judiciary or render it irrelevant. America is following that roadmap, one executive order at a time.

Even Supreme Court justices and legal scholars who once defended broad executive authority are beginning to voice concern.

Yet the real danger of the Unitary Executive Theory is not simply that it concentrates power in the hands of the president — it’s that it does so by ignoring the rest of the Constitution.

Respect for the Constitution means obeying it even when it’s inconvenient to do so.

We’re watching the collapse of constitutional constraints not through tanks in the streets, but through policy memos drafted in the West Wing.

No matter how well-meaning the politicians make these encroachments on our rights appear, in the right (or wrong) hands, benevolent plans can easily be put to malevolent purposes. Even the most principled policies can be twisted to serve illegitimate ends once power and profit enter the equation.

The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.

We are approaching critical mass.

The groundwork has been laid for a new kind of government where it doesn’t matter if you’re innocent or guilty, whether you’re a threat to the nation, or even if you’re a citizen.

What will matter is what the government — or whoever happens to be calling the shots at the time—thinks. And if the powers-that-be think you’re a threat to the nation and should be locked up, then you’ll be locked up with no access to the protections our Constitution provides.

In effect, you will disappear.

Our freedoms are already being made to disappear.

This is how tyranny arrives: not with a constitutional amendment, but with a series of executive orders; not with a military coup, but with a legal memo; not with martial law, but with bureaucratic obedience and public indifference.

A government that rules by fiat, outside of constitutional checks and balances, is not a republic. It is a dictatorship in everything but name.

If freedom is to survive this constitutional crisis, We the People must reclaim our role as the ultimate check on government power.

That means holding every branch of government accountable to the rule of law. It means demanding that Congress do its job — not merely as a rubber stamp or partisan enabler, but as a coequal branch with the courage to rein in executive abuses.

It means insisting that the courts serve justice, not politics.

And it means refusing to normalize rule by decree, no matter who sits in the Oval Office.

There is no freedom without limits on power.

There is no Constitution if it can be ignored by those who swear to uphold it.

The presidency was never meant to be a throne. The Constitution was never meant to be optional. And the people were never meant to be silent.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the time to speak out is now.

As our revolutionary forefathers learned the hard way, once freedom is lost, it is rarely regained without a fight.

Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Not Due to COVID-19, New Study Finds

Nearly Half of “COVID-19 Deaths” Were Not Due to COVID-19, New Study Finds

45.3% of “COVID-19 deaths” in Greece had no symptoms—exposing the coordinated PSYOP deployed to maximize fear and enforce mass compliance with draconian control measures.

Apr 22, 2025

This article originally appeared on Focal Points.

The study titled “Deaths “due to” COVID-19 and deaths “with” COVID-19 during the Omicron variant surge, among hospitalized patients in seven tertiary-care hospitals, Athens, Greece” was just published in the journal Scientific Reports:

    Abstract

    In Greek hospitals, all deaths with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test are counted as COVID-19 deaths. Our aim was to investigate whether COVID-19 was the primary cause of death, a contributing cause of death or not-related to death amongst patients who died in hospitals during the Omicron surge and were registered as COVID-19 deaths. Additionally, we aimed to analyze the factors associated with the classification of these deaths. We retrospectively re-viewed all in-hospital deaths, that were reported as COVID-19 deaths, in 7 hospitals, serving Athens, Greece, from January 1, 2022, until August 31, 2022. We retrieved clinical and laboratory data from patient records. Each death reported as COVID-19 death was characterized as:

(A) death “due to” COVID-19, or (B) death “with” COVID-19. We reviewed 530 in-hospital deaths, classified as COVID-19 deaths (52.4% males; mean age 81.7 ± 11.1 years). We categorized 290 (54.7%) deaths as attributable or related to COVID-19 and in 240 (45.3%) deaths unrelated to COVID-19. In multivariable analysis The two groups differed significantly in age (83.6 ± 9.8 vs. 79.9 ± 11.8, p = 0.016), immunosuppression history (11% vs. 18.8%, p = 0.027), history of liver disease (1.4% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.047) and the presence of COVID-19 symptoms (p < 0.001). Hospital stay was greater in persons dying from non-COVID-19 related causes. Among 530 in-hospital deaths, registered as COVID-19 deaths, in seven hospitals in Athens during the Omicron wave, 240 (45.28%) were reassessed as not directly attributable to COVID-19. Accuracy in defining the cause of death during the COVID-19 pandemic is of paramount importance for surveillance and intervention purposes.

