Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘World Health Organization’

Moderna and the COVID vaccine: what kind of lunacy? « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on May 23, 2020

TWO: If Fauci can ram through his partner Moderna’s vaccine, get it approved and released, his heroic status among the dumbed-down public would skyrocket even higher. He could write his own ticket. Head of the giant National Institutes of Health. Director General of the World Health Organization.

by Jon Rappoport

“It’s completely correct to say that NIAID will reap a profit on the Moderna/NIAID vaccine. There are 6 NIAID scientists who work for Dr. Fauci, each of whom would get $150,000/year indefinitely as their reward. So that’s $900,000 to his subordinates every year in perpetuity.” Mary Holland, General Counsel, Children’s Health Defense

Would you buy a used car from the company called Moderna?

The US government has shelled out $500 million to this Massachusetts-based biotech firm for a COVID vaccine.

Based on what?

Forbes, May 8: “It’s a big bet for the ten-year-old company, which currently has 24 products in its pipeline—but nothing yet on the market. The biotech sports a huge market cap of $17.5 billion, but it posted a net loss of $514 million on revenues of just $60 million last year. And most of that incoming cash came from government grants and research collaborations with big pharmaceutical companies.”

Moderna has never put a single product into the marketplace.

Last year, it lost $514 million.

It took in $60 million.

But it’s somehow worth billions.

The COVID vaccine it’s working on utilizes brand new RNA technology.

No RNA drug or vaccine product has ever been certified for public use.

Other companies have tried and failed, mainly because safety was a serious problem.

Moderna is partnering with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the federal agency headed up by Tony Fauci.

How many red flags do you need?

What’s going on?

ONE: Fauci, Gates, and others are itching to get an RNA product approved for public use. In the area of vaccines, the manufacturing process is far quicker and easier than the traditional approach. Thus, they can flood the world with all sorts of new vaccines at the drop of a hat. That’s what they want: a massively vaccinated planet under the gun.

TWO: If Fauci can ram through his partner Moderna’s vaccine, get it approved and released, his heroic status among the dumbed-down public would skyrocket even higher. He could write his own ticket. Head of the giant National Institutes of Health. Director General of the World Health Organization.

THREE: Does Fauci stand to gain a personal fortune from his connection with Moderna, if the COVID RNA vaccine is approved? I don’t know, but of course, a quiet back-door $$$ deal involving Fauci would be a simple proposition.

As easy as billionaire Bill Gates’ Howdy Doody smile.

If Fauci weren’t 80 years old, he’d be an ideal running mate for Joe Biden. And if wobbly Joe won, and didn’t last out his term, Fauci would become the president of the United States. After all, he’s been serving as the interim president for months, dictating lockdown policy and the massive destruction of the economy.

Maybe Tony could tease out a few hundred million more for Moderna, so they could whip up a super-special anti-aging cream for him. Rub on, wait five minutes, and you look thirty. Voila.

It’s time for a medical doctor to win the presidency. It’s a natural. Testing for everyone, wall-to-wall contact tracing, social credit score, mandatory vaccination, immunity certificates, cancellation of the Constitution, laws against freedom, destruction of human life as we know it, daily bullshit medical updates from the Oval Office…

“…Today, the president took out his prescription pad and wrote his latest orders to the nation: ‘If after receiving your RNA Cybervaxx shot, you fall down in the street foaming at the mouth, be aware that you’re experiencing an adverse event. It’s called an auto-immune response. Basically, your body is attacking itself. Hopefully, you’re carrying your cell phone with you. Step one—remove your mask to avoid drowning in your own fluids. Step two—try to bring your tremors and flopping motions under control. Step three—take out your cell and press 9^83*2A-7bX6. This code is case sensitive. Step four—shelter in place, help is on the way. In some areas, especially large cities, there will be delays, owing to technical system overload. Roaming mobs of liberals are rioting. They expected a smooth miracle with Cybervaxx. But rollouts of new technology always involve problems and adjustments. This is how science works. And now a word from the Secretary of the Treasury on the new currency. Bill, take it away’…”

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Messianic World Reformer Behind WHO’s Agenda. (It Isn’t Bill Gates.)

Posted by M. C. on April 25, 2020

The responsibility of charting the necessary changes in human behavior rests clearly on the sciences working in that field. Psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, economists, and politicians must face this responsibility. It cannot be avoided

He treated his office as a pulpit from which to preach Freudian-inspired ideas about proper parenting and the perversions of religion and popular morality. Much of what he had to say concerned what he saw to be the root causes of war. War, he argued, was a manifestation of collective neurosis: the consequence of poor parenting and social institutions that delivered humanity into a state of perpetual immaturity. He condemned the central institutions of society — family, school, and church — for propagating the dogmas that lay at the base of this collective neurosis.

There are no anti-vaccine organizations with any influence. Anti-vaccination organizations are tiny, underfunded, fringe organizations that have no influence.

Officially, it was part of UNESCO, which at the time was run by the scientific world’s most famous defender of eugenics, Sir Julian Huxley.

In contrast, the pro-vaccination movement is universally dominant. This is where all of the government money goes, not just in the United States but everywhere. This is the message articulated by all of the proponents of world health movements. In short, this is the Establishment. In the United States, it is represented at the top by Fauci.

The CDC, NIH WHO, NHS…all have been caught flat-footed, totally unprepared.

What do we pay these people for?

Their solution is to lock down the world and pray…oops they don’t do that…hope someone comes up with a secular miracle.

Gary North

I have a Ph.D. in history. I am a revisionist (“conspiracy”) historian. I have been ever since 1958.

I have written fat books on historical events and historical causation. I have even written a book on the conspiracy view of history. You can download it here.

As a revisionist historian, I am on the fringe of the fringe of a fringe. In 1958, I became a revisionist historian because of the assistance of a lady who was part of a network of mostly female anti-Communist researchers in southern California. She had a lot of files and conservative books. She introduced me to The Freeman. She also introduced me to the revisionist literature of the Pearl Harbor attack. I learned how to connect the dots at age 16.

I have continued to connect the dots in ways not considered historiographically acceptable.

What I am about to tell you is “the story behind the story,” as Marvin “Robbie the Robot” Miller used to tell us on his daily radio shows in the early 1950’s.

The secret is knowing which questions to ask, and then using the Web to connect the major dots. That will get you started.

Most people ask no questions. They don’t care. Most of the others ask the wrong questions. Then they are lured down rabbit trails by their questions.


The historical questions are these, and in this sequence: what, where, when, who, why, and how? Each successive question is more difficult to answer.

What? The World Health Organization is part of the United Nations.

Where? Its headquarters are in Geneva, Switzerland. But geography is irrelevant. It is an international organization. It is under the jurisdiction of UNESCO: the United Nations Educational and Social Organization. That is located in the United Nations Building in New York City. Why New York City? Because John D. Rockefeller, Jr. donated the land. It cost him $8.5 million for 18 acres. The city spent another $5 million. The Rockefellers owned the apartment complex across the street. The value of that property soared.

When? It has been around a long time. The Wikipedia entry explains just how long it has been around.

The International Sanitary Conferences, originally held on 23 June 1851, were the first predecessors of the WHO. A series of 14 conferences that lasted from 1851 to 1938, the International Sanitary Conferences worked to combat many diseases, chief among them cholera, yellow fever, and the bubonic plague. The conferences were largely ineffective until the seventh, in 1892; when an International Sanitary Convention that dealt with cholera was passed.Five years later, a convention for the plague was signed. In part as a result of the successes of the Conferences, the Pan-American Sanitary Bureau (1902), and the Office International d’Hygiène Publique (1907) were soon founded. When the League of Nations was formed in 1920, they established the Health Organization of the League of Nations. After World War II, the United Nations absorbed all the other health organizations, to form the WHO.

We also read this in the entry’s introduction:

The WHO was established in 7 April 1948, which is commemorated as World Health Day. The first meeting of the World Health Assembly (WHA), the agency’s governing body, took place on 24 July 1948. The WHO incorporated the assets, personnel, and duties of the League of Nations’ Health Organisation and the Office International d’Hygiène Publique, including the International Classification of Diseases. Its work began in earnest in 1951 following a significant infusion of financial and technical resources.

