Jump to content

Today's news temporary edition


kj35
 Share

Recommended Posts

Regarding Judy Mikovits, another interview with more details.

Also see the text under the video, certain sub-topics have been broken into short videos.
 

SARS-CoV-2- Interview with Judy Mikovits

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSgN8ONNKVs

 

Dr. Mikovits is a well-known scientist who is regarded \the most outstanding molecular and cellular biologist of our time. The intro reveals her incredible background and story. She was fired from WHO and unlawfully imprisoned (!) due to her groundbreaking discoveries to provide real treatment for diseases and her professional integrity. She does reveal the former foul play of WHO and the current scenario as well on solid empirical and scientific evidence. If she is correct, and her integrity and expertise does suggest that she is, then we know the outcome of the upcoming mandatory vaccination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USA shopper refused for not wearing masks and people don't think vaccines will be made compulsory by stealth

 

Hero’ Costco worker hailed after showdown with irate shopper over mask policy

AOL.COM 1 hr ago

A worker at a Costco store is being praised on social media for calmly deescalating a battle with an angry customer who refused to wear a mask while shopping in the store.

Costco requires all employees and customers to wear a face covering while inside its retail locations. But the customer filmed himself waiting in the checkout line without a mask and berating a worker named Tison who asked him to put one on.

“I’m not doing it because I woke up in a free country,” the customer said after threatening to put the Costco worker on his “3,000-follower Instagram feed.”  Tison greeted the man’s Instagram followers, politely told him to have a great day and walked away ― taking the customer’s shopping cart of goods with him. 

“You’re no longer welcome here in our warehouse,” Tison said. “You need to leave, thank you very much.” 

Realizing his error, the customer quickly suggested that his partner ― who was wearing a mask ― take his card to pay for the goods while he leaves the store. But was too late. Tison was gone and so was the shopping cart full of toilet paper, detergent and other items.

“He’s a pussy little bitch,” the customer ranted. “I’m not a fucking sheep.”  

TMZ found the customer’s feed, which featured another rant he posted after leaving the store. The booted customer said he was “not the fucking sheep” and boasted that he was one of the only people in the store without a mask.

Tison, on the other hand, won acclaim on social media for how he handled the situation:  

Tison replied from his own Twitter account. 

“People of Twitter thank you for all of the support,” he wrote. “I was just trying to protect our employees and our members.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, kj35 said:

Sounds familiar

 

https://www.rt.com/news/489097-plandemic-website-hacked-covid19/

The website for the controversial ‘Plandemic’ documentary movie has been hacked by a disgruntled viewer who replaced the landing page with a message claiming its star Dr Judy Mikovits is “bat s**t crazy.”

The documentary, in which virologist Mikovits claims the Covid-19 virus was created in a lab and that wearing masks is dangerous, has been pulled from Facebook and YouTube and widely slated in mainstream media. It has still managed to attract millions of views on other platforms, including BitChute, however — a perhaps unsurprising side-effect of the valiant efforts to censor it.

Its website, WatchPlandemic.com, was hacked and vandalized on Monday. The landing page, which usually directs viewers to places where the documentary can still be viewed, was replaced with a black screen and four bullet points disputing claims made in the documentary.

The message, which is still visible on the page as of Tuesday afternoon GMT, states that “Judy Mikovitz is bat sh*t crazy (sic)” and that protective masks “aren't going to kill you.”

 

The hackers 4 bullet points are simply ridiculous. 

 

The first, that Mikovits is 'bat shit crazy'  is just a personal attack and doesn't refute what she says about Fauci's corrupt nature.

 

The second point that Bill Gates doesn't need more money - this clearly isn't just about money it's about control.

 

The third, that masks aren't going to kill you. Well, there isn't any evidence that they save lives either. We do know they can reduce oxygen levels and have caused a fatal car accident and lung damage in another person. I drive past an older man this morning jogging wearing a mask and it wasn't a comfortable sight at all.

 

The fourth point is the most ridiculous, that the world is scary now and people believe in conspiracies because it's 'more comforting than the truth'. There is absolutely nothing comforting about believing in a fascist globalist conspiracy rather than believing in a virus which in reality isn't that lethal. 

 

I saw quite a few people on facebook 'debunk' Mikovitz because 'she has a book out'. :classic_laugh:

Edited by Jnana
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

First article dates back from 2018 so has nothing that new…

 

Quote

BRICS nations pledge unity in face of US-China trade war

 

Leaders of biggest emerging economies reaffirm commitment to open world economy amid US tariff threats

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who held a controversial meeting with Trump last week, echoed the calls for closer ties among BRICS members and for stronger trade within the group.

 

“BRICS has a unique place in the global economy – this is the largest market in the world, the joint GDP is 42 per cent of the global GDP and it keeps growing,” Putin said.

 

 

Something to be noticed is that on the same page you got a link to an article reading why is Russia's coronavirus death rate to low ? and that a bit further you stumble upon a splashy video titled RUSSIA REPORTS 10,000 COVID-19 CASES IN A DAY!!!!

 

So you got reality and propaganda all mixed up within one page of the same news site, and you may guess most what we've heard about Brazil or Turkey these latest years was distorted, exaggerated or plain forged…

 

 

Quote

Russia summits are on the cards for Xi Jinping in July

 

Published: 11:00pm, 20 May, 2020

 

·         Moscow preparing to go ahead with meetings of BRICS emerging economies and SCO security bloc in St Petersburg as planned

·         It would be the Chinese president’s first overseas trip since the coronavirus hit and could be a boost for the alliance amid growing backlash over pandemic

 

Russia could be the destination for President Xi Jinping’s first overseas trip since the coronavirus hit, with plans for two regional summits still on track, providing a boost to the alliance as Beijing faces a growing backlash over the pandemic.