Key Findings:

Massive Overcounting of COVID-19 Deaths

    Out of 530 hospital deaths registered as COVID-19 deaths, only 290 (54.7%) were actually caused by COVID-19.

    240 deaths (45.3%) were found to be completely unrelated to COVID-19 — patients died with a positive PCR test, but showed no symptoms, required no COVID-specific treatment, and died of clearly unrelated causes.

Death Certificate Inaccuracy

    Of the 204 certificates listing COVID-19 as the direct cause of death, only 132 (64.7%) were confirmed as such after clinical review.

    Of the 324 certificates listing COVID-19 as a contributing factor, only 86 (26.5%) were found to be truly related.

Hospital-Acquired Infections Misclassified

    Patients infected during hospitalization were significantly more likely to be misclassified as COVID-19 deaths (OR: 2.3, p = 0.001).

Younger Age and Severe Comorbidities Associated with Misclassification

    Patients who died “with” COVID-19 were younger, more likely to be immunosuppressed, have end-stage liver disease, or be admitted for other causes.

Symptoms and Treatments Differed Sharply

Patients who died “due to” COVID-19 were more likely to:

    Exhibit classic symptoms: hypoxia (44.1%), shortness of breath, fever, and cough

    Require oxygen support (93.4% vs. 66.9%) and receive COVID-specific therapies:

        Remdesivir (5-day course: 61.9% vs. 35.2%)

        Dexamethasone (81.7% vs. 40.7%)

Study Strengths

This study went far beyond death certificate coding, implementing a rigorous, multi-source clinical audit:

    Full medical chart reviews: Included physician notes, lab data, imaging, and treatment records.

    Attending physician interviews: Structured questionnaires captured real-time clinical insights from those who treated the patients.

    Dual independent expert assessments: Two experienced infectious disease specialists (each with >2,500 COVID cases) reviewed each case independently for classification accuracy.

This study found that nearly half of all registered COVID-19 deaths during the Omicron wave in Greece were misclassified, with no clinical evidence linking them to COVID-19 as the true cause. Given that similar death coding practices were employed across Western nations, it is reasonable to conclude that COVID-19 death counts were artificially inflated to a comparable degree elsewhere.

This drastic inflation of death counts aligns with what many now understand to be a coordinated psychological operation (PSYOP) — designed to instill fear and maximize compliance with draconian pandemic measures such as lockdowns, mask mandates, and mass mRNA injection campaigns.

It is this weaponization of fear that has prompted criminal referrals in seven U.S. states, triggering active criminal investigations into top COVID-19 officials for terrorism, murder and racketeering:

https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-nearly-half-of-covid-19
https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/nearly-half-of-covid-19-deaths-were

RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 Vaccines

RFK Jr. Launches Long-Awaited Offensive Against COVID-19 Vaccines

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy just dropped a bombshell on national TV.

Apr 24, 2025

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new HHS Secretary, is pushing his “Make America Healthy Again” agenda, and his recent interview with Jesse Watters has sparked intense discussion.

Many of you are asking: If Kennedy believes COVID vaccines are harmful, why hasn’t he pulled them from the market?

The answer lies in a complex federal system, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), and entrenched conflicts of interest. With one key figure already out (a vaccine zealot by the name of Dr. Peter Marks) and a timeline I mentioned in my last article—3-6 months, pointing to Q4 2025—Kennedy’s working to reshape this landscape.

Let’s break it down and see what’s at play.

Kennedy’s got serious clout as HHS Secretary, running the show at the CDC, FDA, and NIH. Sounds like he could torch those COVID vaccines in a heartbeat, right?

Think again! The vaccine racket’s a fortress of bureaucracy, rigged with scientists, regulators, and legal traps. Kennedy can shake the foundations—appoint new blood, demand audits—but banning jabs means battling a machine built to protect itself.

The FDA greenlights vaccines based on trial data they swear is untouchable. Then the CDC’s advisory crew dictates who gets jabbed and when. These aren’t just recommendations; they’re ironclad, controlling federal funds and insurance payouts. Kennedy could push for a ban, but without rock-solid proof and expert allies, he’d be drowned in lawsuits and media smears.