From the beginning, the organization was committed to the eradication of disease by means of vaccines.

1947: The WHO established an epidemiological information service via telex, and by 1950 a mass tuberculosis inoculation drive using the BCG vaccine was under way.

Who? This is where it gets interesting. We read in the section on “Establishment“:

The first meeting of the World Health Assembly finished on 24 July 1948, having secured a budget of US$5 million (then GB£1,250,000) for the 1949 year. Andrija Stampar was the Assembly’s first president, and G. Brock Chisholm was appointed Director-General of WHO, having served as Executive Secretary during the planning stages.

G. Brock Chisolm was a high-level administrator in the post-World War II New World Order. He was a Canadian. I first wrote about him in 1959 in a high school term paper. He was one of the big promoters of the mental health movement. In 1957, he became the president of the World Federation for Mental Health. This was why I knew who he was when I wrote my term paper. Wikipedia summarizes:

The World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH) is an international, multi-professional non-governmental organization (NGO), including citizen volunteers and former patients. It was founded in 1948 in the same era as the United Nations (UN) and the World Health Organization (WHO). . . .The WFMH founding document, “Mental Health and World Citizenship”, understood “world citizenship” in terms of a “common humanity” respecting individual and cultural differences, and declared that “the ultimate goal of mental health is to help [people] live with their fellows in one world.Members include mental health service providers and service users. In 2009, the World Fellowship for Schizophrenia and Allied Disorders, an international network of families of people with serious mental illness, merged with the World Federation. The World Federation has close ties with the World Health Organization. For many years after its founding, the WFMH was the only NGO of its kind with a close working relationship with UN agencies, particularly the WHO.

In my 1959 paper (which I saved), I quoted Dr. Chisholm. He wrote “The Psychiatry of an Enduring Peace” in Psychiatry (Feb. 1946).

The responsibility of charting the necessary changes in human behavior rests clearly on the sciences working in that field. Psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, economists, and politicians must face this responsibility. It cannot be avoided (p. 5).We have been very slow to rediscover this truth and to recognize the unnecessary and artificially imposed inferiority, guilt, and fear, commonly known as sin, under which we have almost all labor and which produces so much of the social maladjustment and unhappiness in the world (p. 7).

There is something to be said for taking charge of our own destiny, for gently putting aside the mistaken old ways of our elders if that is possible. If it cannot be done quietly, it may have to be done roughly or even violently — that has happened before (p. 18)

Five months after the article was published, he was appointed as the head of the predecessor of the WHO, the WHO Interim Commission. Officially, it was part of UNESCO, which at the time was run by the scientific world’s most famous defender of eugenics, Sir Julian Huxley.

The Canadian Encyclopedia offers this insight:

In the negotiations leading up to the WHO’s formation, Chisholm stressed that the organization must be truly global in its scope. He insisted that it serve the “world citizen” and see past divisions imposed by national borders and histories.

In 2009, the University of British Columbia Press published a book on Chisholm: Brock Chisholm, the World Health Organization, and the Cold War. In a review of this book published on the website of the academic Humanities and Social Science Online, we read this:

As deputy minister [of Canada’s newly created Department of Public Health and Welfare], Chisholm was not a retiring bureaucrat; rather, he repeatedly drew unwanted attention to his department for ill-considered and sometimes outrageous public comments. He treated his office as a pulpit from which to preach Freudian-inspired ideas about proper parenting and the perversions of religion and popular morality. Much of what he had to say concerned what he saw to be the root causes of war. War, he argued, was a manifestation of collective neurosis: the consequence of poor parenting and social institutions that delivered humanity into a state of perpetual immaturity. He condemned the central institutions of society — family, school, and church — for propagating the dogmas that lay at the base of this collective neurosis. Perhaps most famously, Chisholm lashed out against Santa Claus. In an address to an Ottawa audience, he declared that parents crippled their children by consistently lying to them: “Any man who tells his son that the sun goes to bed at night is contributing directly to the next war…. Any child who believes in Santa Claus has had his ability to think permanently destroyed” (p. 43).

The WHO has a page reviewing the book. We read this:

A postscript could perhaps have mentioned that those early visionary ideas have turned out to be not that illusory after all. Chisholm’s hope of universal health services now guides WHO’s Global Strategy for Health for All; his advocacy of a peacekeeping force is now reality, albeit weak, through the UN Blue Berets; his ideas on world federalism are partly translated in the European Union; his anti-nuclear stand has seen the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs receive the Nobel Peace Prize; and his poverty–disease link is key to UN Millennium Development Goals.

It is a highly laudatory review, as we would expect.

In 1959, he was named the man of the year by the American Humanist Association.

What is also significant is the fact that he had no background in epidemiology. He was a psychiatrist. He had been a political appointment in Canada, and he was a political appointment with the WHO. He was the director-general of the WHO in 1946, before it was established as a separate organization. The WHO website says this:

The Canadian Government created the position of Deputy Minister of Health in 1944, and Chisholm was first the person to occupy the post until being elected as Executive Secretary of the WHO Interim Commission in July 1946.Succeeding the League of Nations’ Health Organization, the World Health Organization was established in April of 1948, with Chisholm as its Director-General.

It was Chisholm who proposed the name “World Health Organization”, with the intent of emphasizing that the Organization would be truly global, serving all nations. Chisholm’s vision of WHO was a determining factor in the election for the post of Director-General. Parts of WHO’s constitution, including the definition of health as “…a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”, were first heard in Chisholm’s speech to the final meeting of WHO’s technical planning committee.

The WHO constitution also declares health to be a fundamental right of every human being, and recognizes that “the heath of all peoples is fundamental to the attainment of peace and security.” Chisholm believed that the well-being of humanity is dependent on the world’s emotional health.

The significant question is this: how did he get the two appointments? That is the question that revisionist historians ask whenever government economic intervention is involved. It is the question that Murray Rothbard asked again and again in his histories of American intervention. It is the question that is almost never raised by conventional historians.

Why? The WHO has been at the forefront of vaccination from its beginning. This has been at the top of its agenda. This historical account appears on the website of the WHO. You can read it here. It was published in 2014.

The immunization programme that saved millions of livesWhat started as an ambitious effort to tackle six vaccine-preventable diseases has become one of the world’s most successful public health programmes. This month the Expanded Programme on Immunization marks its 40 years. Michael Reid and Fiona Fleck report.

Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2014;92:314-315. doi:

In the 1960s, smallpox was still circulating in Africa and Asia. Within a decade of the launch of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Intensified Smallpox Eradication Programme in 1967, the disease had been wiped out globally.

Long before the last case of smallpox was reported in 1977, the idea that a similar approach could be taken with other vaccine-preventable diseases was gaining support.

Dr Donald A Henderson, who joined WHO in 1967 to head the Intensified Smallpox Eradication Programme, was struck by how much could be achieved with modest means. “We found very quickly that in Africa the average vaccinator could reach 500 African children a day,” he says. “We wondered ‘why aren’t we doing this with more vaccines?’”

The article offers historical details of the WHO’s program of vaccination.

While other donors joined them, it was the core EPI team at WHO that established the foundation of this global initiative with its cold-chain unit, led by John Lloyd and James Cheyne, “catalyzing a revolution in improved cold-chain equipment and logistics,” Rafe Henderson says.Few countries had immunization programmes and most were just responding to outbreaks, according to Dr Ciro de Quadros, who became head of EPI in the WHO Region of the Americas in 1976, His first step was to get countries to appoint a national immunization manager.

“We brought together the country managers and everyone else from the governments working in epidemiology, primary health care, and so on, and listed the problems – how to improve coverage, do surveillance and organize the cold chain – and analysed them. Then we worked on each problem and solution in each country,” de Quadros says.

In the 1970s countries the world over were keen to launch their own EPI but lacked important elements, including sustainable funding, heat-stable vaccines (in tropical countries), suitable transportation and a system to guarantee vaccine quality.

Of all of the agencies under the auspices of the United Nations, the WHO has been most successful in pursuing its agenda.