 

Russian ambassador to China Andrey Denisov confirmed the schedule and said there had also been discussions about President Vladimir Putin visiting China in September, though no date had been set.

 

“We still hope … that later this year, maybe the second half of the year, we’ll have a number of opportunities [for the leaders to visit] each other, both here in China and in Russia,” Denisov said in a video press briefing on Wednesday.

 

Putin is expected to host a leaders’ summit of the BRICS emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, as well as a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, a regional security and economic bloc, in St Petersburg in mid-July.[…]

 

Xi and Putin have spoken by phone three times since March, and as Beijing comes under increasing pressure over its handling of the coronavirus outbreak, Putin is the only major world leader who has denounced the United States for blaming China for the pandemic.

 

 https://www.scmp.com/business/article/3085299/chinese-investors-buying-us-property-face-heightened-scrutiny-amid-rising

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's not 'a virus' that came from China but the whole COVID scam and its wide extended and double-sided propaganda that were launched from China thanks to the Western media and some Chinese corrupted authorities, which is why we could see a real video of Chinese people in Wuhan yelling it's all fake! at bribed officials 'in visit'…

 

I didn't know about this movie made in 2016 and that's linked in this article of which here below is an extract… Pilger's film is about 2 hours long but you got the development of the related events commented by the author in this 30mn interview and then the COVID related update in the article, the whole stuff clearly making fear that a third world war be now unavoidable…

 

https://youtu.be/mXNO_g4hlKw

 

 

Quote

 

Back in 2016 it was harder for people to see this escalation on the horizon, but now in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic we’re hearing a frantic, disproportionate amount of anti-China sentiment from the Trump administration and its supporters, in the same way we heard Russia hysteria amplified over the last three years by Trump’s enemies. Trump was politically pressured to dangerously escalate cold war tensions with Russia, and he’s now being politically incentivized to pass the blame for his administration’s spectacular failures in addressing this pandemic on to the Chinese government in a way which manufactures support for escalations on that front as well. Two different narratives, same agenda.

 

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/03/23/the-coming-war-on-china - watch-john-pilgers-powerfully-relevant-documentary/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, chud said:

 

It's not 'a virus' that came from China but the whole COVID scam and its wide extended and double-sided propaganda that were launched from China thanks to the Western media and some Chinese corrupted authorities, which is why we could see a real video of Chinese people in Wuhan yelling it's all fake! at bribed officials 'in visit'…

 

I didn't know about this movie made in 2016 and that's linked in this article of which here below is an extract… Pilger's film is about 2 hours long but you got the development of the related events commented by the author in this 30mn interview and then the COVID related update in the article, the whole stuff clearly making fear that a third world war be now unavoidable…

 

https://youtu.be/mXNO_g4hlKw

 

 

 

 

I wish there were a lot more journalists of Pilger's ilk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2020 at 3:14 PM, Jnana said:

The third, that masks aren't going to kill you. Well, there isn't any evidence that they save lives either. We do know they can reduce oxygen levels and have caused a fatal car accident and lung damage in another person. I drive past an older man this morning jogging wearing a mask and it wasn't a comfortable sight at all.

 

Funny enough, today I had 2 near misses in the car, all within a mile or so, with people pulling out from side roads in front of me and both were wearing those molded type dust masks, so I thought are they causing a distration or interfering with concentration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Orange Alert said:

 

Funny enough, today I had 2 near misses in the car, all within a mile or so, with people pulling out from side roads in front of me and both were wearing those molded type dust masks, so I thought are they causing a distration or interfering with concentration.

I’ve seen that too, people either on their own or with there other half driving all facemasked up and surgical gloves in their own car. Loads of traffic today and the heat....I think the traffic was caused by the bewildered driving around with low oxygen levels. Low oxygen levels cause drowsiness and gives you the sensation of drunkenness.

Had issues driving today like you said for the same reason.

Bus drivers roaring towards you in facemasks in central London in a heat wave does not make for a fun time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CODIE said:

I’ve seen that too, people either on their own or with there other half driving all facemasked up and surgical gloves in their own car. Loads of traffic today and the heat....I think the traffic was caused by the bewildered driving around with low oxygen levels. Low oxygen levels cause drowsiness and gives you the sensation of drunkenness.

Had issues driving today like you said for the same reason.

Bus drivers roaring towards you in facemasks in central London in a heat wave does not make for a fun time.

 

:classic_laugh:... would get comical if it wasn't so sad... 

 

Mandatory mask wear is also used by big companies like the whole scam is too as an excuse to sanction and eventually fire 'stubborn' employees. People were protesting all over the West already so how could these companies have run more workforce reductions ? They have to get even more 'competitive' to face China's rivalry, so that's one more reason for a 'pandemic' and why these 'precaution measures' are enforced by THE STATE even beyond the recommendations from health 'authorities'…  

 

Edited by chud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Air Force And SpaceX Are Teaming Up For A 'Massive' Live Fire Exercise

 

The exercise will involve SpaceX Starlink satellites, a variety of military assets, and a new command and control system working together.

 

FEBRUARY 25, 2020

 

 

Quote

 

Just last week, Air Force acquisition chief William Roper told reporters at the Pentagon that the Air Force and SpaceX will conduct an event on April 8, together with other branches of the U.S. military, that will see SpaceX Starlink satellites link up with multiple armed forces systems in a “massive” live fire exercise.

 

 

 

 

"SpaceX has been a great industry partner for us," Roper said. "They are very excited and we are excited to learn more about their satellites through the demonstration." 

 

 

The demonstration will reportedly involve shooting down a drone and a cruise missile and will take place at several different sites including Marine Corps Air Station Yuma in Arizona to Eglin Air Force Base in Florida.[…]

 

Last month, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper gave a joint press briefing with French Minister of Armed Forces Florence Parly – the top defense official in a country that is presently planning to put defensive weapons in space –  in which Esper claimed that it is this direct escalation by Russia and China that has pushed the U.S. to begin militarizing space:

 

"I would just add that our – our nations have been in space for many, many years. It's just been recently that both China and Russia pushed us to the point where it now became a warfighting domain."

"As a result, the United States has stood up Space Command and just recently, Space Force, to make sure that we can preserve space as a global commons. It's important not just to our security, but to our commerce, our way of life, our understanding of the planet, weather, you name it. So it's very important that we – we now treat it that way and make sure that we're prepared to defend ourselves and preserve space."

 

 

Some comments...

 

Quote

I can't believe it took me this long to realize 'Starlink' was a US government spy sat program masked

as one of Elon Musk's crazy ideas... Brilliant.

 

Obama - "I will not weaponize space"

USA 1967 - "We Will Not Weaponize Space"

 

Skynet

 

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/32346/the-air-force-and-spacex-are-teaming-up-for-a-massive-live-fire-exercise

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised no-one has picked up on this one, it actually briefly appeared on the BBC News homepage yesterday, but buried among the "Cummings row" news.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-51868737

 

Netanyahu trial: Israeli prime minister faces Jerusalem court

The trial of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on corruption charges has opened in Jerusalem, days after he began a new term in office.

Mr Netanyahu, 70, is the first standing leader to face trial in the country's history. He denies accusations of bribery, fraud and breach of trust.

Arrived at the courthouse for a brief hearing, he said the cases were aimed at "toppling him in any way possible".

He was sworn back into office as head of a rare unity government a week ago.

His political rival, Benny Gantz, agreed to share power following three inconclusive elections in under a year.

He has rejected calls by opponents to step down while he fights the cases.

 

 

I think we can probably guess how this one will pan out... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10,000 Chinese Soldiers Have Entered Inside Indian Territory [REPORT]

"Recall that in 2017, there’s an incident where the Indian soldiers in Sikkim crossed into Bhutan and hindered some Chinese construction workers from extending a road into the Galwan Valley. While that went for more than two months, New Delhi and Beijing were able to go into a mutual negotiation for withdrawal from the territory. While we thought everything was fine, reports have it that a similar occurrence is happening again. Now, 10,000 Chinese soldiers are inside the territory of India, claiming the entire Galwan Valley."

 

https://insiderpaper.com/10000-chinese-soldiers-ladakh-galwan-valley/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gender-neutral-passport-denied-7nwrl9g92

 

Not what it seems from headline case denied for passports but submitted for a wider review to introduce gender neutral across the board

Court of Appeal
Published May 27, 2020
Regina (Elan-Cane) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Before Lady Justice King, Lord Justice Irwin and Lord Justice Henderson
[2020] EWCA Civ 363
Judgment March 10, 2020

The right to respect for private and family life, under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, did not impose a positive obligation on the government to permit a person to apply for and be issued with a passport with an indicator in the sex field signifying that that person’s gender was unspecified.

The Court of Appeal so held when giving reasons for dismissing the appeal of the claimant, Christie Elan-Cane, against the dismissal by Mr Justice Jeremy Baker, sitting in the Queen’s Bench Division ([2018] EWHC 1530 (Admin)) of the claimant’s application for judicial review of the policy of the defendant, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, requiring applicants for a United Kingdom passport to state their gender as either male or female with no “X” gender-neutral option.

Ms Kate Gallafent, QC, Mr Tom Mountford and Ms Gayatri Sarathy for the claimant; Sir James Eadie, QC and Ms Sarah Hannett for the secretary of state; Ms Monica Carss-Frisk, QC and Ms Rachel Jones for Human Rights Watch, intervening.

Lady Justice King said that the claimant was born with female physical sexual characteristics and was therefore registered as female at birth. The claimant grew increasingly detached from the female gender to the extent that the claimant underwent a bilateral mastectomy followed by a total hysterectomy. The claimant said that those procedures were successful in achieving the desired status of “non-gendered”.

It was obvious and beyond argument that the case concerned the claimant’s private life and engaged article 8. There could be little more central to a citizen’s private life than gender, whatever that gender might or might not be. No one could suggest that the claimant had no right to live as a non-binary, or more particularly as a non-gendered, person.

A gender identity chosen, achieved or realised through successive episodes of major surgery and lived through decades of scepticism, indifference and sometimes hostility had to be taken to be absolutely central to the person’s private life. The question then became: what, if any, positive obligation was placed on the state to protect that aspect of the claimant’s private life?

Whilst the present case was limited to passports, the driver for change was the broad notion of respect for gender identity. The passport issue could not reasonably be considered in isolation. If there was no requirement for an individual to specify their gender on their passport application, it begged the question as to the utility of requesting gender information at all. That in turn raised the question as to the purpose of requesting gender information across all official records.

The government was embarked upon work which would address those questions as part of a wider consideration of gender identity issues, and that work strongly supported the judge’s finding that the government was entitled to take the view that it was inappropriate to consider the issue of passports in isolation.

Looking at the totality of approach to gender identity issues world-wide and the information made available to the court, it seemed that, whilst the direction of travel, or “trend”, was undoubtedly moving towards the recognition of the status of non-binary people, there was, as yet, nothing approaching a consensus in relation to either the broad and indeterminate issue of the recognition of non-binary people, or the narrow and precise issue of the use of “X” markers on passports.

In the early development of some ethical or moral issue in relation to which there was no consensus, the state in question was likely to enjoy a wide margin of appreciation despite the importance of the issue to the individual. The judge had been right that the margin of appreciation in the present case was “relatively wide”. Accordingly, the current policy of the passport office not to permit the claimant to apply for and be issued with a passport with an “X” marker, did not at present amount to an unlawful breach of the claimant’s article 8 private life rights.

However, there was a respectable argument that the time was approaching when the consensus within the Council of Europe’s member states would be that there was a positive obligation on the state to recognise the position of non-binary, including intersex, individuals. If and when that time came the state would then have to take steps towards implementing that obligation.

Lord Justice Irwin and Lord Justice Henderson delivered concurring judgments.

Solicitors: Clifford Chance; Treasury Solicitor; Macfarlanes LLP.

Law

Europe

 

Edited by kj35
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Circular firing squad scores a hit: Real reason Michael Moore’s film axed from YouTube is climate wrongthink, not copyright

 

Helen Buyniski

is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23

26 May, 2020 19:53

Moore burnishing his liberal cred at Bernie Sanders rally © Reuters / Carlos Allegri

225

Follow RT on

Michael Moore’s popular yet controversial exposé of the “green” movement’s corruption has finally been knocked off YouTube by a tactic that’s as cowardly as it is underhanded. Nothing upsets a cult like a successful apostate.

“Planet of the Humans,” posted to YouTube for free viewing on Earth Day, to the horror of the climate-change industrial complex, was removed from the platform on Monday, after a British environmental photographer filed a copyright claim. The deplatforming represents a triumph for the deep-pocketed “green” superstars who’ve been tearing their hair out over the film for the past month, livid over the unflattering portrayal of their crusade by the once-beloved liberal filmmaker, but unable to shut him up.

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Blatant act of censorship’: Michael Moore green energy doc taken off YouTube after copyright claim by environmentalist opponent

Photographer Toby Smith claimed the film – which had been viewed more than 8.3 million times before its removal – used “several seconds” of footage he’d shot of rare earth elements being mined without his permission. Unlike previous attempts to get the film taken down – which targeted its distributor with claims the film was packed with falsehoods and “fossil fuel industry talking points” – this angle of attack was successful, concealing the iron fist of censorship within the velvet glove of copyright law. 

Smith could have gone directly to the filmmakers and complained, rather than running directly to YouTube. But the photographer made no secret of his true intentions. “I wasn’t interested in negotiation,” he told the Guardian on Tuesday, sniffing that he didn’t “agree with its message” and condemning “the misleading use of facts in its narrative.”

READ MORE

Michael Moore’s latest film targeted ‘renewables’ & accused ‘green’ groups of being in Big Energy’s pockets. It hit a nerve

Heaven forbid facts be used to support a narrative one disagrees with! That’s “disinformation,” in the Orwellian Newspeak parlance of centrist-liberal orthodoxy. Indeed, Smith and the rest of the film’s critics have tried every disingenuous trick in the book to get Moore’s film taken down, from guilt by association (it’s “endorsed by climate skeptics and right-wing think tanks!”) to shaming celebrity pile-ons. Documentary-maker Josh Fox even briefly convinced the film’s distributor to pull it by claiming it was “dangerous, misleading and destructive to decades of progress in environmental policy, science and engineering” – only to see it reinstated so as not to trigger the Streisand Effect (in which the backlash to censorship sees the offending work skyrocket in popularity as people flock to see what the controversy is about).

However, a copyright claim lets the haters memory-hole the film while maintaining plausible deniability around the censorship issue, allowing YouTube to dodge the thorny issue of deplatforming an Oscar-winning documentarian. 

Never mind that Smith, like his climate-bigwig fellow critics Bill McKibben and Michael Mann, has an ideological motivation for silencing Moore. The film eviscerates the hypocrisy of the green movement, depicting the self-styled saviors of the planet as money-grubbing opportunists in bed with the same Big Oil interests they claim to oppose. The “renewable energy” that’s supposed to solve the climate crisis is revealed to be as environmentally devastating as the fossil fuels we’ve been taught to revile. Copyright lets YouTube claim they’re “just following orders.”

Jeff Gibbs, director of “Planet of the Humans,” recognized the spurious copyright takedown as an “act of censorship by political critics,” calling it a “misuse of copyright law to shut down a film that has opened a serious conversation” about “green capitalism” and Wall Street profiteering within the environmental movement. “This is just another attempt by the film’s opponents to subvert the right to free speech,” he told the Guardian, adding that he was working with YouTube to get the film back up.

But Big Climate doesn’t want a serious conversation. They’re accustomed to knocking heretics off social media – or at least marginalizing them – with minimal effort. Well-funded online activism group Avaaz has been engaged in a full-frontal assault on “climate misinformation” on YouTube for months, implicitly threatening both the video platform and the brands whose ads appear on climate-skeptical videos with the wrath of millions of armchair inactivists if they don’t suppress the offending content. Just last week, Facebook’s fact-checkers squelched a PragerU video debunking the “climate change is killing the polar bears” meme, even though it was backed by expert science.

ALSO ON RT.COMWhose alternative facts? Facebook consigns PragerU to ‘reduced visibility’ purgatory after challenge to polar bear myth

But convincing platforms to take down a one-time liberal darling – especially one with an Academy Award under his belt – is a tall order. Now that the “wrongthink” voices of climate skeptics have been silenced and “climate-change denialism” equated to Holocaust denial in the popular imagination, thanks to a full-bore media demonization campaign of all who question climate orthodoxy, the environmental movement has turned to seeking infidels in its midst. 

Given his one-time status in the movement, Moore can’t be dismissed as just another Koch brothers shill, no matter how loud his detractors shout that “right-wingers” have embraced his latest film. But they won’t hesitate to resort to underhanded tactics to take him down. 

 

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

Edited by kj35
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

Keep up with the news by installing RT’s extension for Chrome. Never miss a story with this clean and simple app that delivers the latest headlines to you.

 

RT

LIVE

search

 

Menu mobile

facebook

twitter

youtube

instagram

HomeOp-ed

Did you know the bogus idea of 'social distancing' was invented by a 14-year-old girl during the Bush administration in 2006?

25 May, 2020 16:35 / Updated 1 day ago

©  Getty Images / Bernhard Lang

956

1

Follow RT on

By Jeffrey A. Tucker, editorial director for the American Institute for Economic Research. He is the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and eight books in five languages, most recently 'The Market Loves You.' He is also the editor of 'The Best of Mises.' He tweets at @jeffreyatucker.

The lockdown measures implemented across the US – and failing to save us from either Covid-19 or economic ruin – have roots in a 2006 schoolgirl’s science project. They became law despite several academics’ resistance.

Now begins the grand effort, on display in thousands of articles and news broadcasts daily, somehow to normalize the lockdown and all its destruction of the last two months. We didn’t lock down almost the entire country in 1968/69, 1957, or 1949-1952, or even during 1918. But in a terrifying few days in March 2020, it happened to all of us, causing an avalanche of social, cultural, and economic destruction that will ring through the ages. 

There was nothing normal about it all. We’ll be trying to figure out what happened to us for decades hence. 

READ MORE

Anti-social distancing: The darker side of a remote world, from execution orders to digital governance

How did a temporary plan to preserve hospital capacity turn into two-to-three months of near-universal house arrest that ended up causing worker furloughs at 256 hospitals, a stoppage of international travel, a 40 percent job loss among people earning less than $40,000 per year, devastation of every economic sector, mass confusion and demoralization, a complete ignoring of all fundamental rights and liberties, not to mention the mass confiscation of private property with forced closures of millions of businesses?  

Whatever the answer, it’s got to be a bizarre tale. What’s truly surprising is just how recent the theory behind lockdown and forced distancing actually is. So far as anyone can tell, the intellectual machinery that made this mess was invented 14 years ago, and not by epidemiologists but by computer-simulation modelers. It was adopted not by experienced doctors – they warned ferociously against it – but by politicians. 

Let’s start with the phrase social distancing, which has mutated into forced human separation. The first I had heard it was in the 2011 movie 'Contagion.' The first time it appeared in the New York Times was February 12, 2006:

"If the avian flu goes pandemic while Tamiflu and vaccines are still in short supply, experts say, the only protection most Americans will have is 'social distancing,' which is the new politically correct way of saying 'quarantine.'”

But distancing also encompasses less drastic measures, like wearing face masks, staying out of elevators – and the [elbow] bump. Such stratagems, those experts say, will rewrite the ways we interact, at least during the weeks when the waves of influenza are washing over us."

School project gone too far

Maybe you don’t remember that the avian flu of 2006 didn’t amount to much. It’s true, despite all the extreme warnings about its lethality, H5N1 didn’t turn into much at all. What it did do, however, was send the existing president, George W. Bush, to the library to read about the 1918 flu and its catastrophic results. He asked for some experts to submit some plans to him about what to do when the real thing comes along.

ALSO ON RT.COMPersonal pods, ‘bumper tables’ & pool noodle hats? Inventive ‘social distancing’ enforcers ensure New Normal is anything but

The New York Times (April 22, 2020) tells the story from there: 

"Fourteen years ago, two federal government doctors, Richard Hatchett and Carter Mecher, met with a colleague at a burger joint in suburban Washington for a final review of a proposal they knew would be treated like a pinata: telling Americans to stay home from work and school the next time the country was hit by a deadly pandemic.

"When they presented their plan not long after, it was met with skepticism and a degree of ridicule by senior officials, who like others in the United States had grown accustomed to relying on the pharmaceutical industry, with its ever-growing array of new treatments, to confront evolving health challenges.

"Drs Hatchett and Mecher were proposing instead that Americans in some places might have to turn back to an approach, self-isolation, first widely employed in the Middle Ages.

"How that idea – born out of a request by President George W. Bush to ensure the nation was better prepared for the next contagious disease outbreak – became the heart of the national playbook for responding to a pandemic is one of the untold stories of the coronavirus crisis.

"It required the key proponents – Dr Mecher, a Department of Veterans Affairs physician, and Dr Hatchett, an oncologist turned White House adviser – to overcome intense initial opposition.

"It brought their work together with that of a Defense Department team assigned to a similar task.

"And it had some unexpected detours, including a deep dive into the history of the 1918 Spanish flu and an important discovery kicked off by a high school research project pursued by the daughter of a scientist at the Sandia National Laboratories.

"The concept of social distancing is now intimately familiar to almost everyone. But as it first made its way through the federal bureaucracy in 2006 and 2007, it was viewed as impractical, unnecessary and politically infeasible."

Notice that in the course of this planning, neither legal nor economic experts were brought in to consult and advise. Instead it fell to Mecher (formerly of Chicago and an intensive care doctor with no previous expertise in pandemics) and the oncologist Hatchett.

But what is this mention of the high-school daughter of 14? Her name is Laura M. Glass, and she recently declined to be interviewed when the Albuquerque Journal did a deep dive of this history. 

"Laura, with some guidance from her dad, devised a computer simulation that showed how people – family members, co-workers, students in schools, people in social situations – interact. What she discovered was that school kids come in contact with about 140 people a day, more than any other group. Based on that finding, her program showed that in a hypothetical town of 10,000 people, 5,000 would be infected during a pandemic if no measures were taken, but only 500 would be infected if the schools were closed."

READ MORE

‘Social distancing’ open to interpretation it seems, as Europe haphazardly emerges from lockdown (VIDEOS)

Laura’s name appears on the foundational paper arguing for lockdowns and forced human separation. That paper is Targeted Social Distancing Designs for Pandemic Influenza (2006). It set out a model for forced separation and applied it with good results backwards in time to 1957. They conclude with a chilling call for what amounts to a totalitarian lockdown, all stated very matter-of-factly. 

"Implementation of social distancing strategies is challenging. They likely must be imposed for the duration of the local epidemic and possibly until a strain-specific vaccine is developed and distributed. If compliance with the strategy is high over this period, an epidemic within a community can be averted. However, if neighboring communities do not also use these interventions, infected neighbors will continue to introduce influenza and prolong the local epidemic, albeit at a depressed level more easily accommodated by healthcare systems."

In other words, it was a high-school science experiment that eventually became law of the land, and through a circuitous route propelled not by science but politics.

Scientists push back

The primary author of this paper was Robert J. Glass, a complex-systems analyst with Sandia National Laboratories. He had no medical training, much less an expertise in immunology or epidemiology. 

That explains why Dr D.A. Henderson, “who had been the leader of the international effort to eradicate smallpox,” completely rejected the whole scheme. 

Says the NYT:

"Dr Henderson was convinced that it made no sense to force schools to close or public gatherings to stop. Teenagers would escape their homes to hang out at the mall. School lunch programs would close, and impoverished children would not have enough to eat. Hospital staffs would have a hard time going to work if their children were at home.

The measures embraced by Drs Mecher and Hatchett would “result in significant disruption of the social functioning of communities and result in possibly serious economic problems,” Dr Henderson wrote in his own academic paper responding to their ideas.

The answer, he insisted, was to tough it out: "Let the pandemic spread, treat people who get sick and work quickly to develop a vaccine to prevent it from coming back."

AIER’s Phil Magness got to work to find the literature responding to the 2006 paper by Robert and Sarah Glass and discovered the following manifesto: Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza. The authors included D.A. Henderson, along with three professors from Johns Hopkins: infectious disease specialist Thomas V.Inglesby, epidemiologist Jennifer B. Nuzzo, and physician Tara O’Toole. 

ALSO ON RT.COMWhy don’t our governments trust us when it comes to this virus? We need a vaccine against state authoritarianism

Their paper is a remarkably readable refutation of the entire lock-down model. 

"There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza… It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration…

"Home quarantine also raises ethical questions. Implementation of home quarantine could result in healthy, uninfected people being placed at risk of infection from sick household members. Practices to reduce the chance of transmission (hand-washing, maintaining a distance of three feet from infected people, etc.) could be recommended, but a policy imposing home quarantine would preclude, for example, sending healthy children to stay with relatives when a family member becomes ill. Such a policy would also be particularly hard on and dangerous to people living in close quarters, where the risk of infection would be heightened…. 

"Travel restrictions, such as closing airports and screening travelers at borders, have historically been ineffective. The World Health Organization Writing Group concluded that 'screening and quarantining entering travelers at international borders did not substantially delay virus introduction in past pandemics... and will likely be even less effective in the modern era'… It is reasonable to assume that the economic costs of shutting down air or train travel would be very high, and the societal costs involved in interrupting all air or train travel would be extreme…

"During seasonal influenza epidemics, public events with an expected large attendance have sometimes been canceled or postponed, the rationale being to decrease the number of contacts with those who might be contagious. There are, however, no certain indications that these actions have had any definitive effect on the severity or duration of an epidemic. Were consideration to be given to doing this on a more extensive scale and for an extended period, questions immediately arise as to how many such events would be affected. There are many social gatherings that involve close contacts among people, and this prohibition might include church services, athletic events, perhaps all meetings of more than 100 people. It might mean closing theaters, restaurants, malls, large stores, and bars. Implementing such measures would have seriously disruptive consequences…

"Schools are often closed for one–two weeks early in the development of seasonal community outbreaks of influenza primarily because of high absentee rates, especially in elementary schools, and because of illness among teachers. This would seem reasonable on practical grounds. However, to close schools for longer periods is not only impracticable but carries the possibility of a serious adverse outcome….

"Thus, canceling or postponing large meetings would not be likely to have any significant effect on the development of the epidemic. While local concerns may result in the closure of particular events for logical reasons, a policy directing communitywide closure of public events seems inadvisable. Quarantine. As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable…."

READ MORE

US states rush-recruiting Covid-19 contact tracers are overcompensating for their incompetence with authoritarianism

Finally, the remarkable conclusion:

"Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted. Strong political and public health leadership to provide reassurance and to ensure that needed medical care services are provided are critical elements. If either is seen to be less than optimal, a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe."

Confronting a manageable epidemic and turning it into a catastrophe: that seems like a good description of everything that has happened in the Covid-19 crisis of 2020.

Ideas have consequences

Thus did some of the most highly trained and experienced experts on epidemics warn with biting rhetoric against everything that the advocates of lockdown proposed. It was not even a real-world idea in the first place and showed no actual knowledge of viruses and disease mitigation. Again, the idea was born of a high-school science experiment using agent-based modeling techniques having nothing at all to do with real life, real science, or real medicine.

So the question becomes: How did the extreme view prevail?

The New York Times has the answer:

"The [Bush] administration ultimately sided with the proponents of social distancing and shutdowns – though their victory was little noticed outside of public health circles. Their policy would become the basis for government planning and would be used extensively in simulations used to prepare for pandemics, and in a limited way in 2009 during an outbreak of the influenza called H1N1. Then the coronavirus came, and the plan was put to work across the country for the first time."

You can read the 2007 CDC paper here. It is arguable that this paper did not favor full lockdown. I’ve spoken to Rajeev Venkayya, MD, who regards the 2007 plan as more liberal, and assures me that they never envisioned this level of lockdown: “lockdowns and shelter-in-place were not part of the recommendations.” To my mind, fleshing out the full relationship between this 2007 document and current policy requires a separate article.

The Times called one of the pro-lockdown researchers, Dr Howard Markel, and asked what he thought of the lockdowns. His answer: he is glad that his work was used to “save lives” but added, “It is also horrifying.”

“We always knew this would be applied in worst-case scenarios,” he said. “Even when you are working on dystopian concepts, you always hope it will never be used.”

Ideas have consequences, as they say. Dream up an idea for a virus-controling totalitarian society, one without an endgame and eschewing any experienced-based evidence that it would achieve the goal, and you might see it implemented someday. Lockdown might be the new orthodoxy but that doesn’t make it medically sound or morally correct. At least now we know that many great doctors and scholars in 2006 did their best to stop this nightmare from unfolding. Their mighty paper should serve as a blueprint for dealing with the next pandemic. 

 

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^ tried editing and tidying up twice . Bolding characters to make narrative read but it just won't let me. I'll try again with smaller edit to at least make it readable

 

Edit. Yep it won't let me. Important part here :

 

Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza. The authors included D.A. Henderson, along with three professors from Johns Hopkins: infectious disease specialist Thomas V.Inglesby, epidemiologist Jennifer B. Nuzzo, and physician Tara O’Toole. 

Their paper is a remarkably readable refutation of the entire lock-down model. 

"There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread of influenza… It is difficult to identify circumstances in the past half-century when large-scale quarantine has been effectively used in the control of any disease. The negative consequences of large-scale quarantine are so extreme (forced confinement of sick people with the well; complete restriction of movement of large populations; difficulty in getting critical supplies, medicines, and food to people inside the quarantine zone) that this mitigation measure should be eliminated from serious consideration…

"Home quarantine also raises ethical questions. Implementation of home quarantine could result in healthy, uninfected people being placed at risk of infection from sick household members. Practices to reduce the chance of transmission (hand-washing, maintaining a distance of three feet from infected people, etc.) could be recommended, but a policy imposing home quarantine would preclude, for example, sending healthy children to stay with relatives when a family member becomes ill. Such a policy would also be particularly hard on and dangerous to people living in close quarters, where the risk of infection would be heightened…. 

"Travel restrictions, such as closing airports and screening travelers at borders, have historically been ineffective. The World Health Organization Writing Group concluded that 'screening and quarantining entering travelers at international borders did not substantially delay virus introduction in past pandemics... and will likely be even less effective in the modern era'… It is reasonable to assume that the economic costs of shutting down air or train travel would be very high, and the societal costs involved in interrupting all air or train travel would be extreme…

"During seasonal influenza epidemics, public events with an expected large attendance have sometimes been canceled or postponed, the rationale being to decrease the number of contacts with those who might be contagious. There are, however, no certain indications that these actions have had any definitive effect on the severity or duration of an epidemic. Were consideration to be given to doing this on a more extensive scale and for an extended period, questions immediately arise as to how many such events would be affected. There are many social gatherings that involve close contacts among people, and this prohibition might include church services, athletic events, perhaps all meetings of more than 100 people. It might mean closing theaters, restaurants, malls, large stores, and bars. Implementing such measures would have seriously disruptive consequences…

"Schools are often closed for one–two weeks early in the development of seasonal community outbreaks of influenza primarily because of high absentee rates, especially in elementary schools, and because of illness among teachers. This would seem reasonable on practical grounds. However, to close schools for longer periods is not only impracticable but carries the possibility of a serious adverse outcome….

"Thus, canceling or postponing large meetings would not be likely to have any significant effect on the development of the epidemic. While local concerns may result in the closure of particular events for logical reasons, a policy directing communitywide closure of public events seems inadvisable. Quarantine. As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable…."

Edited by kj35
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2020 at 3:51 AM, kj35 said:

USA shopper refused for not wearing masks and people don't think vaccines will be made compulsory by stealth

 

Hero’ Costco worker hailed after showdown with irate shopper over mask policy

AOL.COM 1 hr ago

A worker at a Costco store is being praised on social media for calmly deescalating a battle with an angry customer who refused to wear a mask while shopping in the store.

Costco requires all employees and customers to wear a face covering while inside its retail locations. But the customer filmed himself waiting in the checkout line without a mask and berating a worker named Tison who asked him to put one on.

“I’m not doing it because I woke up in a free country,” the customer said after threatening to put the Costco worker on his “3,000-follower Instagram feed.”  Tison greeted the man’s Instagram followers, politely told him to have a great day and walked away ― taking the customer’s shopping cart of goods with him. 

“You’re no longer welcome here in our warehouse,” Tison said. “You need to leave, thank you very much.” 

Realizing his error, the customer quickly suggested that his partner ― who was wearing a mask ― take his card to pay for the goods while he leaves the store. But was too late. Tison was gone and so was the shopping cart full of toilet paper, detergent and other items.

“He’s a pussy little bitch,” the customer ranted. “I’m not a fucking sheep.”  

TMZ found the customer’s feed, which featured another rant he posted after leaving the store. The booted customer said he was “not the fucking sheep” and boasted that he was one of the only people in the store without a mask.

Tison, on the other hand, won acclaim on social media for how he handled the situation:  

Tison replied from his own Twitter account. 

“People of Twitter thank you for all of the support,” he wrote. “I was just trying to protect our employees and our members.

I believe you Brits use the term, bullocks? Been reading similar accounts where the great masked ones save the day by banishing the germ ridden unmasked, non-believers (who are most likely racist, gun toting Trump supporters). The masked ones are the heros. Let's all drop everything and bang on a pot for them.

 

Bullocks, indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was "warned" about not wearing mine yesterday while at a local Rite-Aid. I remained pleasent and courteous and just acted really stupid like, "Gosh! I had no idea I was required to wear a mask. Thank you so much for the info. Then, I continued to shop while being glared at by the members of the Borg.

 

...oh, and...the CHP have been out in full force throughout the city in their Ford Explorers patrol vehicles. Making their presence known. The man at Rite-Aid warned me that the police have been very active in harassing people w/o masks; coming in stores, ejecting people.

 

Ah, the New Normal!

Edited by KingKitty
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

British troops ‘unlikely’ to be prosecuted over Iraq abuse claims

More than a thousand war crime accusations tabled against troops in the Middle East have been dismissed

 

Lucy Fisher, Defence Editor | Jonathan Ames, Legal Editor

Wednesday June 03 2020, 12.00am, The Times

Defence chiefs should apologise to soldiers for failing to “stand behind their own” against thousands of false war crimes allegations, a leading lawyer said, as it was announced that further prosecutions were unlikely.

Andrew Cayley, QC, director of the Service Prosecuting Authority, said that an independent investigation into thousands of allegations from the invasion of Iraq in 2003 would probably produce no prosecutions.

He told the BBC that the “low level” of offending and lack of credible evidence had led most cases to be dismissed. Only one remains outstanding, while more than a thousand war crime accusations tabled against troops in the Middle East have been dismissed.

Hilary Meredith, a solicitor who specialises in acting for current and former military personnel, blamed the Ministry of Defence for not protecting soldiers from a stream of false claims.

Phil Shiner, a former solicitor, made more than 1,000 claims involving the British military after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. He was struck off in 2017 after being found guilty of misconduct and dishonesty relating to false abuse claims against British troops.

Ms Meredith accused Mr Shiner of instructing agents to distribute thousands of questionnaires in Iraq and then embellishing the responses when they were translated into English.

In principle, the troops affected by the false allegations could sue both Mr Shiner for making fraudulent claims and the government for failing to maintain a duty of care, she said, although she pointed out that bringing proceedings would be prohibitively expensive.

“What is needed at the very least, however,” Ms Meredith said, “is an apology from the Ministry of Defence that recognises that it did not stand behind their own.”

She added: “At long last, this witch-hunt is coming to an end. Thousands of lives have been ruined.”

She blamed the Iraq historic allegations team (IHAT), which investigated alleged war crimes committed by British troops during the occupation of Iraq, and Operation Northmoor, which investigated alleged war crimes in Afghanistan, for having “hounded hundreds of innocent troops over vile war crime slurs”. Both were closed down in 2017.

Ms Meredith said: “IHAT’s closure also came at a price — not only the cost to the taxpayer but the shattered lives, careers, marriages and health of those falsely accused over many years. I am now calling for a meaningful, public apology.”

Mr Cayley said it was “quite possible” that not a single accusation involving British personnel in Iraq would ultimately result in prosecution. He also expressed confidence that no action would be taken in a separate International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation into alleged abuses by British soldiers.

In 2014 Fatou Bensouda, the chief prosecutor at the ICC in the Hague, reopened a preliminary examination of cases involving alleged British abuses in Iraq.

Mr Cayley said: “My sense is these matters are coming to a conclusion; [Ms Bensouda] will close the preliminary examination this year in respect of Iraq and the United Kingdom.”

Johnny Mercer, the defence minister, said that legislation aimed to prevent future “lawfare” scandals. The Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill contains a “triple lock” of measures to curb vexatious claims. These include a statutory presumption against criminal prosecution once five years have elapsed after an alleged crime on overseas operations.

The legislation has proven controversial. Dominic Grieve, QC, the former attorney-general and MP, has argued that trying to impose a time limit will damage Britain’s international reputation for upholding the Geneva Convention.

 

Edited by kj35
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In a remarkable first, researchers have successfully transferred the natural camouflage ability often displayed by some species of squid and cuttlefish into human cells, allowing them to bend light.

Certain species of octopus, squid and other sea creatures have specialized tissues in their bodies which allow them to manipulate light and seamlessly blend in with their surroundings to confuse predators, or surprise prey. 

via GIPHY

Now researchers at the University of California have engineered human cells to have similar camouflage capabilities to those seen in cephalopod skin. While it sounds like the plot of a comic book or a science fiction film, the UCI researchers assure people that this is, in fact, hard science.

"Our project – which is decidedly in the realm of science – centers on designing and engineering cellular systems and tissues with controllable properties for transmitting, reflecting and absorbing light," says lead author Atrouli Chatterjee, a UCI doctoral student in chemical and biomolecular engineering.

ALSO ON RT.COMScientists unlock secrets of 3D ‘invisibility cloak’ using… cuttlefish? (VIDEO)

Chatterjee works in the laboratory of Alon Gorodetsky, an associate professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering, whose teams have previously made breakthroughs in infrared camouflage and other high tech materials.

Chatterjee drew inspiration from the female Doryteuthis opalescens squid, which can switch the stripe on its mantle from almost transparent to opaque white as a defence mechanism, using certain kinds of proteins called reflectins. 

The team took some of the protein-based particles behind this “biological cloaking technique” to recreate the amazing ability in human cells. 

"We were amazed to find that the cells not only expressed reflectin but also packaged the protein in spheroidal nanostructures and distributed them throughout the cells' bodies," said Gorodetsky, who co-authored of the study, adding that the cells behaved almost exactly as they do in squids. 

ALSO ON RT.COMMonstrous giant squid discovered on New Zealand beach (PHOTOS)

The team also tested whether they could turn the ability on or off using external stimuli by placing the cells between two plates of glass coated with different concentrations of salt. 

The “cloaking cells” exposed to more sodium chloride scattered more light and stood out more from their surroundings. 

For now, however, the breakthrough is restricted to medical and biological microscopy applications, so we likely won’t be chasing invisible men down any street soon 

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...