It’s a high-stakes war, and he’s playing to win!

Just listen to what Kennedy told Jesse Watters: “The COVID vaccine, the recommendation for children was always dubious… why are we giving this to tens of millions of kids when the vaccine itself does have profound risk? We’ve seen huge associations with myocarditis and pericarditis, with strokes, with other injuries, with neurological injuries, and this was clear even in the clinical data that came out of Pfizer. There were actually more deaths, there were about 23% more deaths in the vaccine group than the placebo group.”Boom! Kennedy’s not mincing words—Pfizer’s own data showed a 23% higher death rate in the vaccinated group, plus heart issues, strokes, and neurological damage. This isn’t conspiracy talk; it’s straight from the clinical trials! Yet the system’s still pushing these jabs like candy. Kennedy’s demanding informed consent and real science, but he’s up against a wall.

 

That wall’s called ACIP—the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices—the unelected puppet masters of vaccine policy. Born in 1964, this HHS squad’s up to 15-19 “experts” in public health and vaccines, handpicked by the previous HHS Secretaries. They serve 4 year terms and can be reappointed. Their gig? Crafting rules on vaccine use—schedules, doses, the whole shebang. Once the CDC Director signs off, these edicts hit the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and become law of the land, forcing jabs into schools and hospitals. ACIP swears it’s all about science, meeting three times a year in Atlanta to comb through data. But here’s the dirty truth: some of these so-called experts are Pharma’s lapdogs! X posts are screaming it—grants, consulting fees, and cozy ties to Pfizer and Moderna. They’re screened for conflicts, sure, but that’s like letting a wolf guard the sheep. Kennedy can replace ACIP members, but it’s a grind—terms don’t vanish overnight, and he needs truth-seekers who aren’t bought and paid for. Until then, ACIP’s keeping COVID vaccines untouchable.

 

Kennedy’s been shouting at the conflict of interests: the vaccine system’s a cesspool, and he’s got the receipts. Just look at Peter Marks, one of Big Pharma’s top vaccine zealots, who ran the FDA’s vaccine approvals during Operation Warp Speed. This guy was the jab’s biggest cheerleader, but Kennedy’s arrival sent him packing! Marks bolted in March 2025, crying about “misinformation” and an “assault on scientific truth.” Bye-bye, Pharma shill! His exit’s a massive victory for truth-seekers, but the swamp’s still crawling with conflicts. ACIP members, FDA insiders, CDC scientists—too many are tangled in Pharma’s web of grants, patents, and speaking gigs. Kennedy’s swinging the axe, tightening conflict rules, auditing shady deals, and booting out more sellouts like Marks. But it’s no quick fix—dismantling this corruption takes time, especially with lawsuits and media vultures circling.

 

Kennedy’s already rocking the boat, slashing $11 billion in bloated HHS programs and cutting 10,000 jobs. The establishment’s in panic mode —23 states and D.C. are suing, claiming he’s gutting public health. In my last article, I told you he’d need 3-6 months to shake things up, and that clock’s ticking. RFK promised that by September (clip below), expect fireworks — new ACIP members and fresh safety studies. To get there, Kennedy needs to commission data reviews, align ACIP with his priorities, and follow legal processes like the Administrative Procedure Act(APA) to ensure his changes stick.

Anyway to summarize, rush too fast, and he hands ammo to his enemies. Move too slow, and he risks losing warriors like you. It’s a tightrope, but with Kennedy’s fire—and his bombshell about Pfizer’s deadly data—he’s got the guts to win!

Meanwhile, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico recently posted on his official X account, warning citizens about excessive DNA contamination.

White House unveils true origins of COVID 19

White House unveils true origins of COVID 19

by Tyler Durden

Sunday, Apr 20, 2025

The Trump administration on Friday published an in-depth look at how Dr. Anthony Fauci and US intelligence agencies suppressed the lab-leak theory behind COVID-19 for political purposes.

"Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency. Most egregiously, the federal government demonized alternative treatments and disfavored narratives, such as the lab leak theory, in a shameful effort to coerce and control the American people's health decisions," reads a new White House webpage.