For Dr Thomas Cherian, who coordinated WHO’s EPI from 2006 to 2012, the programme’s achievements far exceed the expectations raised by the 1974 resolution. “Virtually all countries have immunization programmes and most of them have dedicated budgets and effective surveillance systems, which are vital for detecting new cases and monitoring the extent to which a population is protected,” he says.Since the 1980s, the quality of vaccines has been assured, through the prequalification system managed by WHO, so that these vaccines can be recommended for bulk purchase by UNICEF, the GAVI Alliance (formerly known as the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization) and other funding agencies. Thanks to prequalification and other regulatory systems, more than 90% of vaccines used in national immunization programmes are of an assured quality.

Immunization in countries is no longer limited to the six classic vaccines for children: diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, poliomyelitis and tuberculosis.

Infants are vaccinated routinely against rubella, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b (a leading cause of bacterial meningitis and pneumonia), rotavirus (a major cause of diarrhoea) and Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria (a major cause of pneumonia). In some countries human papillomavirus vaccine is included for girls between nine and 12 years of age and routine immunization against regionally important diseases such as epidemic meningococcal meningitis, yellow fever and dengue is also offered.

How? This pro-vaccine agenda took money to implement. Its agenda is based on a theory of epidemiology that is almost universally accepted by both the scientific and medical communities. This theory offered a solution to pandemics: a program of universal vaccination. This could only be implemented by government funding and compulsion. This is why the WHO’s agenda takes political connections at the highest level. It takes tax money and political power to implement the agenda.

Because the WHO is international, it has always relied on a program calling for cooperation among national governments. This internationalist vision has always been at the forefront of the creation of the New World Order. That was the personal goal of Brock Chisholm from the very beginning. He articulated this vision. The WHO has never deviated from this vision.

Of all the United Nations agencies, none has been as successful as the WHO in promoting international government cooperation. The public has never called this into question.


Bill Gates was born in 1955. He co-founded Microsoft in 1975. He resigned as the CEO of Microsoft in January 2000. In that year, he and his wife created the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

In 2015, he gave a TED talk on the next pandemic.

Earlier this year, Netflix posted a three-part documentary: Inside Bill’s Brain. It was produced in 2019. The interviewer asked Gates whether any government agency paid any attention to his speech. He said that only one small agency did. In short, his speech was ignored.

This is also worth noting, which the Daily Mail reported:

In the episode titled The Next Pandemic the documentary producers go to a wet market in Lianghua, China, where animals are killed and the resulting meat sold in the same place.This, the documentary explained, makes the wet markets a ‘disease X factory’ as the different animal corpses are stacked on top of each other, blood and meat mixing, before being passed from human to human.

The United States government paid no attention to any of this until it was too late.

What we see from this should be obvious to anybody who is aware of the historical background: Bill Gates until a month ago had no influence at all with respect to the pandemic.

WHO’s budget is about $4.2 billion a year. This has been true since 2008. In terms of purchasing power, the budget is 22% less today than it was in 2008.

Of this, the United States government provides about 20%, according to a recent Fox News report. The Gates Foundation is second. It is expected to pay $531 million in voluntary donations this year. That is 13% of the budget.

There is no doubt that the Gates Foundation is an important contributor to this program. But the idea that the Gates Foundation is somehow the tail that wags the dog is ludicrous. The WHO has been the primary agency of universal vaccines ever since its creation in 1948.

In 1999, the Gates Foundation donated $750 million to set up GAVI. GAVI is today called Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. Previously, it was the GAVI Alliance, and before that the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization. In 2015, Gates did an interview for GAVI. He said he regarded this as the most important money that his foundation has contributed to.

There is no question that Bill and Melinda Gates are both big proponents of universal vaccination in countries that are facing major diseases. But this is standard operating procedure today. This is what the United States government has been funding since 1948. This is the official party line of the United States government and WHO. In the private sector, Gates is no doubt today the most famous proponent of this worldview. But he has no power. The man who has power is Dr. Anthony Fauci.


There are basic things that a conspiracy theorist or revisionist must do. There are things he must follow. Here are the big ones:

Follow the money.
Follow the confession/ideology.
Follow the organizations.
Follow the media.
Follow the government appointments.

There are no anti-vaccine organizations with any influence. Anti-vaccination organizations are tiny, underfunded, fringe organizations that have no influence.

In contrast, the pro-vaccination movement is universally dominant. This is where all of the government money goes, not just in the United States but everywhere. This is the message articulated by all of the proponents of world health movements. In short, this is the Establishment. In the United States, it is represented at the top by Fauci.

Fauci is the second longest-serving bureaucrat to head a government agency since J. Edgar Hoover. Ronald Reagan appointed him the head of the little-known agency, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Until late February, almost nobody had ever heard of the organization. Fauci is 79 years old. He has run the agency for 36 years. He could’ve retired. He could’ve retired to become a highly paid lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry. But he didn’t. He is a true believer. He is a true believer in universal vaccination. He has made this clear over the past six weeks. He has so much power and influence with the public that Donald Trump is afraid to fire him. He has been Trump’s front man in all of this.

To imagine that Bill Gates is anything more than a very rich advocate of “me, too” public health policies on the vaccination issue is to fail to understand the basics of historical research.

And so, I offer you this piece of advice. Anyone who tells you that Bill Gates is the power behind the throne of the WHO is not a serious historian. He does not know the basics of historical research. He has not followed the money, the confession, the organizations, the media, and the government appointments with respect to vaccination as the only acceptable solution to widespread diseases, including pandemics. He has also not asked the six questions: “what, where, when, who, why, and how?”

I am a great believer in revisionist history. Here is my other advice. If you want to do a revisionist history of the WHO, ignore Bill Gates. Pay attention to G. Brock Chisholm. How did he get the position as the first head of the WHO? Who was behind him? He was a psychiatrist, not an epidemiologist.

The trouble is, newcomers to conspiracy theories are not interested in doing serious revisionist research. They really don’t want to know the background of the WHO. They don’t want to do the painstaking research necessary to trace this background. They want to post a sensational article on Facebook. The problem is, the sensational article was written by somebody who doesn’t know what is going on, and more importantly, what has been going on since 1946.

I figured out who Brock Chisholm was and what he was doing in 1959 when I was 17 years old. Is it too much to expect conspiracy theorists of the WHO to pursue this line of investigation? Yes, I suppose it is.


Today, the WHO is a bureaucracy with a minimal budget, half of it raised by voluntary donations. There is no trace of its old humanist, world-transforming vision of world reconstruction through systematically applied coercion by the United Nations. That was Chisolm’s vision. Today, the UN is toothless. UNESCO is impotent.

WHO’s employees are narrowly focused medical technicians who must content themselves with trying to stop diseases that threaten to become pandemics. Their solution is always the same: a vaccine. But there is no vaccine for COVID-19. So, all that the WHO can do is recommend that national governments put the world’s population under house arrest until someone, somewhere comes up with a vaccine. They are narrowly focused specialists with a hammer — a promised vaccine — who see mankind’s liberty as a nail.

Its policy recommendation has been adopted. Politicians have unilaterally shut down the world’s economy. Bailing out the economy through massive government deficits and counterfeit central bank money is destroying the few remaining traces of fiscal restraint in the West.

This is the bankrupt legacy of Chisholm, Huxley, and the messianic New World Order of the immediate post-war era. They proclaimed a new humanity through scientific central planning by the United Nations. Their heirs are a cadre of specialized technicians with no political power. They have no solution to COVID-19 except to ask politicians to put the world under house arrest until some pharmaceutical firm comes up with a cure for an epidemic that may well have receded before the magic bullet arrives . . . if it ever arrives.

Don’t worry about Bill Gates. He has no power. Worry about your governor, who has enormous power, and who has used it without a vote from the legislature to shut down business all over your state. When is he going to stop paying attention to Fauci? When is he going to cancel your state’s system of house arrest, which he unilaterally imposed on his own authority?


This is a publicly posted article. I would appreciate it if you would post a link to it if you read some Facebook diatribe against Bill Gates and his supposed control of the WHO. Maybe there is some dedicated person out there who will be willing to do the hard work of finding out the people who have been behind the power of the WHO since its inception in 1948. That would be worth investigating. Connecting the dots back to Bill Gates is a rabbit trail. It deflects people from finding out who really have been the powers behind the throne, and what their agendas have been.

Be seeing you

Printer-Friendly Format



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Vimeo Bans Documentary Exposing “Big Pharma’s” Influence Within The World Health Organization – Collective Evolution

Posted by M. C. on April 23, 2020

In Brief

  • The Facts:A documentary called “trustWHO” explores the influence that the pharmaceutical industry, among others, has on the World Health Organization. It was recently banned by Vimeo.
  • Reflect On:Why is sound and solid research presenting credible information being banned and censored on multiple platforms across the internet?

Special note to readers: This is the most comprehensive investigation into both sides of the vaccine debate. Researchers, medical professionals and scientists, come together to bring you the information you need to know in order to make educated decisions about vaccines. The global viewing event for The Truth About Vaccines begins April 22.

I recently published a piece about Wikileaks regarding recent posts they made pertaining to documents they released nearly a decade ago . The documents highlight the influence that pharmaceutical companies have on health policy set by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Towards the end of that article, I wrote about a documentary that’s recently been removed by Vimeo, and I wanted to publish another article that specifically shines light on this matter.

Vimeo deleted “trustWHO”, a film directed by Lilian Franck. Vimeo stated that they do not support “Videos that depict or encourage self-harm, falsely claim that mass tragedies are hoaxes, or perpetuate false or misleading claims about vaccine safety.”

According to the filmmakers, the claim from Vimeo is “Both misleading and false. “trustWHO” has been thoroughly researched for 7 years; it has been fact-checked and approved by lawyers, experts in the medical field and even by key executives of the WHO itself. The documentary simply investigated how efficiency and transparency of the WHO are undermined by both corporate influences and a lack of public funding. It is a journalistic investigation based on facts and far from what Vimeo makes it out to be. This is our full statement on the matter, presented by Robert Cibis (Filmmaker, Co-author and producer of “trust WHO”).


In our world today, there is the powerful presence of a digital Orwellian “fact checker” that’s going around the internet and social media deleting any evidence that threatens corporate, political, financial or elitist interests, or information that simply highlights the corruption within agencies that have been tasked to safeguard us. The elimination of content from various platforms, like Vimeo, Youtube, Facebook and more is being done so in an immoral and unethical manner.

This is why we here at Collective Evolution are concerned that our Facebook Page will be deleted, so we are encouraging all those who want to continue to receive and be able to find our content to sign up for our email list.

The more that sound information is censored, the more it’s simply going to contribute to the awakening of more people, and more people are going to seek out that censored information and evaluate it for themselves.

Below is a message from  Oval Media, producers of Trust WHO. In the video you can see a snippet of the documentary. It features a number of scientists and doctors, and former officials from within the World Health Organization. If you’re interested in watching the full version, you can support them and do so here while it’s still up. They are also currently fundraising for a documentary they would like to produce on the current COVID-19 pandemic. You can contribute here and find out more about that if interested.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

They Are Rolling Out The Architecture Of Oppression Now Because They Fear The People – Caitlin Johnstone

Posted by M. C. on April 13, 2020

“World Health Organization executive director Dr. Michael Ryan said surveillance is part of what’s required for life to return to normal in a world without a vaccine. However, civil liberties experts warn that the public has little recourse to challenge these digital exercises of power once the immediate threat has passed,” reads a recent VentureBeat article titled “After coronavirus, AI could be central to our new normal“.

“As authoritarianism spreads, as emergency laws proliferate, as we sacrifice our rights, we also sacrifice our capability to arrest the slide into a less liberal and less free world,” NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said in a recent interview. “Do you truly believe that when the first wave, this second wave, the 16th wave of the coronavirus is a long-forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept? That these datasets will not be kept? No matter how it is being used, what is being built is the architecture of oppression.”

“Apple Inc. and Google unveiled a rare partnership to add technology to their smartphone platforms that will alert users if they have come into contact with a person with Covid-19,” reads a new report from Bloomberg. “People must opt in to the system, but it has the potential to monitor about a third of the world’s population.”

“World Health Organization executive director Dr. Michael Ryan said surveillance is part of what’s required for life to return to normal in a world without a vaccine. However, civil liberties experts warn that the public has little recourse to challenge these digital exercises of power once the immediate threat has passed,” reads a recent VentureBeat article titled “After coronavirus, AI could be central to our new normal“.

“White House senior adviser Jared Kushner’s task force has reached out to a range of health technology companies about creating a national coronavirus surveillance system to give the government a near real-time view of where patients are seeking treatment and for what, and whether hospitals can accommodate them, according to four people with knowledge of the discussions,” reads a recent article by Politico, adding, “But the prospect of compiling a national database of potentially sensitive health information has prompted concerns about its impact on civil liberties well after the coronavirus threat recedes, with some critics comparing it to the Patriot Act enacted after the 9/11 attacks.”

“Mass surveillance methods could save lives around the world, permitting authorities to track and curb the spread of the novel coronavirus with speed and accuracy not possible during prior pandemics,” The Intercept‘s Sam Biddle wrote last week, adding, “There’s a glaring problem: We’ve heard all this before. After the September 11 attacks, Americans were told that greater monitoring and data sharing would allow the state to stop terrorism before it started, leading Congress to grant unprecedented surveillance powers that often failed to preempt much of anything. The persistence and expansion of this spying in the nearly two decades since, and the abuses exposed by Snowden and others, remind us that emergency powers can outlive their emergencies.”

As we discussed recently, it’s an established fact that power structures will seize upon opportunities to roll out oppressive authoritarian agendas under the pretense of protecting ordinary people, when in reality they’d been working on advancing those agendas since long before the crisis being offered as the reason for them. It happened with 9/11, and we may be certain that it is happening now.

The reason for this is simple: the powerful are afraid of the public. They always have been. For as long as there has been government power, there has been the fear that the people will realize the power of their numbers and overthrow the government that is in power. And understandably so; it has happened many times throughout history.

This is more the case now than ever. The oppressive, exploitative nature of neoliberalism has created a dissatisfaction that’s converged with humanity’s historically unprecedented ability to network and share information, which has seen anti-government protests and movements arising all around the world. Despite the longstanding media blackout on the Yellow Vests protests in France, you may be absolutely certain that eyes widened and leaders snapped to attention all around the planet when the words “We’ve chopped off heads for less than this” were scrawled in graffiti on the Arc de Triomphe during the early days of the demonstrations.

Leaders are made vastly more fearful and skittish by the fact that this dissatisfaction with the current world order just happens to be occurring at a time when that world order is already at its most tenuous point in decades, with a surging China poised to surpass the US as a superpower on the world stage and collaborating with Russia and other unabsorbed nations to create a truly multipolar world. It becomes much more difficult to control dominant narratives in a way that can effectively manufacture consent for the aggression that will be necessary to freeze and reverse this shift away from unipolar domination when the denizens of that unipolar empire are out in the streets demanding its downfall.

And so of course internet censorship is being ramped up as well, with the mass media demanding that plutocrat-owned tech companies do more to combat coronavirus “disinformation” and these government-allied tech giants all too happy to oblige. In a recent escalation in this ongoing trend, Youtube changed its rules and began deleting videos accordingly after David Icke said there is a connection between coronavirus and 5G in a controversial video on that platform. Youtube is owned by Google, which has been a military-intelligence contractor with ties to the CIA and NSA since its very inception; you don’t have to like Icke or his views to be repulsed by the idea of this institution manipulating human communication with an increasingly iron fist.

The escalations in internet censorship and the escalations in surveillance are both directed at a last-ditch effort to control the masses before control is lost forever, and neither are intended to be rolled back when the threat of the virus is over. People are now off the streets, with their communications being restricted and the devices they carry in their pockets being monitored with more and more intrusiveness. There are of course some good faith actors who legitimately want to protect people from the virus, just as there were some good faith actors who wanted to protect people from terrorism after 9/11, but where there is power and fear of the public there will be an agenda to reel in the freedom of the masses.

Journalist Jonathan Cook said it best when he wrote, “Our leaders are terrified. Not of the virus – of us.”


Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics onTwitter, checking out my podcast on either YoutubesoundcloudApple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypalpurchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

A sneaky attempt to end encryption is worming its way through Congress – The Verge

Posted by M. C. on March 21, 2020

Maryland, Nebraska, and New York have all proposed taxes that would force tech companies to hand over a portion of the revenue generated from digital advertising.

For starters, it’s not clear that companies have to “earn” what are already protections provided under the First Amendment: to publish, and to allow their users to publish, with very few legal restrictions. But if the EARN IT Act were passed, tech companies could be held liable if their users posted illegal content.

“Illegal content” is what exactly? What the government and silicon vallet says it is.

Guilty until proven innocent.

The EARN IT Act could give law enforcement officials the backdoor they have long wanted — unless tech companies come together to stop it

A thing about writing a newsletter about technology and democracy during a global pandemic is that technology and democracy are no longer really at the forefront of everyone’s attention. The relationship between big platforms and the nations they operate in remains vitally important for all sorts of reasons, and I’ve argued that the platforms have been unusually proactive in their efforts to promote high-quality information sources. Still, these moves are a sideshow compared to the questions we’re all now asking. How many people will get COVID-19? How many people will die? Will our healthcare system be overwhelmed? How long will it take our economy to recover?

We won’t know the answers for weeks, but I’m starting to fear the worst. On Wednesday the World Health Organization declared that COVID-19 had officially become a pandemic. A former director for the Centers for Disease Control now says that in the worst case scenario, more than 1 million Americans could die.

This piece by Tomas Pueyo argues persuasively that the United States is currently seeing exponential growth in the number of people contracting the disease, and that hospitals are likely to be overwhelmed. Pueyo’s back ground is in growth marketing, not in epidemiology. But by now we have seen enough outbreaks in enough countries to have a rough idea of how the disease spreads, and to understand the value of “social distancing” — that is, staying behind closed doors. So I want to recommend that everyone here reads that piece, and consider modifying your behavior if you’re still planning events or spending a lot of time in public.

* * *

One risk of having the world pay attention to a single, all-consuming story is that less important but still urgent stories are missed along the way. One such unfolding story in our domain is the (deep breath) Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies (“EARN IT”) Act, which was the subject of a Senate hearing on Wednesday. Here’s Alfred Ng with an explainer in CNET:

The EARN IT Act was introduced by Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican of South Carolina) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Democrat of Connecticut), along with Sen. Josh Hawley (Republican of Missouri) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Democrat of California) on March 5.

The premise of the bill is that technology companies have to earn Section 230 protections rather than being granted immunity by default, as the Communications Decency Act has provided for over two decades.

For starters, it’s not clear that companies have to “earn” what are already protections provided under the First Amendment: to publish, and to allow their users to publish, with very few legal restrictions. But if the EARN IT Act were passed, tech companies could be held liable if their users posted illegal content. This would represent a significant and potentially devastating amendment to Section 230, a much-misunderstood law that many consider a pillar of the internet and the businesses that operate on top of it.

When internet companies become liable for what their users post, those companies aggressively moderate speech. This was the chief outcome of FOSTA-SESTA, the last bill Congress passed to amend Section 230. It was putatively written to eliminate sex trafficking, and was passed into law after Facebook endorsed it. I wrote about the aftermath in October:

[The law] threatens any website owner with up to 10 years in prison for hosting even one instance of prostitution-related content. As a result, sites like Craigslist removed their entire online personals sections. Sex workers who had previously been working as their own bosses were driven back onto the streets, often forced to work for pimps. Prostitution-related crime in San Francisco alone — including violence against workers — more than tripled.

Meanwhile, evidence that the law reduced sex trafficking is suspiciously hard to come by. And there is little reason to believe that the EARN IT Act will be a greater boon to public life.

Yet, for the reasons Issie Lapowsky lays out today in a good piece in Protocol, it may pass anyway. Once again Congress has lined up some sympathetic witnesses who paint a picture that, because of their misfortune, whole swathes of the internet should be eliminated. It would do that by setting up a byzantine checklist structure that would handcuff companies to a difficult-to-modify set of procedures. One item on that checklist could be eliminating end-to-end encryption in messaging apps, depriving the world of a secure communications tool at a time when authoritarian governments are surging around the world. Here’s Lapowsky:

The EARN IT Act would establish the National Commission on Online Child Sexual Exploitation Prevention, a 19-member commission, tasked with creating a set of best practices for online companies to abide by with regard to stopping child sexual abuse material. Those best practices would have to be approved by 14 members of the committee and submitted to the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security, and the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission for final approval. That list would then need to be enacted by Congress. Companies would have to certify that they’re following those best practices in order to retain their Section 230 immunity. Like FOSTA/SESTA before it, losing that immunity would be a significant blow to companies with millions, or billions, of users posting content every day.

The question now is whether the industry can convince lawmakers that the costs of the law outweigh the benefits. It’s a debate that will test what tech companies have learned from the FOSTA/SESTA battle — and how much clout they even have left on Capitol Hill.

The bill’s backers have not said definitively that they will demand a backdoor for law enforcement (and whoever else can find it) as part of the EARN IT Act. (In fact, Blumenthal denies it.) But nor have they written the bill to say they won’t. And Graham, one of the bill’s cosponsors, left little doubt on where he stands:

“Facebook is talking about end-to-end encryption which means they go blind,” Sen Graham said, later adding, “We’re not going to go blind and let this abuse go forward in the name of any other freedom.”

Notably, Match Group — the company behind Tinder, OKCupid, and many of the most popular dating apps in the United States — has come out in support of the bill. (That’s easy for Match: none of the apps it makes offer encrypted communications.) The platforms are starting to speak up against it, though — see this thread from WhatsApp chief Will Cathcart.

In the meantime, Graham raises the prospect that the federal government will get what it has long wanted — greatly expanded power to surveil our communications — by burying it in a complex piece of legislation that is nominally about reducing the spread of child abuse imagery. It’s a cynical move, and if the similar tactics employed in the FOSTA-SESTA debate were any indication, it might well be an effective one.

The Ratio

Trending up: Amazon and the Gates Foundation might team up to deliver coronavirus test kits to Seattle homes. The test kits include nose swabs that can be mailed to the University of Washington for analysis.

Trending up: Amazon will give all employees diagnosed with coronavirus or put into quarantine up to two weeks of paid sick leave. The policy includes part-time warehouse workers. COVID-19 has really been a watershed for tech giants treating their contract workers like the human beings they are.


Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Forgotten Epidemic: Cholera in Yemen – Original

Posted by M. C. on March 17, 2020

Five years ago, in March 2015, Saudi Arabia and its allies began bombing Yemen after the Houthis gained control of the capital Sanaa. At the same time, the Obama administration released a statement pledging military and logistical support to the coalition. Since the bombing campaign began, the US-Saudi coalition has targeted vital civilian infrastructure, including water infrastructure.

How the US government deals with disease in one of the poorest places on the planet.

Back at home it is martial law.

As Americans are gripped with fear over the coronavirus, the cholera epidemic quietly continues in Yemen. The disease spreading in Yemen is not some new untreatable virus, but a well-known illness that can be easily prevented with access to clean water, or with a cheap oral vaccine. The outbreak is a direct result of the barbaric US-Saudi siege on the country that started in 2015.

The cholera outbreak started in Yemen in October 2016. The outbreak exploded in 2017 when the country saw over one million cases, the worst cholera epidemic since records started in 1949. In 2019, Yemen experienced the second-worst year, with over 860,000 suspected cases. 2020 is on track to be another bad year, with over 56,000 new suspected cases recorded in the first seven weeks. As of March 8th 2020, the World Health Organization has recorded 2,263,304 cholera cases in Yemen and 3,767 deaths related to the illness since 2017.

The international humanitarian organization Oxfam has warned the rainy season in Yemen will cause a spike in cholera cases, as it has in previous years. The rainy season starts in mid-April and lasts until August.

Cholera is an infectious disease that causes severe diarrhea and vomiting, which can lead to dehydration and death if not treated properly. People catch cholera by drinking contaminated water or coming into contact with a person’s feces who has the disease. Treatment for cholera can be as simple as drinking water and taking antibiotics. Countries with compromised water and sewage infrastructure are susceptible to a cholera outbreak.

Five years ago, in March 2015, Saudi Arabia and its allies began bombing Yemen after the Houthis gained control of the capital Sanaa. At the same time, the Obama administration released a statement pledging military and logistical support to the coalition. Since the bombing campaign began, the US-Saudi coalition has targeted vital civilian infrastructure, including water infrastructure.

The Yemen Data Project has compiled all available data on coalition airstrikes on Yemen from March 2015 to January 2020. According to the data, 97 airstrikes directly hit water infrastructure, which includes water tanks, water trucks, wells, water and sewage plants, and water desalination plants. The worst year for hits on water infrastructure was the year the cholera outbreak started, 2016, when 30 bombs hit water targets.

Attacks on water infrastructure are just a small sample of the atrocities committed by the US-Saudi coalition. The coalition has also hit hospitals, schools, farms, fishing boats, houses, and market places. Direct targeting of civilian infrastructure, and the blockade on the country enforced by the US Navy, has created what the UN calls, the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. The latest report from UNICEF puts the number of Yemeni people in need of humanitarian assistance around 24 million, about 80 percent of the population.

It’s tough to know exactly how many people have died in Yemen since the war started. The Armed Conflict Location & Data Project (ACLED) announced in October 2019 that over 100,000 people had been killed in direct violence during the war, 12,000 of those deaths being civilians.

The UN released a report in April 2019 that said if the conflict ended that year, it would have accounted for 233,000 deaths. The UN breaks these numbers up into 102,000 combat deaths, which reflect the ACLED numbers, and 131,000 deaths due to lack of food, health services, and infrastructure. If the conflict continues through 2022, the UN predicts it will be responsible for 482,000 deaths. In the nightmare scenario that the war is not over until 2030, the UN predicts the war will kill 1.8 million people, the majority of those deaths being children under five.

There have been efforts in Congress to end US support for this genocidal war, but they have all been vetoed by President Trump. In April, Trump vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have ended US involvement in the war, and in June, he vetoed resolutions that would have blocked arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

The latest effort to end the war was an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would have terminated the flow of US logistics, intelligence, spare plane parts, and other forms of support to Saudi Arabia. In the end, this amendment was gutted from the NDAA, and US support for the war continues.

Most people arguing in favor of supporting the Saudi’s brutal campaign in Yemen cite the Iranian threat. In September 2019, an attack on Saudi oil infrastructure that severely damaged oil output was blamed on Iran, even though the Houthis immediately took credit for it.

Before the September attack, the Houthis had launched similar attacks inside Saudi Arabia, and Houthi drone technology was the subject of much reporting. But these facts were thrown down the memory hole as the hawks in Washington used the attack as justification to increase troop presence in the Middle East and continue support for the war on Yemen. In response, President Trump sent a few thousand troops to Saudi Arabia, showing the world that Saudi oil is far more valuable than Yemeni lives.

The cholera epidemic is just one example of the challenges Yemenis are facing every day. And the war in Yemen is just one example of the dire humanitarian crises created by US imperialism. In the midst of a global pandemic, Washington still maintains crippling sanctions on Iran and Venezuela. Iran has been hit particularly hard by coronavirus, and nobody should criticize the response of the Iranian government without recognizing the impact of US sanctions.

In the face of coronavirus, Americans are scared. Schools and businesses are shutting down across the country. People are rushing to the stores to stock up on toilet paper, food, and hand sanitizer. Now would be a good time to stop and think about the people of Yemen who have been dealing with an outbreak of a deadly disease for years. A man-made outbreak, not only exacerbated by but directly caused by US intervention.

Be seeing you

Yemen faces worst cholera outbreak in the world, health ...



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Does the Coronavirus Make the Case for World Government? | Mises Institute

Posted by M. C. on February 28, 2020

Third, we already have de facto supranational bodies such as World Health Organization tasked with preventing and lessening the spread of diseases like the coronavirus. The WHO has been around since 1948 and hasn’t prevented a host of modern epidemics like SARS and Zika; excatly what new international agency or organization will do better?

Jeff Deist

Sometimes terrible things happen without any human malfeasance, and the novel Wuhan coronavirus may in fact be one of those things. It is entirely plausible the virus emerged from “wet markets” in the Hubei Province of China rather than as a fumbled (or worse, intentionally released) bioweapon cooked up by the Xi Jinping government.

We may never know, of course. But easy or readily apparent answers to the question of how this could have been avoided should be viewed with the skepticism appropriate to any state propaganda. Crises of all kinds, whether economic, political, military, or health, send ideologues scrambling to explain how such events fit neatly into their worldview. In fact, political partisans often attempt to paint any crisis as having occurred in the first place precisely because their policies and preferences have not been adopted.

The Wuhan coronavirus seems tailor-made for this. Alarmists who argue for (i) much more robust and comprehensive “public health” measures by national governments and (ii) greater supranational coordination inevitably point to infectious diseases as justification for increased state power over personal medical decisions. Scary and fast-spreading viruses are perfect fodder for their busybody argument that people cannot simply be left to their own devices.

Cross-border outbreaks of illnesses are particularly well suited to the preexisting bureaucratic desire for power over populations: they make the public much more willing to accept forced quarantines and arrests for noncompliance; forced immunizations; involuntary commitments to state facilities; curfews; restrictions on business operations and travel; and import controls. They also allow public health officials to commandeer and manage efforts to find “the cure,” who then take credit when the virus eventually relents.

These are the sorts of things that authoritarian politicians want all the time. Crises simply provide an opportunity to ratchet up their power and also to accustom the public to being ordered around and taking cues from centralized government sources.

Antistate libertarians are not immune to this phenomenon of attempting to place square events into round holes. We tend to explain crises as the result of state (or central bank) interference, either created or made worse by the lack of market discipline, incentives, and property rights lacking due to state action or state regulation. Libertarians think the Food and Drug Administration, for example, kills more people than it saves by approving bad drugs and delaying regulatory approvals for promising treatments.

Moreover, an individualist libertarian perspective on bodily sovereignty poses an obvious challenge to public health. No individual should be forced to accept quarantine or immunization against his will, and in fact no individual should be forced to consider herd immunity or other collectivist notions when making medical decisions. Just as most libertarians don’t think Doritos and Mountain Dew should be banned because their consumption imposes “public” healthcare costs in a statist/fascist system of mandatory insurance and tax-funded Medicaid, most don’t think that individual health decisions should be overridden by politicians—even in an “emergency” outbreak situation.

So how do we reconcile public health with individual rights? Should the latter be sacrificed to protect the former?

Three observations present themselves.

First, even the highly authoritarian Chinese national state has been unable to contain the virus, though it can cordon off whole cities by dictatorial fiat and impose wholesale house arrest over cities in a manner unthinkable in Western countries. Chinese state police literally drag people suspected of carrying the virus out of their cars, forcibly put them handcuffed in hazmat vehicles, and haul them off to what amount to prison hospitals. Chinese citizens who speak out publicly against the Xi government’s handling of the crisis are arrested. So, if the Chinese government can’t contain it, even with martial law and control over media, how in the world do Western countries expect to do so? Imagine trying to quarantine, say, Dallas and Fort Worth!

Second, poor countries (and China is quite poor per capita compared to the West, ranking around sixty-fifth internationally) almost invariably suffer from worse public health conditions. Sanitation, nutrition, and access to drugs, facilities, and competent doctors matter a great deal when it comes to incubating infectious diseases. Richer countries are healthier countries, and the West benefits when conditions improve and modernize in the Third World.

Third, we already have de facto supranational bodies such as World Health Organization tasked with preventing and lessening the spread of diseases like the coronavirus. The WHO has been around since 1948 and hasn’t prevented a host of modern epidemics like SARS and Zika; excatly what new international agency or organization will do better?

If anything, pandemics call for decentralization of treatment. After all, the best approach is to isolate infected people rather than bringing them into large hospital populations in crowded city centers. What doctor or nurse wants to work in a hospital full of coronavirus cases?

We might wish for a utopian libertarian answer to public health crises like the coronovirus, along the lines of a Rothbardian externality argument for airborne pollution. But sometimes bad things simply happen. The best hope is market incentives, the rapid application of individual human ingenuity and self-interest to the situation. Liberty is better, not perfect. And governments, including the Chinese government, are clueless as always.

Be seeing you





Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

ClubOrlov: A Most Convenient Virus

Posted by M. C. on February 11, 2020

Given that this is the Pentagon, whose basic task involves killing people, not the World Health Organization, it seems likely that they also do something along the lines of developing effective biological weapons. A couple of years ago US operatives were caught collecting DNA samples from the Russian population and were promptly escorted out of the country.

It would be nice know things in relative terms.

Is this virus infecting/killing more people, invading more countries than any typical everyday virus?

I prefer to write on things I know about, but once in a while an opportunity presents itself for me to comment on some aspect of widespread mistrust and confusion while resting on a solid foundation of my professional curiosity. This is the case of the 2019-nCoV novel coronavirus. A lot of the elements of the coronavirus story just don’t add up, and that’s what I want to explore. At the outset, I want to make it clear that I am no expert on these matters. Is 2019-nCoV a genetically engineered biological weapon or is it a naturally evolved strain of a virus that is endemic in China’s bat population? This we don’t know, but it is interesting to look at the plausibility of each of these scenarios and also to consider whether what we are observing could be a combination of a little of each.

As a biological weapon of mass destruction, 2019-nCoV isn’t particularly good. On the plus side, it is highly contagious and can be spread by infected individuals who are not showing any of the symptoms, such as fever and shortness of breath. On the minus side, the mortality rate is a mere 2.1% and is likely to trend down because this rate does not account for a potentially huge number of young, healthy people who contracted the virus but never developed any symptoms, were never tested for it, and will never know that they had survived it. For a virus to be potent as a bioweapon, its kill ratio needs to be optimized for killing the largest possible number of its victims, but doing so slowly enough so that the victims don’t die before they have a chance to spread the infection.

Another minus: the average age of those who succumb to it is around 65, making it rather ineffective in impairing the productive capacities of a nation, be they industrial or military, since many of those who die are past their peak productive years or retired. In fact, taking a rather cynical view, this virus could be rather helpful in reducing the burden of economically unproductive sick an elderly people who, in an aging Chinese population, and given the respect Chinese society traditionally gives to its elders, consume a growing share of the country’s resources.

On the plus side, those who succumb to it are predominantly Chinese, male and elderly, and this may be taken as an indication of some very clever targeting. In fact, the selectivity of this virus may be indicative of an effort to selectively take out members of the Chinese Communist party, in order to destabilize China politically, to effect regime change there and to impose US-style Freedom&Democracy® upon the hapless Chinese population. Given that the US no longer has the military might to take on China (and can’t even respond to Iranian rocket attacks on its military bases), and given that the US has pretty much lost the trade war against China, a biological weapon may be the only arrow left in its quiver.

Let’s keep in mind that the Pentagon has built quite a number of facilities around the world that research various pathogens. Given that this is the Pentagon, whose basic task involves killing people, not the World Health Organization, it seems likely that they also do something along the lines of developing effective biological weapons. A couple of years ago US operatives were caught collecting DNA samples from the Russian population and were promptly escorted out of the country.

The obvious supposition is that these samples were to be used to develop biological weapons to specifically target the Russian population. I suspect that the specialists charged with this task were most disappointed to discover that the vast majority of the Russian population consists of just your regular white people, pretty much the same the world over, and to target them is to target themselves. But that is not the case with the Chinese, whose genetic makeup is more distinctive. This is all clearly inconclusive, and it may very well be the case that the Pentagon’s biological weapons program is just another part of its giant money-burning machine, or the case may be that it actually does produce a biological weapon now and again, and that 2019-nCoV is the meager result it has so far managed to produce.

But then again, the way the epidemic started is not what you’d expect if an artificial strain were released at some place and time. In that case, you’d expect an instantaneous spike in infections, with symptoms showing up in a tight cluster right at the end of the incubation period. But instead what we saw was sporadic incidents of infection connected with a certain fish market in Wuhan gradually giving rise to an epidemic. This suggests that the source of the virus is a natural one, such as the bats which were sold at this market. However, the Chinese have been eating bats for thousands of years (bat soup is a delicacy), so why would this virus only emerge now?

The reason for the timing may simply be increased contact. The virus emerged right around the Chinese new year. According to the Chinese calendar, this is the year of the rat, and while the Chinese also eat rats, bats are preferred. Also, around two-thirds of all the pigs in China have recently been lost to swine flu, driving up prices of pork and also, incidentally, forcing China to start importing pigs from the US, which were previously subject to an embargo. This made the naturally abundant bats an attractive alternative to other sources of animal protein. Equally serendipitously, China’s chicken population is now being ravaged by avian flu, and this, as you might expect, will force China to start importing chickens from the US as well.

Of course, this is all highly inconclusive, but a view may be taken that all is fair in love and war—and trade war with the US especially. But what has set off a few alarms in my head was the reaction to the coronavirus epidemic, both in China and in the West, the US especially.

First, the Chinese government has treated the epidemic as an act of war, deploying all the means at its disposal, including the military, in order to contain its spread, building several large new hospitals, putting entire huge cities under quarantine and extending the national holidays. The response as been far beyond what this virus seems to warrant, with its low mortality rate. Without saying so, the Chinese government has treated this epidemic as an act of biological warfare—perhaps as a dry run for a more lethal epidemic that may come in the future. At any rate, the Chinese government is seeing to it that nobody can blame it for not taking the problem sufficiently seriously, or not doing enough about it.

Second, the Western media response has been an exemplary effort to produce a panic and to smear China, making what is happening there into a horror story. Not only did the mass media outlets do their best to stoke mass hysteria about all things Chinese, but various bloggers and independent “experts” pitched in to produce a panic. There seems to have been a policy-driven reorientation from Russophibia (where it has been high time for the US to silently admit defeat and move on) to Sinophobia (where the US is yet to have its ass handed to it on a plate). Those notionally independent commentators who are exploiting this opportunity to attack China are acting as useful idiots in this centrally choreographed media campaign.

Third, the White House has recently requested that experts look into the possibility that 2019-nCoV has been genetically engineered. It is often the case that the person who shouts “Catch the thief!” the loudest happens to be the thief himself. I suspect that the next move will be to declare that this virus is indeed an engineered biological weapon developed by… why, Russia, of course, and Mr. Putin personally.

Taking all of this into account, the scenario that seems most plausible to me was that this virus was genetically engineered in one of the Pentagon’s biological weapons laboratories and introduced into China via infected wild bats, having picked the technology and manufacturing mecca of Wuhan as a target. The ultimate goal, one might surmise, is to induce US corporations to repatriate production to the US mainland in order to “make America great again.”

But my suspicion is that this isn’t going to work. The Chinese government will succeed in stopping the epidemic, in the process demonstrating that it cares about its people and is effective in protecting them. Already the infection rate, plotted on a log scale, is starting to slope down from a straight line, meaning that the epidemic is losing steam. And then, working alongside many other countries, China will move on with the main task of eradicating the other parasite—which is the United States, a country that get something for nothing simply by printing dollars.

To support this blog, and to join the discussion, please visit Patreon or SubscribeStar.

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The 2020 Coronavirus Scare: Better Than Any Horror Movie – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on February 1, 2020

If you are still concerned, the red wine molecule resveratrol, garlic, vitamin D, vitamin C, and supplemental zinc are safe, scientifically-backed remedies at hand.

Lyme disease, Ebola, Coronavirus. Isn’t it an odd coincidence that these outbreaks all happened near government run biological (warfare?) research labs?

Don’t worry. The government is here to help. Like all government instigated crisis, we will never know the truth.


The emails pour in………. in one way or another the emailers words ask: “are we all going to die of coronavirus infection?” “What do we do?” I can feel the panic and terror in the emails I am receiving.

This time, the viral epidemic is better than any horror movie. One wonders if there will be a hidden parasite in the upcoming coronavirus vaccine that penetrates the blood/brain barrier and zombifies humans – mind control via vaccination. This actually happens in nature among wasps, worms, dogs, and even humans (archived in Matt Simon’s book PLIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD). It’s a modern re-run of the “everybody had better drink their Kool-Aid” event that killed 900 members of a cult in Jonestown, Guyana in 1978, X a billion. I’d invest in the casket business now before others think about it. We’d all literally be dying for a cure.

Well, there is no vaccine, which is the real reason for this contrived pandemic, brought to you by the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control, and a committee that planned the whole event in order to gain public funding for a vaccine and to prime the global masses with fear for the first attempt of a worldwide vaccination campaign. Keep the multitudes on edge. Get them clamoring for a cure. Provoke panic. The World Bank is providing funds to financially weather this planned pandemic. A major airline has already cancelled flights to China for a month. Anticipate mandated vaccination in order to fly internationally once a vaccine is approved and available. Maybe vaccination records will become part of a passport.

The urgency: “….We now interrupt this broadcast for an announcement by the World Health Organization declaring this coronavirus outbreak a global health emergency.” Drug makers are said to be “racing against time” to introduce a vaccine.

On cue, the news media hypes a winter viral infection that is less lethal than the 2003-2004 SARS coronavirus outbreak that emerged from Guangdong province in November, 2002 that infected ~8000 and led to ~800 deaths in 29 countries.

China reports 9,692 cases and 213 deaths (2.2% death rate) associated with this virus as of Jan. 30. The SARS (severe acute respiratory distress syndrome) coronavirus epidemic of 2003-2004 was reported to have infected 8360 with 764 deaths (9.1% death rate). That is 4-times less risk for death, so what is all this panic about? The fearmongering is rampant. Public health officials say “better safe than sorry.”

A report in the Journal of the American Medical Association says a novel coronavirus was isolated on January 7, 2020 and states it has spread to numerous countries (but only via airline travel and not person-to-person (except for one lone case as of Jan. 30).

A published timeline shows the first case as reported on Dec. 31, with the epicenter confirmed in Wuhan, China, a day later (Jan. 1), but the World Health Organization had issued travel restrictions days before the mutated virus was isolated and confirmed.

The hasty travel warnings, quarantines, halting airline flights, faked photos of dead bodies lying on the streets of Wuhan, China; people falling over dead in the streets of China; temperature checks of airline travelers arriving from China; and censorship of proven home remedies on social media like oil of oregano and garlic (this health writer calls it the “let them die until we have a vaccine” syndrome.

Philanthropist and SuperVaxMan Bill Gates is reported to have predicted a corona-like outbreak in a 2019 Netflix documentary about the next pandemic, right down to where it would begin — a Chinese market. So, this epidemic is right on schedule by the global elites. I want to see Mr. Gates get all twelve vaccinations recommended for adults on TV all at one time. Remember, “You’re never too old to get vaccinated.”

As if by coincidence, on January 30 a major drugmaker announces it is introducing the first 2-hour commercial test for Wuhan coronavirus. The Bloomberg News announcement says the drug company’s “emergency response team of molecular diagnosticians sprang into action a few weeks ago when word of the Wuhan virus spread.” Anticipate emergency approval from the FDA for this test any day now.

One online ANON (anonymous) oracle condemns home remedies and urges humanity to obtain accurate information “for the sake of the world.”

A political website states: “Coronaviruses are very unstable, frequently mutate.” Yes, and that is why potentially mortal flu viruses and the coronavirus epidemics peter out fast, morphing into a less virulent strain mid-epidemic.

But in the back of the public’s mind is the question: “But what if?”

There won’t ever be enough vaccines. The masses would be forced to rely on home remedies.

If you are still concerned, the red wine molecule resveratrol, garlic, vitamin D, vitamin C, and supplemental zinc are safe, scientifically-backed remedies at hand.

Be seeing you

Ronald Reagan Archives - Common Sense Evaluation

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

VACCINE BOMBSHELL as U.N. health experts admit toxic vaccine ingredients are harming children worldwide – see video, transcript –

Posted by M. C. on January 15, 2020

Think about this the next time you are waiting for the doctor and reading the posting that describes the number and frequency of vaccines that are required by laws for babies.

This is from WHO doctors, the UN point people for “we to control you and force these vaccines upon you because we love you and if you don’t armed government workers will pay you a visit”.

If THEY think these vaccines are bad-that is saying something.

Did I mention control?

(Natural News) A Dec. 2, 2019 World Health Organization “Global Vaccine Safety Summit” video has been found and leaked to the world, revealing shocking admissions of the health hazards posed by vaccines and their toxic ingredients.

A first-wave compilation of some of the more damning quotes was created by Del Bigtree’s “Highwire” organization, which posted the video to YouTube. Knowing that video would quickly be banned, we posted it to, where “Highwire” is expected to launch a channel very soon.

You can watch the full video at this link on Brighteon. For a related article that covers this, see this link at

A full transcript of this video compilation is offered below. Watch the video here, via Brighteon:

Some of the highlights:

An admission that vaccine adjuvants increase cell death and damage to vaccine recipients. For this paragraph, the term “reactogenicity” means vaccine adverse reactions and side effects, including those that are known to be extremely harmful and cause long-term damage or even death:

Dr. Stephen Evans, Professor of PharmacoepidemiologyIt seems to me that adjuvants multiply the immunogenicity of the antigens that they are added to, and that is their intention.  It seems to me they multiply the reactogenicity in many instances, and therefore it seems to me that it is not unexpected if they multiply the incidence of adverse reactions that are associated with the antigen…

Warnings about long-term effects from vaccine adjuvants:

Dr. Martin Howell FriedeYou are correct. As we add adjuvants, especially some of the more recent adjuvants, such as the ASO1, saponin-derived adjuvants , we do see increased local reactogenicity… The major health concern which we are seeing are accusations of long term, long term effects.

An admission that the W.H.O. is panicking over the fact that many doctors and nurses are finally starting to question the safety and vaccines and are becoming aware of the coordinated cover-up of vaccine injuries:

Prof. Heidi Larson, PhD, Director of the Vaccine Confidence ProjectWe have a very wobbly health professional front line that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. When the front line professionals are starting to question or they don’t feel like they have enough confidence about the safety to stand up to it to the person asking them the questions.  I mean most medical school curriculums, even nursing curriculums, I mean in medical school you’re lucky if you have a half-day on vaccines. Never mind keeping up to date with all this.

Also from Prof. Heidi Larson, PhDYou can’t repurpose the same old science to make it sound better if you don’t have the science that’s relevant to the new problem. So we need much more investment in safety science.

An admission that vaccine clinical trials are insufficient and that vaccines are approved without adequate safety data. Also admits that vaccines damage children far more than they damage elderly adults:

Dr. Marion Gruber – Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. FDAAnd again as you mentioned pre-licensure clinical trials may not be powered enough. It’s also the subject population that you administer the adjuvant to because we’ve seen data presented to us where an adjuvant, a particular adjuvant added to a vaccine antigen did really nothing when administered to a certain population and usually the elderly, you know, compared to administering the same formulation to younger age strata.

A warning about the lack of vaccine safety monitoring systems around the world:

Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, M.D., Chief Scientist, W.H.O., PediatricianI think we cannot overemphasize the fact that we really don’t havevery good safety monitoring systems in many countries, and this adds to the miscommunication and the misapprehensions because we’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine…

Here’s an admission that viral fragments don’t work as promised by immunization theory and that it’s the adjuvants which are responsible for the inflammatory response to vaccines. In other words, vaccine science as described by the vaccine establishment, is quackery:

Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator, Initiative for Vaccine Research, W.H.O.Without adjuvants, we are not going to have the next generation of vaccines.  And many of the vaccines that we do have, ranging from tetanus through to HPV require adjuvants in order for them to work. We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so.

An admission that vaccine safety tracking systems don’t even exist and that efforts to build such systems are only just beginning:

Dr. Robert Chen, M.D. – Scientific Director, Brighton Collaboration[W]e’re really only in the beginning of the era of large data sets where hopefully you could start to kind of harmonize the databases for multiple studies. And there’s actually an initiative underway… Helen there may want to comment on it to try to get more national vaccine safety database linked together so we could start to answer these types of questions that you just raised.

Full transcript of what’s on this video – there’s a lot more yet to come…

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »