Absurd Lies About Russia Since SMO Started

Top 5 Completely Absurd Lies About Russia Since SMO Started
Drago Bosnic

Siuth Front, 08.06.2023

Russophobia and anti-Russian propaganda run very deep, particularly in the political West. For centuries, various European invaders have been portraying Russia in the worst possible light. Over time, this became extremely intricate and even found its way into the mainstream. However, more recently, particularly since the start of the special military operation (SMO) in Ukraine, Russophobic propaganda became completely absurd. Choosing the top 5 of these certainly wasn’t an easy task, as the amount of ludicrous claims is absolutely mind-boggling. From the “Ghost of Kiev” and “the last stand of the Snake Island defenders” to pickle jar air defenses and the “Goat of Kiev”, you get a pretty good idea of just how laborious such a task could’ve been. However, in terms of being completely devoid of any logic, here are the top 5, in chronological order.

Russia destroys its own Nord Stream pipelines

According to the “free press”, on September 26, 2022, Moscow was extremely bored with all the windfall coming from rising natural gas prices, so it decided to blow up its Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines after spending the previous 17 years building them. Interestingly, Russia decided to do this only a day after Poland and Norway opened the Nord Stream’s primary competitor, the Baltic Pipe, running through Denmark and bringing in gas from the North Sea. Obviously, in order to make the task more difficult, but also more fun, Russia decided to conduct the attack within the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of Denmark and Sweden, instead of its own.

For months, various “conspiracy theorists” kept claiming that Russia didn’t actually destroy its own pipelines. However, the “free press” had “conclusive evidence” that the “cartoonishly evil Kremlin”, previously accused of “weaponizing” its vast energy reserves against the European Union, decided to destroy it and help the US profit immensely from the EU’s weaning off Russian natural gas. US President Joe Biden openly threatening to destroy Nord Stream, as well as Victoria Nuland’s snarky boastfulness about the pipelines becoming “a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea” mean absolutely nothing and are just Russian propaganda.

The destruction of its own pipelines came approximately a month after some in the EU suggested using the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to increase Russian energy imports and also “coincided perfectly” with the manifold surge in US LNG shipments to the EU, which surpassed Russian natural gas deliveries for the very first time. This resulted in even the usually compliant Brussels bureaucrats complaining that the US is engaged in war profiteering.

Russia blows up the Crimean Bridge

On October 8, the “evil dictator Putin” was sick and tired of seeing the Crimean Bridge whole, so he decided to blow it up. Unfortunately, the men he entrusted this task with failed and managed to “only” partially damage the bridge which is crucial for Russian logistics. Once again, in order to make it more fun, Putin ordered the saboteurs to try and reach Crimea through Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia, then go through southern Russia and reach the bridge from the east. Repeated snarky remarks by Zelensky’s adviser Mykhailo Podolyak who boasted about the attack, as well as similar statements from the Kiev regime’s Defense Ministry and even Zelensky himself were just another piece of Russian propaganda and they could never in any way implicate anyone else.

Russia wants to irradiate itself by attacking the Zaporozhye NPP

After Russian forces took over the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant (NPP), “evil Putin” realized that his troops there didn’t have much to do, so he decided to order the nearby Russian artillery unit to start shelling their own comrades in the NPP. Apparently, this was the only way to extract the sensitive US nuclear technologies from there, as Russia lacks such advanced high-tech due to its extremely underdeveloped nuclear energy industry. According to undeniably truthful reporting by the “free press”, Russian shelling is ongoing as President Putin wants to make sure his forces there also get irradiated in case of a catastrophic detonation of one or all reactors. The only reason this hasn’t happened yet is the chronic lack of shells and the poor precision of the Russian artillerymen.

Russia regularly attacks itself with drones

The escalating drone attacks across western parts of Russia, including the capital city of Moscow, clearly cannot be the fault of its neighbor to the southwest. Which begs the question of where do these mysterious unmanned flying machines come from? Once again, the only logical conclusion could be President Putin’s unrelenting boredom. Because Moscow is too safe, this significantly amplifies the monotony, resulting in the Russian president’s orders for repeated attacks on the capital city. This is also a good way to make sure Russian air defense units in and around Moscow have something to do. However, Putin might have gone a bit too far recently, as he ordered a drone strike on the Kremlin and possibly on himself. The “free press” reports that this might have something to do with his rapidly deteriorating physical and mental health, as clearly indicated by the way Putin sits and places his hands.

Russia blows up its own dam in order to flood itself

On the morning of June 6, Russia realized it has had enough of the Kakhovka dam being too whole, so it decided to blow it up. The “evil Kremlin” went ahead with this plan after realizing it would result in catastrophic flooding of the areas under its control and also endanger hundreds of defensive positions of the Russian military. In addition, the water supply for Crimea is now at risk, once again clearly implying that Putin had every reason to order the destruction of the dam, as Crimeans were obviously too bored with all the water they’ve been getting since the Northern Crimean Canal was reactivated. Another important piece of evidence pointing to Moscow is that this also endangers the Zaporozhye NPP, which Russia clearly wants to destroy in order to irradiate itself (see point four).

However, although several Kiev regime’s top officials, such as Major General Andriy Kovalchuk, stated they’ve been planning to attack Kakhovka and even conducted “test strikes”, this is obviously just Russian propaganda by rabidly pro-Kremlin outlets such as the Washington Post. Interestingly, some Western analysts and experts, particularly those from the “free press” such as CNN and NBC have suggested this might have something to do with Russia finally acknowledging that the Normandy landings were much more important than the Eastern Front during the Second World War, as the event “coincided” with the 79th anniversary of the D-Day.

Ukraine is ground zero for the CIA’s fascist origins

Ukraine is ground zero for the CIA’s fascist origins

strategic-culture.org

July 7, 2023

The American magazine Newsweek published a big “exclusive” report this week purporting to reveal the extent of CIA involvement in the Ukraine proxy war against Russia. It hardly merits the billing of “exclusive” since it is well known that the U.S. spy agency is up to its neck in orchestrating the conflict.

In truth, the CIA’s nefarious role in Ukraine goes back decades to the end of World War Two. More on that further down.

Nevertheless, the Newsweek article provides a useful admission that Washington is recklessly – and criminally – fueling hostilities towards Russia, the world’s biggest nuclear power in terms of its arsenal. The Biden administration and its military-intelligence apparatus are risking an escalation of the proxy war to an all-out nuclear conflagration.

The Newsweek report remarks on the “contradiction” between President Joe Biden’s public vow to not put American boots on the ground and the undeniable heavy presence of U.S. clandestine forces in Ukraine helping (more precisely, directing) the war effort. Instead of “contradiction”, a plainer, more fitting word is “lie”.

Recall, too, Biden previously said he doesn’t want to “start World War Three” with Russia. That’s about as believable as an alcoholic saying he doesn’t want another drink.

The Biden administration is engaged in gross deception of the American public by absurdly pretending that U.S. military personnel are not in Ukraine and that Washington is not directing a war against Russia. Biden’s policy of pumping weapons into Ukraine ($40 billion so far) is inexorably leading the United States and its NATO allies deeper into an all-out war against Russia. Yet this mentally challenged president somehow maintains “there are no U.S. boots on the ground” and that the U.S.-led NATO alliance is not at war with Russia. Such blatant lies should be grounds for his impeachment.

Apart from the admission that the Newsweek article provides, the otherwise banal reporting is a whitewash of the CIA’s pivotal and pernicious role in the Ukraine conflict.

Laughably, the article portrays the CIA as “trying to ensure the war does not spin out of control”. Thus, the agency is presented as a moderating, restraining influence on the Kiev regime and its military conduct. The reader is led to believe that Washington is endeavoring to prevent the Ukrainian military from launching direct attacks on Russia. It is claimed that the CIA is “struggling” to control the operations of the Kiev regime which has at times gone rogue against Biden’s “rules of engagement”. Examples of rogue conduct, it is claimed, are the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage, the bombing of the Kerch Bridge to Crimea, drone attacks on Moscow and several “mysterious assassinations” of Russian public figures.

This is risible disinformation from the CIA courtesy of Newsweek. Alternative, reliable investigative reporting by Seymour Hersh and others has exposed the Biden administration’s direct responsibility for the blowing up of the Nord Stream gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea last September.

It is also credibly asserted by Moscow that none of the other deep attacks on Russia could have been carried out by Ukrainian forces without the logistical involvement of the CIA and other NATO covert military agencies, primarily Britain’s MI6.

Since the conflict erupted in February last year, the Biden administration and its NATO partners have stoked the war with stepwise increases in ever-more lethal weaponry, from long-range missiles to battlefield tanks to promised delivery of F-16 fighter jets. This week Biden has reportedly green-lighted the supply of banned cluster munitions, which the Kiev regime will doubtless use against civilians in Russia’s Donbass region – under instruction from CIA advisors.

A crucial historical background for understanding the conflict in Ukraine is the involvement of the CIA in orchestrating the coup d’état in Kiev in 2014. That coup ousted a democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovich, and ushered in the Neo-Nazi junta that persists today – headed by the nominally Jewish comedian figure Vladimir Zelensky.

Zelensky and his inveterate corrupt cabal are nothing more than puppets and playthings for the CIA and MI6. Their useful-idiot function is to front a colossal arms racket and a U.S.-led proxy war to undermine Russia geopolitically, with regime change in Moscow as the ultimate objective, as well as to facilitate Washington’s agenda of subjugating Europe as a vassal colony for American capital for the purpose of propelling the next American war against China.

The CIA and its British counterparts are running the Neo-Nazi cesspit that Ukraine has been turned into. Even while trying to whitewash the CIA’s criminal role in Ukraine, the Newsweek article cited above admits that the agency has multiple bases located across that pathetic country and that CIA operatives are overseeing “massive networks” of arms running.

But what is particularly disturbing about the disinformation is the attempt to hoodwink the American public and others into thinking that the CIA and the Biden administration are somehow bystanders to the war. A war that is escalating despite their supposed noble efforts at “restraining”.

The American public is being drugged with lies and blandishments, misled as if sleepwalking towards a catastrophic world war with nuclear-armed Russia.

The conflict in Ukraine could be stopped immediately, as Russian national security advisor and former president Dmitry Medvedev pointed out again this week, if the United States simply stopped supplying weapons to Ukraine. However, the Biden administration has spurned all diplomatic efforts to negotiate a political-security settlement. U.S. media reports this week of “back channel” communications with Russia are not credible when Washington is giving full throttle to the war effort with the sinister hand of the CIA.

It should be remembered, too, that the CIA was borne out of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) at the end of World War Two. One of its first postwar tasks was recruiting Ukrainian fascists and mass killers who had collaborated with the Nazi Reich in its genocidal Final Solution against Slavs, Jews, Poles and others. (These fascists like Stepan Bandera and Mykola Lebed are held up as national heroes by today’s Kiev regime, including Jewish Mr Zelensky.) Washington deliberately recruited and deployed those terrorists to attack the Soviet Union in order to advance U.S. imperialist hegemonic ambitions in Europe.

Not much has changed. Ukraine is ground zero for the CIA’s fascist origins. Not only are American boots on the ground in Ukraine in large numbers. They have been there for decades – paired with jackboots – for the very objective of fomenting the present dangerous crisis that has now culminated.

Newsweek and other U.S. mainstream media are a profanity to public service and truth. One can discern between the lines, if sufficiently aware, but generally, those media outlets are tantamount to acting like soporific drugs. They should be obliged to carry a doctor’s warning on their frontage banners: consuming this product can induce stupidity resulting in disaster.

WHO’s Dictator General to initiate climate lockdowns!

‘One Health’ will give WHO’s Dictator General power to initiate climate lockdowns
By Rhoda Wilson on May 24, 2023

The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (“IHRs”) and the Pandemic Treaty both incorporate the “One Health” approach.

One Health has little definition or structure and is sold using vague strings of words and phrases that are meaningless and often confusing. This is deliberate and in the same vein as tactics used by governments during the covid era to keep populations confused and so more likely to blindly follow instructions.

Behind the verbiage, One Health is a tool to create networks and combine efforts towards centralising power and control.  Once central power has been achieved then similar measures that were imposed in response to the covid “pandemic” can be used for climate change, loss of biodiversity, human diseases, vector-borne diseases and more.

Where will the power and control be centralised? The World Health Organisation’s (“WHO’s”) Director Dictator General Tedros the Terrorist and, ultimately, those who fund WHO.

That One Health is incorporated into WHO’s global dictatorship plans has almost slipped under the radar, but some researchers such as Dr. Meryl Nass have noticed, investigated and are trying to inform others.

One of the biggest changes WHO has seen in its 75-year history is a shift from funding from sovereign nations to funding from private parties.  As of now, the bulk of the WHO’s funding comes from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and two closely aligned vaccine-based non-profits funded by vaccine and pharma companies, the vaccine alliance GAVI and the global Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations or CEPI.

There’s no hiding the incestuous interconnection between various governments and organisations including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum (“WEF”).  It’s no coincidence that the Gates Foundation is the second largest funder of WHO, which is also helping to fund WEF.

WHO’s “Pandemic Treaty” will not only be concerned with pandemics. It introduces globally the “One Health” ideology. The concept recognises the interdependence of human and animal health and the connection with the environment. Through this One Health agenda, WHO will have the power to make decisions in matters relating to the environment (including greenhouse gas emissions, pollution and deforestation), animal health (e.g., livestock) and human health (including vaccinations, social determinants and population movement). With these extended powers, WHO could readily declare a climate or environmental emergency and enforce lockdowns.

Read more: The plan for WHO supremacy over human health, Alliance for Natural Health International, 11 May 2023

Not only is One Health included in the Pandemic Treaty, but it is also in the proposed amendments to the IHRs which are being negotiated at the 76th World Health Assembly this week.

On Monday, the host of the Dutch podcast Voorwaarheid (English ‘Video Truth’) Willem Engel interviewed Dr. Meryl Nass about One Health and how it has spread and is being used for a hidden agenda. Dr. Nass has published several articles about One Health on her Substack page HERE.

One Health was a concept some doctors and veterinarians came up with about 20 years ago. International organisations and self-appointed elites hijacked the idea to use it as a means of gaining power and control over most of the world, Dr. Meryl Nass told Engel.  As a result, the “basket of items” that could be included in the One Health concept has continued to expand.

“UN agencies became involved with it. Other international agencies like the World Organisation for Animal Health became involved.  And the Rockefeller Foundation started funding it in 2009.  And so, by 2009 it had already been captured and CDC rolled out a One Health programme.

By 2012, the idea of One Health was rolled out at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

“It became a lot of words that, simply saying, different groups needed to work together for their shared objectives.  But the objectives were not defined. The methods by which they were to work together were not defined.  And the projects they were to work on weren’t defined either.”

There have been at least 60 different definitions of “One Health.”  Dr. Nass read out a few.  You can read these on the first two pages of the slides that accompany her interview HERE.

According to the most recent and authoritative definition, One Health includes not only people and animals, as was the original concept 20 years ago, but it now also includes plants, waterways and ecosystems.  The One Health Commission claims that One Health is a “ray of hope for addressing our global challenges” and lists 14 “global challenges” including food, water safety, security, soil health and “comparative biology.”

The four lead agencies underlying One Health are WHO and three UN agencies – Food and Agriculture Organisation (“FAO”), United Nations Environment Programme (“UNEP”) and World Organisation for Animal Health (“OIE”).

The One Health approach is built into the proposed amendments to the IHRs that are currently on the table.  Some of the amendments are likely to be voted on at the World Health Assembly this week and the remainder in May 2024.

“The One Health approach … will fall under the purview of the WHO Director-General whenever he or she decides to declare a public health emergency of international concern.

“It probably won’t be implemented until 10 months after next May [22 months from now] when the new International Health Regulations would be able to go into effect.  But some of it may be, if it’s passed this year, it will only take 18 months [from now] to go into effect and our nations will only have 10 months to pull out if they want to.

“We have to do what we can to stop it [before it goes into effect next year].  Which we can do by pulling out of the WHO.”

#ExitTheWHO

During the second half of the interview, Dr. Nass and Engel had an interesting discussion about the origins of the “pandemic.”  It’s well worth the listen.

https://rumble.com/v2pf3hq-dr.-meryl-nass-one-world-one-health.html

The video above is embedded from Rumble.  If you are unable to view the video, you can watch it on Odysee HERE.

https://odysee.com/@Voorwaarheid:1/2023-05-22-One-World-One-Health-Met-Dr.-Meryl-Nass:e

Further resources:

    ‘One Health’: What Is It, Who’s Promoting It – and Why? Children’s Health Defense
    ‘One Health’ — The Global Takeover of Everything? Children’s Health Defense
    One Health: A Plan to ‘Surveil and Control Every Aspect of Life on Earth’? Children’s Health Defense
    ‘Sinister Forces at Play’ in WHO’s Global One Health Agenda Children’s Health Defense

Free Speech in Twitter is claimed as ‘disinformation' by EU

Translation: They lost control over propaganda speech on twitter and are now in free spin mode, they need everything in place to sell their western lies and Elon is blocking their lies and propaganda.

If I recall correctly the EU was sold as a organization to merely facilitate economic transactions and movement among countries not a Soros unelected super state.

EU is a totalitarian state for what eastern Europeans post communist states fought for 60 years to eradicate, the only difference is that Western Europe swallow it with bones and everything under the disguise of freedom loving United States of Europe.

The EU is desperate to clamp down on Elon Musk’s free speech as ‘disinformation’
If Brussels’ tech disinfo code is voluntary, then why did officials freak out when Musk yanked Twitter from it?
RT : 4 Jun, 2023

European Union officials are having a meltdown, all because Twitter CEO Elon Musk has withdrawn the platform from a “voluntary” EU code of conduct for tech firms to combat so-called “disinformation.” And they have yet to cite a single actual example of it.

EU Internal Markets Commissioner Thierry Breton tweeted, “You can run, but you can’t hide,” citing a legal obligation to prevent disinformation from August. He’s basically treating Musk, a guy who builds rockets and cars in America, like an unruly schoolchild, with Brussels in the role of the principal. French Digital Minister Jean-Noel Barrot even threatened to ban Twitter from the EU in a recent interview, citing the “grave” threat of disinformation.

They’re basically accusing Musk of pre-crime, like in the movie ‘Minority Report’ where Tom Cruise’s character is chased down by the state before having committed an offense. The EU is seeking to bring the very long arm of its authoritarianism down on Musk and other private tech players – however far outside the EU they might actually be – who refuse to abide by Brussels’ “Code of Practice on Disinformation,” concocted in 2018 and revised last year.

Breton is even heading to Silicon Valley to check in on them. “I am the enforcer. I represent the law, which is the will of the state and the people,” he said about his trip.

Sounds like Mr. Enforcer could use a good humbling from the people he purports to represent, and what better way for it to be delivered than through Musk, who envisions Twitter as the voice of the people and a platform for truly free expression.

By withdrawing from the code, Musk is just the latest example of what seems to be a trend. Facebook’s parent company Meta has already laid off moderators. Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, and others have also cut into their watchdog departments, citing cost-cutting measures. Perhaps policing narratives is bad for business.

You have to wonder, though – if joining this EU pact is optional, then what exactly is the big deal? It’s not like there’s any guarantee that any of the signatories are actually reducing what the EU considers as disinformation. In fact, the whole concept of top-down policing of information flow raises suspicion about the potential marginalization of views and debates that oppose the establishment narrative. According to this EU code,

tech platforms like Twitter are connected with “fact-checkers, civil society, and third-party organizations with specific expertise on disinformation.” The policy document adds that platforms also must report to an EU “Code Taskforce,” monitoring their efforts. Given that any such actors would implicitly have the EU’s stamp of approval, it’s not a stretch to imagine that they could effectively end up acting as enforcers or gatekeepers of the establishment narrative.

Musk himself is no stranger to this kind of systemic collusion between state actors and platforms to the detriment of contradictory debate and free information flow. It was his own release of the Twitter Files in the wake of his acquisition of the platform that brought to light the collusion between Twitter and Western government authorities to manipulate and censor public debate over Covid-19, for example, or to coordinate on certain narratives about geopolitical competitors (like Russia) – all under the guise of fighting “disinformation.”

Speaking of which, it didn’t take long after Musk’s withdrawal from the disinfo code for the EU’s vice president for values and transparency – an Orwellian title, if there ever was one – to suggest that the ultimate beneficiary of Musk’s actions in withdrawing from the code wasn’t free speech and debate, but rather Russia.

“Bye, bye birdie,” Vera Jourova said. “Twitter has chosen a hard way to comply with our digital laws. Russia’s disinformation is dangerous and it is irresponsible to leave EU’s anti-disinformation code.” Right, because all facts and analysis that don’t align with the Western agenda has to be Russian, as these folks see it. The reasoning is just a step away from proclaiming Musk to be some kind of useful idiot for Russia, despite him also being a major Pentagon contractor.

It seems that Musk has just decided that the EU’s provisions aren’t aligned with the free-speech mandate that he has for the company, which he personally owns and for which he forked over $44 billion. And the EU apparently can’t bring itself to respect the definition of private ownership.

If they wanted to make and treat online platforms like a public good or service, then they should just outright spend the cash to do that themselves so they can turn them into firehoses for their own propaganda – and then watch everyone flee.

It’s not like Musk is just letting fake news proliferate, despite the EU pearl-clutchers suggesting otherwise. It looks like he’s just found a different way to address fact checking. How arrogant do you have to be to figure that a guy who builds rockets and revolutionized the car industry couldn’t possibly come up with a better fact-checking system than a bunch of garden-variety bureaucrats?

When Musk took over the platform, he ditched some Twitter moderators and replaced them with a feature called “Community Notes,” whereby users who spot something that’s factually incorrect or misleading can contribute in real time to a correction or clarification that’s visible right under the tweet in question.

It turns out that this row between Twitter and the EU has become quite the topic on the platform itself. It’s also generating a lot of comments that Western officials would rather the average person did not see. And with Musk in charge, there’s not much they can do about it beyond threats and name calling. At least not without looking like the budding authoritarians they are.

- - -
Rachel Marsden is a columnist, political strategist, and host of independently produced talk-shows in French and English.

US Intentionally released SARS-Cov-2 in Wuhan

“US Intentionally released SARS-Cov-2 in Wuhan”
Patents' American Researcher Martin told it at EU International Covid Summit
By Fabio G. C. Carisio
May 30, 2023

Originally published by The Standard

The Covid-19 coronavirus was “intentionally released” by the United States in Wuhan, China, with the target to trigger a global pandemic to raise public acceptance of vaccines, a US businessman specializing in patent auditing said.

David Martin, the founding chairman of M Cam asset management company, said at an International Covid Summit organized by the European Parliament in Brussels earlier this month that the US was responsible for the making of both coronaviruses causing the outbreaks of severe acute respiratory syndrome – or SARS – in 2003 and the Covid-19 pandemic in the past three years.

The third edition of the summit featured speakers from anti-lockdown advocates to medical academia to discuss the global pandemic response. The speakers shed light on the possibility that the coronavirus which caused the pandemic was man-made, instead of naturally occurring.

In his speech, Martin said: “The pandemic that we alleged to have happened in the last few years did not happen overnight. In fact, the very specific pandemic using the coronavirus began at a different time.”

He said that in 1965, scientists discovered the coronavirus as a model of a pathogen – an agent that causes disease. They also found out that coronaviruses can be modified.

“Later we started learning how to modify a coronavirus by putting them in animals such as dogs and pigs,” Martin said, adding that such a practice became the basis for US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer’s first coronavirus spike protein vaccine in 1990.

But very soon the medical sector and drug makers found out that the vaccines did not work.

“Because the coronavirus is a malleable model, it mutates,” Martin said. “Every medical publication concluded that coronaviruses escape vaccines because it modifies and mutates too rapidly for a vaccine to be developed.”

In 2002, a university in North Carolina initiated a study to develop an “infectious replication defective,” which Martin interpreted as “a weapon to target individuals, but not have collateral damage.”

Characterizing the project as having “mysteriously preceded SARS by a year,” Martin said the coronavirus that caused the highly deadly infection was not from China and that it was “engineered” instead of naturally occurring.

On Covid-19, Martin said the coronavirus – named as SARS-CoV-2 by the World Health Organization – was poised for human emergence in 2016, with a preview about an “accidental or intentional release of a respiratory coronavirus” from a laboratory in Wuhan.

He said the purpose of the coronavirus “release” was to boost global acceptance on universal vaccination.

Explaining the common concern among the medical industry, Martin said: “Until an infectious crisis is very real, present and at the emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored.

“To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase the public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures, such as the pan-influenza, or pan-coronavirus, vaccine. A key drive is the media and the economics will follow the hype.

“We [pharmaceutical firms] need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issue. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process,” he said.

The Covid infection was first reported in Wuhan, Hubei province in central China in late 2019, with initial clusters coming from the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The disease turned into a global pandemic in early 2020. As of Saturday, over 766 million infections have been recorded worldwide, with nearly seven million deaths.

The source of the coronavirus remained a mystery. Some scientists believe it transferred to humans from wild animals like bats and manidaes, while some politicians, in particular those from the US, accused the Wuhan Institute of Virology – a government-controlled lab – of leaking the pathogen.

A team of WHO-appointed experts inspected Wuhan in early 2021 to probe the source of the pandemic. After the 12-day visit, including a visit to the lab, the scientists concluded that it is “extremely unlikely” that the lab could have leaked the Covid-19 coronavirus.

MAIN SOURCES

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hveIX7g-eiA

The Standard – US ‘intentionally released Covid virus in Wuhan’ EU summit told

Class action lawsuit over Covid vaccine injuries

Class action lawsuit over Covid vaccine injuries targets the Australian government: 'There has been a cover-up'
By MAX AITCHISON FOR THE DAILY MAIL
26 April 2023

Class action filed at Federal Court on Wednesday
Government and medicines regulator named parties

A landmark Covid-19 vaccine injury class action lawsuit has been filed against the Australian government and the medicines regulator.

The nation-wide suit, which reportedly has 500 members including three named applicants, seeks redress for those allegedly left injured or bereaved by the Covid-19 vaccines.

One of the applicants who suffered a severe heart condition after getting the Pfizer jab is even claiming there was 'cover-up' during the vaccine rollout which hid the potential risks.

The federal government, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the Department of Health - in addition to a number of senior public servants - are all named as parties to the class action, which was filed in the New South Wales Federal Court on Wednesday.

The named parties are accused of negligence in their approval and monitoring of Covid-19 vaccines, breach of statutory duty and misfeasance in public office.

The lawsuit was organised by Queensland GP Dr Melissa McCann who raised over $105,000 through crowd funding.

Dr McCann said the injured and bereaved have 'suffered immense loss, pain and grief' and called out the alleged 'gaslighting and silence' they had been subjected to

'These injured and bereaved have suffered immense loss, pain and grief,' Dr McCann tweeted.

'Just as heartbreaking has been the gaslighting and silence, which has left them feeling abandoned. We cannot simply 'move on' from covid and leave them behind.'

Dr McCann has been critical of the existing compensation scheme, claiming it was 'not fit for purpose'.

'Many vaccine-injured Australians who cannot access compensation through the Services Australia scheme now find themselves abandoned, with no support,' Dr McCann said.

The size of the compensation claim being sought is not yet clear.

The TGA has been contacted for comment.

The TGA’s latest health safety report, published on 20 April, reveals that adverse risks are extremely low.

There were 138,307 total adverse event reports from nearly 66 million vaccine doses administered - a rate of just 0.2 per cent.

'The protective benefits of vaccination far outweigh the potential risks,' the report states.

Melbourne teacher Gareth O'Gradie is one of the named applicants on the class action. He was diagnosed with vaccine-induced pericarditis and required open heart surgery

The medicines regulator has identified a total of 14 reports where the cause of death was linked to vaccination and said there was no new vaccine-related deaths identified since 2022.

'The TGA closely monitors reports of suspected side effects (also known as adverse events) to the COVID-19 vaccines,' it said.

'This is the most intensive safety monitoring ever conducted of any vaccines in Australia.'

But instructing solicitor Natalie Strijland, of Brisbane law firm NR Barbi, said the action would argue the TGA caused considerable harm and damage by failing to regulate the COVID-19 vaccinations properly.

The class action names three applicants, one of whom is 41-year old father-of-two Gareth O'Gradie.

Mr O'Gradie, a teacher from Melbourne, was left with a 20-centimetre scar down his chest after developing severe pericarditis — inflammation of the lining around the heart — following his first Pfizer vaccination in July 2021.

He did not respond to various medications and therapies and in February 2022 doctors performed open heart surgery to remove his pericardial sac lining his heart.

The TGA said myocarditis and pericarditis were 'usually temporary conditions, with most people getting better within a few days', noting that the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) 'continues to emphasise that the protective benefits of the vaccines far outweigh the rare risk of these side effects'.

But Mr O'Gradie believes there has been 'misinformation about the safety' of the vaccines from the government.

'I think there has been some cover-up,' he told news.com.au.

'There was a lot of, you know, 'We need to not scare the public as part of the vaccine rollout, so let's not publicise these things.' There was a large, intentional withholding of information — that doesn't give people informed consent.'

He claimed that he was 'totally not or never have been anti-vaccine'.

'I'm pro-science, I'm well educated,' he said.

Mr O'Gradie told The Australian that he was worried about the 'anti-vaccine lobby piggybacking' on the class action.

He is joined by two other lead claimants: Antonio Derose, 66, who developed encephalomyelitis (inflammation in the brain and spinal cord) following his AstraZeneca jab and Anthony Rose, 47, who claims severe cognitive impairment and chronic fatigue following his Moderna vaccination.

The existing compensation scheme, which is open to Australians who 'suffer a moderate to severe impact following an adverse reaction to a TGA-approved COVID-19 vaccine', has been heavily criticised for being difficult to access and too narrowly focused.

As of April 12, Services Australia had received 3501 applications and paid 137 claims totalling more than $7.3 million. Another 2263 claims are still in progress, while 405 have been withdrawn and 696 deemed not payable.

CIA Cover-Up of Hunter Biden’s Laptop

CIA Cover-Up of Hunter Biden’s Laptop Charged By House Republicans
Written by Eric Zuesse
25.04.2023

Here is the letter by the lead investigators, to Secretary of State Blinken, reporting the new evidence of his complicity in that cover-up, and Michael Morell’s admission that it was done by the U.S. intelligence community in order to defeat Trump’s 2020 Presidential campaign LINK:

The Honorable Antony Blinken Secretary
U.S. Department of State Washington, DC 20520
April 20, 2023

Dear Secretary Blinken:

The Committee on the Judiciary and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence are conducting oversight of federal law-enforcement and intelligence matters within our respective jurisdictions. We are examining the origins of the infamous public statement signed by 51 former intelligence officials that falsely discredited a New York Post story regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop as supposed Russian disinformation. As part of our oversight, we have learned that you played a role in the inception of this statement while serving as a Biden campaign advisor, and we therefore request your assistance with our oversight.

On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published a report detailing how Hunter Biden used the position and influence of his father, now-President Joe Biden, for personal gain with the apparent awareness of President Biden. 1 The article reported on several emails found on a laptop belonging to Hunter Biden that he had abandoned in a Delaware computer shop. 2 The contents of the emails cast doubt on President Biden’s previous denials of speaking to his son about his international business dealings.

Within five days of the article, on October 19, 2020, 51 former intelligence officials released a public statement attempting to discredit the contents of the New York Post’s reporting about Hunter Biden, stating that the story “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” 3 News publications immediately ran with the statement, with Politico publishing a story with the conclusive headline, “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former officials say.” 4 Social media companies simultaneously restricted access to the Post story, including Twitter locking the Post’s and then-White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany’s accounts for sharing a link to the article.5 During the final presidential debate on October 22, then-Vice President Biden cited the public statement to rebut President Trump’s criticism of the Biden family business dealings, saying:

    Look, there are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what this, [President Trump’s] accusing me of is a Russian plan. They have said this this has all the characteristics — four — five former heads of the CIA, both parties, say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage. Nobody believes it except him and his good friend Rudy Giuliani.6

Subsequent reporting revealed that the New York Post story was not, as the public statement claimed and then-Vice President Biden parroted, part of a “Russian information operation.”7 This revelation nearly two years after the fact, however, was little consolation. The concerted efforts to dismiss the serious allegations in the Post’s reporting and to suppress any discussion of the story played a substantial role in the 2020 election.

The Committees recently conducted a transcribed interview with Michael Morell, a former Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and one of the 51 signatories of the public statement. In his transcribed interview, Morell testified that on or around October 17, 2020, you reached out to him to discuss the Hunter Biden laptop story.8 At the time you served as a senior advisor to the Biden campaign. According to Morell, although your outreach was couched as simply gathering Morell’s reaction to the Post story, it set in motion the events that led to the issuance of the public statement.9 Morell testified:

    Q: But, prior to [Secretary Blinken’s] call, you – you did not have any intent to write this statement?

    A: I did not.

    Q: Okay. So his call triggered – A: It did, yes.

    Q: – that intent in you?

    A: Yes. Absolutely.10

That same day, October 17, you also emailed Morell an article published in USA Today alleging that the FBI was examining whether the Hunter Biden laptop was part of a “disinformation campaign.”11 The very bottom of the email you sent to Morell included the signature block of Andrew Bates, then-director of rapid response for the Biden campaign.12

Morell testified that his communication with you was one of a few communications he had with the Biden campaign, explaining that he also received a call from Steve Ricchetti, Chairman of the Biden campaign, following the October 22 debate to thank him for writing the statement.13 He testified:

    After the debate – I think it was after the debate – in fact, I’m pretty sure it was after the debate – I got a phone call from Jeremy Bash, who I work with at Beacon and who is active politically. And Jeremy said: Do you have a minute to talk to Steve Ricchetti?

    I said: Of course.

He was the head of the Biden campaign at the time. And Jeremy got him on the line, and Steve thanked me for putting the statement out. And that was the extent of the conversation.14

Morell also explained that the Biden campaign helped to strategize about the public release of the statement. Morell testified that he sent an email telling Nick Shapiro, former Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor to the Director of the CIA John Brennan, that the Biden campaign wanted the statement to go to a particular reporter at the Washington Post first and that he should send the statement to the campaign when he sent the letter to the reporter.15 Morell testified, however, that he did not recall why he told Shapiro the campaign wanted the statement to go to this reporter first and admitted that he may have spoken to the campaign on another occasion.16

Morell further explained that one of his two goals in releasing the statement was to help then-Vice President Biden in the debate and to assist him in winning the election.17 He testified:

    Q: What was the intent of the statement?

    A: There were two intents. One intent was to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue; and, two, it was [to] help Vice President Biden.18

    ***

    You wanted to help the Vice President why? Because I wanted him to win the election. You wanted him to win; that’s why?

    Yes, sir.19

Based on Morell’s testimony, it is apparent that the Biden campaign played an active role in the origins of the public statement, which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election.20 Although the statement’s signatories have an unquestioned right to free speech and free association — which we do not dispute — their reference to their national security credentials lent weight to the story and suggested access to specialized information unavailable to other Americans. This concerted effort to minimize and suppress public dissemination of the serious allegations about the Biden family was a grave disservice to all American citizens’ informed participation in our democracy.

Based on the information we have obtained to date, we believe that you possess material that would advance our oversight and inform potential legislative reforms. Accordingly, we ask that you please provide the following information and records in your personal possession:

    1. Identify all people with whom you communicated about the inception, drafting, editing, signing, publishing, or promotion of the “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” dated October 19, 2020, during the period October 14, 2020, to November 24, 2020; and
    2. Produce all documents and communications referring or relating to the “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” dated October 19, 2020, sent or received between October 14, 2020, and November 24, 2020.

Please produce this material as soon as possible but no later than 5:00 p.m. on May 4, 2023. Because these events occurred prior to your nomination and confirmation as Secretary of State, we seek your cooperation with our requests in your personal, and not your official, capacity. Although our requests do not implicate Department equities, and accordingly there should be no basis for the Department to interfere with our oversight, we have addressed these requests to you in your official capacity initially as a courtesy. If you are represented by private counsel in this matter, please ask your attorney to contact Judiciary Committee staff promptly on your behalf at (202) 225-6906.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely,

Jim Jordan
Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary

Michael R. Turner
Chairman
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

cc: The Honorable Jerrold L. Nadler, Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary The Honorable Jim Himes, Ranking Member, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

Notes:

    1 Emma-Jo Morris & Gabrielle Fonrouge, Smoking-gun email reveals how Hunter Biden introduced Ukrainian businessman to VP dad, N.Y. POST (Oct. 14, 2020).
    2 Id.
    3 Jim Clapper et al., Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails (Oct. 19, 2020).
    4 Natasha Bertrand, Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say, POLITICO (Oct. 19, 2020).
    5 See, e.g., Elizabeth Dwoskin, Facebook and Twitter take unusual steps to limit spread of New York Post story, WASH. POST (Oct. 15, 2020).
    6 Comm’n on Presidential Debates, Presidential Debate at Belmont University in Nashville, Tennessee (Oct. 22, 2020).
    7 See, e.g., Katie Brenner et al., Hunter Biden paid tax bill, but broad federal investigation continues, N.Y. TIMES, Mar. 16, 2022; Matt Viser et al., Inside Hunter Biden’s multimillion-dollar deals with a Chinese energy company, WASH. POST, Mar. 30, 2022.
    8 See Transcribed Interview of Mr. Michael Morell at 97.
    9 See id. at 21-22, 25.
    10 Id. at 21-22.
    11 Id. at 22. See email from Anthony Blinken to Michael Morell (Oct. 17, 2020, 10:53 p.m.). 12 Email from Anthony Blinken to Michael Morell (Oct. 17, 2020, 10:53 p.m.).
    13 Morell interview at 97.
    14 Id.
    15 Id. at 23.
    16 Id. at 104.
    17 See id. at 11, 34, 102.
    18 Id. at 11.
    19 Id. at 102.
    20 See, e.g., David Folkenflik, More details emerge in federal investigation into Hunter Biden, Nat’l Pub. Radio (Apr. 9, 2022); Jacob Siegel, A guide to understanding the hoax of the Century, Tablet (Mar. 28, 2023).

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.