And while we're still waiting on those pre-dawn raids - i.e. any semblance of accountability, today's disclosure from the White House is a breath of fresh air over a 'theory' that sites like ZeroHedge and The Federalist were punished for suggesting. Millions in ad revenue evaporated after USAID-funded censorship organizations began public character assassination campaigns in conjunction with MSM outlets - all in an effort to cover up the truth.

“1. The virus possesses a biological characteristic that is not found in nature.

2. Data shows that all COVID-19 cases stem from a single introduction into humans. This runs contrary to previous pandemics where there were multiple spillover events.

3. Wuhan is home to China’s foremost SARS research lab, which has a history of conducting gain-of-function research (gene altering and organism supercharging) at inadequate biosafety levels.

4. Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researchers were sick with COVID-like symptoms in the fall of 2019, months before COVID-19 was discovered at the wet market.

5. By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced. But it hasn’t.”

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Of course we the people knew that Covid was from a deliberate lab leak years ago.

The question is: When will those responsible be held to account?

Justice is yet to be served.

COVID-19 Pandemic Ushered the Death of Medical Science

Did the COVID-19 Pandemic Usher the Death of Medical Science?

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null

Global Research, April 22, 2025

The global COVID-19 response was not just flawed. It was fundamentally misguided.

Policies like lockdowns, universal masking, and mass vaccination campaigns with poorly evaluated experimental genetic interventions were implemented with sweeping authority but without adequate scientific scrutiny. Mounting evidence suggests that these strategies not only failed to prevent widespread transmission but also introduced new, long-term risks to public health. Critical decisions were made hastily despite early warnings about the dangers of targeting the full spike protein, a viral component with known homology to human tissues. These misled decisions raised serious concerns about autoimmune consequences.

Even more troubling was the coordinated dismissal of viable alternatives and the suppression of dissenting data. Well-documented early treatments were sidelined in favor of a singular, experimental platform. Government regulatory bodies fast-tracked approvals while relying solely on industry-submitted data in order to bypass essential safety evaluations. As adverse outcomes emerged—from immune system exhaustion to cancer relapses—there was a code of premeditated silence. Scientific transparency was nowhere to be found because the pandemic playbook prioritized compliance over caution and viable dissenting medical expertise.

The global response to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the United States and United Kingdom, represents a moment of grave misjudgment and systemic failure across multiple layers of government and public health leadership. Drawing from decades of experience in oncology, virology, and immunology, Dr. Angus Dalgleish, a professor emeritus of oncology at the University of London and a co-discoverer of the CD4 receptor as the major cellular receptor for HIV, is a dissenting voice who early in the pandemic became disillusioned with the decisions that shaped American and British pandemic strategies. Dr. Dalgleish asserts that the lockdowns, mask mandates, and mRNA vaccines not only failed to mitigate the crisis but also introduced new health risks that are turning out to be lethal.

Dalgleish was one of a small number of medical professionals who became aware of COVID-19 well before its official recognition. As early as November 2019, he spoke with individuals who displayed symptoms that, in retrospect, were classically consistent with COVID-19. His early concern was driven by the potential of a widespread outbreak; however, it was not until the SARS-CoV-2’s viral sequence was released that a scientific alarm truly sounded.

What is particularly disturbing about Dr. Dalgleih’s story is that it exemplifies the pandemic of psychologically deranged hubris and near criminal behavior among our medical officials and the private pharmaceutical sector eager to profit from human misfortune. As the pandemic was underway, he was collaborating with Berger Sørensen of Bynor Pharma in Norway. Together they were developing a promising HIV vaccine with robust clinical data showing it could significantly reduce viral load in treated patients. However, their methodology diverged from the mainstream method of using an entire viral envelope, which involves thousands of antigens. Repeatedly these mainstream efforts were proven ineffective. The Dalgleish-Sørensen team on the other hand focused on a few specific viral epitopes to yield successful results. Despite their efforts, the major global health organizations such as the government health agencies and the Bill Gates Foundation, dismissed their results outright.  This work could have been a precedent when the COVID-19 genetic sequence became available. Rather our public health officials made the decision to repeat the same immunological mistakes. The mainstream strategy targeted the virus’s full spike protein that interacts directly with ACE2 receptors. This is what makes the current Covid-19 vaccines so hazardous. Dr. Sørensen’s research found that 79 percent of the spike protein shares homology with human proteins. This is why the Covid-19 vaccines are high-risk for autoimmune complications and evidence now shows this to be the case with certainty.

Drs. Dalgleish and Sørensen communicated their findings to the UK’s Chief Medical Officer Christopher Whitty, Her Majesty’s Government Chief Scientific Adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, and the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service Sir Richard Dearlove. The British government ignored their warnings. Even a well-documented immune stimulant, which Dr. Dalgleish had successfully used for cancer patients to strengthen innate immunity and protect against viral infections, was dismissed on the pretext of insufficient animal studies. This was despite the stimulant’s proven track record in humans.

The consequences of American and British health official denials were on full display when lockdowns were implemented. From the outset, these flawed pandemic measures would prove to be catastrophic. Moreover, there was no credible analysis of the collateral damage such rules would cause. Numerous physicians and healthcare workers witnessed an immediate decline in patient care, such as delayed diagnoses, interrupted treatments, and postponed surgeries. Perhaps cardiovascular patients suffered the most neglect. For Dr. Dalgleish, and now many other health professionals, these actions seemed less like emergency responses and more like elements of a pre-determined script, especially when policies such as universal masking were based on flawed logic.

The most egregious scientific failure, however, was the wholesale commitment to mRNA vaccine platforms developed by Pfizer and Moderna. Every deployed vaccine relied upon the full spike protein. This is precisely the approach Dalgleish and Sørensen warned against. A more effective strategy would have been using four conserved viral epitopes to create cross-protective immunity and to eliminate concerns about viral mutation. Nevertheless, this alternative model was ignored in favor of a one-size-fits-all vaccine race conducted at “warp speed.”

Efforts to develop a coronavirus vaccine have been made for over 20 years and none ever demonstrated durable efficacy. None got past animal trials. Worse, these earlier efforts often induced a phenomenon known as antigenic sin or immunological imprinting, wherein the immune system becomes fixated on an outdated version of a virus that will undermine future immune responses. This effect is compounded by antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), which is when our antibodies not only fail to neutralize new viral variants but actually facilitate their entry into host cells. This is why we are observing individuals receiving multiple mRNA boosters becoming more susceptible to Covid infections.

Equally alarming is the suppression of T-cell responses. Dr. Dalgleish’s laboratory data showed that the mRNA vaccines do not adequately activate T-cells, which are crucial for viral and cancer immunity. Repeated vaccine boosters actually exhaust T-cells.  This phenomenon was documented in late 2022 by the oncology division at the Health Research Institute of San Carlos in Spain and subsequently corroborated by others.

During our interview with Dr. Dalgleish, he noted that he became particularly worried when stable melanoma patients began to quickly relapse after mRNA boosters. Upon investigation, the only common factor was that they had received a third or fourth COVID vaccine dose. Despite presenting his findings to the medical authorities, he was told to remain silent so as not to “upset” patients. However the findings circulated globally, and more and more clinicians have been forthcoming to report similar patterns.

Turbo-cancers, which are unexpected aggressive metastasizing tumors, also began appearing in vaccinated patients. Young people with no history of disease developed sudden autoimmune disorders, strokes, and cardiac failure. Stillbirths and miscarriages spiked and these tragedies were still ignored or suppressed by major health institutions.

We now know that patients with chronic conditions, such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, etc, were among those most vulnerable to vaccine-induced harm. The lipid nanoparticles used to deliver the spike protein do not degrade as claimed. They persist in the body and we now know they trigger continuous immune activation. The result is systemic inflammation, immune system exhaustion, and in many cases organ failure. Studies have now shown these spike proteins can continue replicating 800 days after injection. This is a catastrophic scenario for individuals with autoimmune susceptibility.

One of the most chilling discoveries came not from hospitals but mortuaries. British undertakers began reporting unprecedented white, rubbery clots obstructing arteries that prevented embalming. Some clots were six feet long. These are not normal post-mortem findings. When morticians and pathologists around the world began comparing notes, a terrifying consensus emerged: the mRNA vaccines were producing self-organizing, persistent clots capable of killing without warning. 

Adding to the concern is the underlying technology of mRNA vaccines. Dr. Dalgleish is also a former board member of CureVac, a pioneering mRNA company; therefore he has deep insight into the limitations of the mRNA platform. These drugs are improperly classified as vaccines, although none have ever successfully passed clinical thresholds even in oncological vaccine development. To deploy them under emergency authorization, without resolving their many problematic issues related to stabilization and immune dysregulation, was blatant recklessness. These formulations can persist in the body for long periods of time, and their immunogenic effects can be profoundly deleterious.

Even the suppression of common sense vitamin D supplementation was another missed opportunity. Data from Spain showed dramatic differences in Covid-19 mortality based on vitamin D levels, yet the medical authorities only recommended minimal dosages that were grossly insufficient for immunological benefit. According to Dr. Dalgleish, our advisory committees were stacked with “useful idiots” rather than experts; this was to ensure that inertia and groupthink would prevail over innovation and sound clinical evidence. There was a deliberate disregard for safer alternatives and the suppression of dissent can only be described as criminal incompetence.

In the face of a global crisis like COVID-19, one would expect the finest traditions of science, defined by healthy skepticism, transparency, and open inquiry, to rise to the forefront. Instead, the world witnessed the systematic erosion of these values being replaced by a culture of a fundamentalist dogma, censorship, and blind allegiance to authority. Many physicians and scientists, like Dr. Dalgleish, with decades of medical research and clinical experience, watched in horror as genuine medicine was discarded in favor of a rigid narrative. Nowhere is this more exemplified than in the actions of prominent healthcare bureaucrats like Dr. Anthony Fauci whose influence not only misdirected public health policy but caused irreparable harm.

One of the earliest red flags was the concerted effort to dismiss the lab-origin theory of SARS-CoV-2. Despite overwhelming indications that the virus had been artificially manipulated, including the presence of six engineered inserts around the receptor binding domain, the dominant narrative clung to the notion of a natural bat spillover. Two of these inserts were previously documented in publications from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Dalgleish and Sørensen examined the molecular structure of the virus and found highly unnatural clusters of positively charged amino acids designed to facilitate human cell entry. These modifications function like magnets that dramatically increase infectivity. If the virus had a natural origin, it would have been an evolutionary leap that is implausible without deliberate engineering.

Despite such clear evidence, the scientific community controlled by the CDC and the British Royal Society refused to even examine the sequence data. As author Matt Ridley later confirmed during his own investigation for the book Viral, not only was there no evidence for zoonotic transmission, there was active resistance to explore the lab-origin hypotheses. This deliberate refusal to engage with evidence represents one of the darkest betrayals of scientific integrity in modern medical history.

Dr. Dalgleish speaks of his personal interactions with Anthony Fauci during the early years of the HIV crisis and his habit of obfuscating scientific evidence that challenge his personal narratives. He was struck by Fauci’s superficial understanding of viral pathogenesis. In critical discussions about how HIV caused disease, Fauci demonstrated a fundamental lack of comprehension. Moreover, he believes that Fauci’s incompetence was not just scientific but also ethical. Whether driven by ideology, personal gain, or a larger agenda, Fauci’s decisions defied both reason and responsibility. Fauci has long cloaked himself in the mantle of scientific authority yet his record, especially during the COVID-19 response, reveals a trail of incompetence, misjudgment, and potentially deliberate malfeasance.

The revelations in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s The Real Anthony Fauci confirm Dr. Dalgleish’s suspicions. Fauci’s career is best characterized as an irresponsible alignment with pharmaceutical financial interests. Kennedy meticulously documents Fauci’s involvement in gain-of-function research and his suppression of safer treatment options like ivermectin. The claim that it was merely a “horse dewormer” was a calculated act of propaganda. The truth is that if drugs like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and mega-Vitamin C and Vitamin D supplementation had been supported instead of sabotaged, there may have been no need for mass deployment of experimental gene therapies masquerading as vaccines.

In the past, we have reported extensively that the suppression of alternative therapies cleared the way for mRNA vaccines to dominate the government’s response strategy. Fauci’s role in this cannot be overstated. Under emergency authorizations, the mRNA vaccines were rushed into the arms of hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, including healthy populations at very low risk from COVID-19.

Another illustrative example is Fauci negligence is the NIAID’s misuse of the PCR test. The late Dr. Kary Mullis, the Nobel laureate inventor of PCR technology, repeatedly warned against using it as a diagnostic tool for infectious diseases. Mullis frequently stated that his technology was unsuitable for identifying active viral infections such as HIV. He emphasized that PCR only detects genetic material, including genetic debris. Nevertheless, the PCR tests became ubiquitous during the first two years of the pandemic. Threshold settings of 35-40 cycles, and sometimes higher, guaranteed massive numbers of false positives. Yet Fauci’s agency relied on inflated testing thresholds in order to justify draconian lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and again to stoke public fear with junk data devoid of any reliable scientific rigor.

The real scandal, however, lies in the global regulatory response. In Australia, for example, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the equivalent to the FDA and British MHRA, claimed due diligence to approve the mRNA vaccine. However, it was discovered through Senate inquiries that they had outsourced the actual safety studies. No genotoxicity or carcinogenicity tests were ever performed. Like the FDA, the TGA relied on data submitted by Pfizer and Moderna who had obvious conflicts of interest. In fact, it was only due to an American court order that the Pfizer trial data were released; initially our federal health authorities intended to keep Pfizer’s data sealed for 75 years. If science were truly guiding policy, why would evidence be hidden? The reason is glaringly certain. Buried within Pfizer’s own trial documents were over 1,000 documented side effects, including autoimmune disorders, microvascular clotting, neurological degeneration and obstetric complications such as miscarriage. These are the documented findings our government and Pfizer were determined to keep hidden from the public.

Statistical analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, conducted by medical experts, including those in Dr. Dalgleish’s advisory circle such as Sir Richard Dearlove, revealed alarming patterns. If you experienced three or four adverse effects from the mRNA vaccines, your risk of death rose to over 3 percent. This is in contrast to the 0.085% risk of dying from COVID-19, which is largely limited to those over 80 years of age. This is not science. It is the abandonment of science in favor of an agenda.

Worse still, Fauci’s favored pharmaceutical interventions went beyond vaccines. He aggressively promoted remdesivir; this was a drug withdrawn during Ebola clinical trials due to its 53 percent mortality rate. Despite this, remdesivir became the standard of care for hospitalized COVID-19 patients. In the US, hospitals were reportedly given financial bonuses for prescribing it. It became known among medical staff as “run death is near,” a morbid nickname that tragically captures the reality of its use. The drug was toxic and added more harm than benefit. Nevertheless, Fauci’s endorsement ensured its widespread distribution. 

In every corner of this pandemic response, real science was buried under a cascade of deception. Safety signals were ignored. Dissenting doctors were silenced. The public was manipulated with fear porn. Physicians who dared to challenge the consensus, such as Drs. Pierre Kory, Paul Marik, Peter McCullough and Meryl Nass, were vilified, silenced and their medical licenses were threatened. 

Dr. Dalgleish is also the co-authored of the book The Death of Science, which gives a critical account of the Covid-19 response during the pandemic. The book’s title captures a defining moment when science, once a noble pursuit of truth, became a weapon for ideological control. In retrospect it is the apogee for what should now be properly recognized as the Anthony Fauci Era in modern medicine: the years between November 1984 and December 2024 when Fauci held the directorship of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and scientific medical integrity eroded research. The Fauci Era marks the time when our federal health agencies most betrayed basic scientific principles and drastically swerved off course to morph into a perverted tool to enforce public conformity. Under Fauci’s technocratic overreach, when questions did arise, they were met not with answers but censorship and coercion.

If we do not confront the profound lessons of this crisis, we risk repeating its worst mistakes. There must be a reckoning. Just as the world once held trials in Nuremberg to confront the horrors of unethical experimentation and medical complicity, we must now confront the reality that our modern health systems have been corrupted by power, profit and ideology. Entrusting global health policy to bureaucrats promoting unproven technologies and unchecked pharmaceutical interests has been shown to be a path to systemic abuse. No matter how credentialed the messenger, no health authority deserves blind obedience. The future of public health depends on a renewed commitment to truth, transparency and scientific humility. If we are to rebuild public trust and ensure that such betrayal is never repeated, we must pursue justice with the same vigor that once defined the best of medicine and science. No amnesty. No forgetting. Only accountability.

*

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow.