‘Freedom is Never Voluntarily Given’: Palestinian Boycott of Israel is Not Racist, It is Anti-Racist

By Ramzy Baroud

Comment: The anti-semitism card is frayed, torn and worn. So much so that those who throw it around flippantly are exposed by their own ignorance as opportunistic and power hungry. Pandering to the zionist lobbies will get them nothing but subservience. If this is what it means to be ‘brave’ and ‘free’, these two words have become Orwellian.

LONG LIVE PALESTINE

Claims made by Democratic New York City mayoral candidate, Andrew Yang, in a recent op-ed in the Jewish weekly, ‘The Forward’, point to the prevailing ignorance that continues to dominate the US discourse on Palestine and Israel.

Yang, a former Democratic Presidential candidate, is vying for the Jewish vote in New York City. According to the reductionist assumption that all Jews must naturally support Israel and Zionism, Yang constructed an argument that is entirely based on a tired and false mantra equating criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

Yang’s pro-Israel logic is not only unfounded, but confused as well. “A Yang administration will push back against the BDS movement which singles out Israel for unfair economic punishment,” he wrote, referring to the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

Yang compared the BDS movement to the “fascist boycotts of Jewish businesses”, most likely a reference to the infamous Nazi boycott of Jewish businesses in Germany, starting in April 1933.

Not only does Yang fail to construct his argument in any historically defensible fashion, he claims that BDS is “rooted in anti-Semitic thought and history.”

BDS is, in fact, rooted in history, not that of Nazi Germany, but of the Palestinian General Strike of 1936, when the Palestinian Arab population took collective action to hold colonial Britain accountable for its unfair and violent treatment of Palestinian Muslims and Christians. Instead of helping Palestine achieve full sovereignty, colonial Britain backed the political aspirations of White European Zionists who aimed to establish a ‘Jewish homeland’ in Palestine.

Sadly, the efforts of the Palestinian natives failed, and the new State of Israel became a reality in 1948, after nearly one million Palestinian refugees were uprooted and ethnically cleansed as a result of a decidedly violent campaign, the aftershocks of which continue to this day. Indeed, today’s ongoing military occupation and apartheid are all rooted in that tragic history.

This is the reality that the boycott movement is fighting to change. No anti-Semitic, Nazi – or, according to Yang’s ahistorical account, ‘fascist’ – love affair is at work here; just a beleaguered and oppressed nation fighting for its most basic human rights.

Yang’s ignorant and self-serving comments were duly answered most appropriately, including by many anti-Zionist Jewish intellectuals and activists throughout the US and the world. Alex Kane, a writer in ‘Jewish Currents’ tweeted that Yang made “a messed up, wrong comparison”, and that the politician “comes across as deeply ignorant about Palestine, Palestinians and BDS”. US Muslim Congresswoman, Ilhan Omar, and the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) added their voices to numerous others, all pointing to Yang’s opportunism, lack of understanding of history and distorted logic.

But this goes beyond Yang, as the debate over BDS in the US is almost entirely rooted in fallacious comparisons and ignorance of history.

Those who had hoped that the unceremonious end of the Donald Trump Administration would bring about a measure of justice for the Palestinian people will surely be disappointed, as the American discourse on Palestine and Israel rarely changes, regardless which President resides in the White House and what political party dominates the Congress.

So, reducing the boycott debate to Yang’s confused account of history and reality is, itself, a reductionist understanding of US politics. Indeed, similar language is regularly infused, like that used by President Joe Biden’s nominee for United Nations envoy, Linda Thomas-Greenfield while addressing her confirmation hearing at the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee on January 27. Like Yang, Thomas-Greenfield also found boycotting Israel an “unacceptable” act that “verges on anti-Semitism.”

While the presumptive envoy supported the return of the US to the Human Rights Council, UNESCO and other UN-affiliated organizations, her reasoning for such a move is merely to ensure the US has a place “at the table” so that Washington may monitor and discourage any criticism of Israel.

Yang, Thomas-Greenfield and others perpetuate such inaccurate comparisons with full confidence that they have strong support among the country’s ruling elites from the two dominant political parties. Indeed, according to the latest count produced by the pro-Israel Jewish Virtual Library website, “32 states have adopted laws, executive orders or resolutions that are designed to discourage boycotts against Israel.”

In fact, the criminalization of the boycott movement has taken center stage of the federal government in Washington DC. Anti-boycott legislation was passed with overwhelming majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives in recent years and more are expected to follow.

The popularity of such measures prompted former Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, to declare the Israel boycott movement to be anti-Semitic, describing it at as ‘a cancer’ at a press conference in November, alongside Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, while in the illegal settlement of Psagot.

While Pompeo’s position is unsurprising, it behooves Yang and Thomas-Greenfield, both members of minority groups that suffered immense historical racism and discrimination, to brush up on the history of popular boycott movements in their own country. The weapon of boycott was, indeed, a most effective platform to translate political dissent into tangible achievements for oppressed Black people in the US during the civil rights movement in the mid-20th century. Most memorable, and consequential of these boycotts was the Montgomery Bus Boycott of 1955.

Moreover, outside the US, numerous volumes have been written about how the boycott of the White supremacist apartheid government in South Africa ignited a global movement which, combined with the sacrifices of Black South Africans, brought apartheid to an end in the early 1990s.

The Palestinian people do not learn history from Yang and others, but from the collective experiences of oppressed peoples and nations throughout the world. They are guided by the wisdom of Martin Luther King Jr., who once said that “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

The boycott movement aims at holding the oppressor accountable as it places a price tag on military occupation and apartheid. Not only is the Palestinian boycott movement not racist, it is essentially a rallying cry against racism and oppression.

The “Great Zero Carbon” Conspiracy

By F. William Engdahl

Comment: I was one of those who was a firm believer that we humans, with our cars and other pollution emitting devices, were the problem to our climate. I still believe that plastics and other materials that take hundreds or thousands of years to degrade are a huge problem where we need to fund immediate solutions for. But after watching Planet of the Humans and reading more and more about what exactly is “climate change” and who is behind it, I have now begun to question.

Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF) is currently promoting his favorite theme, the Great Reset of the world economy. The key to it all is understanding what the globalists mean by Net Zero Carbon by 2050.

The EU is leading the race, with a bold plan to become the world’s first “carbon neutral” continent by 2050 and reduce its CO2 emissions by at least 55% by 2030.

In an August, 2020 post on his blog, self-appointed global vaccine czar Bill Gates wrote about the coming crisis in climate:

“As awful as this pandemic is, climate change could be worse… The relatively small decline in emissions this year makes one thing clear: We cannot get to zero emissions simply—or even mostly—by flying and driving less.”

With a virtual monopoly on mainstream media as well as social media, the Global Warming lobby has been able to lead much of the world into assuming that the best for mankind is to eliminate hydrocarbons including petroleum, natural gas, coal and even the “carbon free” nuclear electricity by 2050, that we hopefully might avoid a 1.5 to 2 degree Centigrade rise in average world temperature. There is only one problem with this. It’s cover for a diabolical ulterior agenda.

Origins of ‘Global Warming’

Many have forgotten the original scientific thesis put forward to justify a radical shift in our energy sources. It was not “climate change.” Earth climate is constantly changing, correlated to changes in the emission of solar flares or sunspot cycles affecting Earth climate.

Around the turn of the millennium as the previous solar-led warming cycle was no longer evident, Al Gore and others shifted the narrative in a linguistic sleight-of-hand to “Climate Change,” from Global Warming. Now the fear narrative has gotten so absurd that every freak weather event is treated as “climate crisis.” Every hurricane or winter storm is claimed as proof that the Climate Gods are punishing us sinful CO2 emitting humans.

But wait. The entire reason for the transition to alternative energy sources such as solar or wind, and abandoning carbon energy sources, is their claim that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that somehow goes up to the atmosphere where it forms a blanket that supposedly warms the Earth below—Global Warming. Greenhouse gas emissions according to the US Environmental Protection Agency come mostly from CO2. Hence the focus on “carbon footprints.”

What is almost never said is that CO2 cannot soar up into the atmosphere from car exhaust or coal plants or other manmade origins. Carbon dioxide is not carbon or soot. It is an invisible, odorless gas essential to plant photosynthesis and all life forms on earth, including us. CO2 has a molecular weight of just over 44 while air (mainly oxygen and nitrogen) has a molecular weight of only 29.

The specific gravity of CO2 is some 1.5 times greater than air. That would suggest that CO2 exhaust gases from vehicles or power plants do not rise into the atmosphere some 12 miles or more above Earth to form the feared greenhouse effect.

Maurice Strong

To appreciate what criminal action is unfolding today around Gates, Schwab and advocates of an alleged “sustainable” world economy, we must go back to 1968 when David Rockefeller and friends created a movement around the idea that human consumption and population growth were the major world problem.

Rockefeller, whose wealth was based on oil, created the neo-Malthusian Club of Rome at the Rockefeller villa in Bellagio, Italy. Their first project was to fund a junk study at MIT called Limits to Growth in 1972.

A key organizer of Rockefeller’s ‘zero growth’ agenda in the early 1970s was his longtime friend, a Canadian oilman named Maurice Strong, also a Club of Rome member. In 1971 Strong was named Undersecretary of the United Nations and Secretary General of the June 1972 Stockholm Earth Day conference. He was also a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation.

Maurice Strong was a key early propagator of the scientifically unfounded theory that man-made emissions from transportation vehicles, coal plants and agriculture caused a dramatic and accelerating global temperature rise which threatens civilization, so-called Global Warming. He invented the elastic term “sustainable development.”

As chairman of the 1972 Earth Day UN Stockholm Conference, Strong promoted population reduction and lowering of living standards around the world to “save the environment.” Some years later the same Strong stated:

“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

This is the agenda today known as the Great Reset or UN Agenda 2030. Strong went on to create the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a political body which advances the unproven claim that manmade CO2 emissions were about to tip our world into irreversible ecological catastrophe.

Co-founder of the Club of Rome, Dr Alexander King, admitted the essential fraud of their environmental agenda some years later in his book, The First Global Revolution. He stated:

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill … All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself. 

King admitted that the “threat of global warming” was merely a ploy to justify an attack on “humanity itself.” This is now is being rolled out as the Great Reset and the Net Zero Carbon ruse.

Alternative Energy Disaster

In 2011, acting on the advice of Joachim Schnellnhuber, of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Angela Merkel and the German government imposed a total ban on nuclear electricity by 2022, as part of a 2001 government strategy called the Energiewende or Energy Turn, to rely on solar and wind and other “renewables.” The aim was to make Germany the first industrial nation to be “carbon neutral.”

The strategy has been an economic catastrophe. Going from having one of the industrial world’s most stable low-cost and reliable electric generation grids, today Germany has become the world’s most expensive electric generator. According to the German energy industry association BDEW, at the latest by 2023 when the last nuclear plant closes, Germany will face electricity shortfalls.

At the same time coal, the largest source of electric power, is being phased out to reach Net Zero Carbon. Traditional energy-intensive industries such as steel, glass production, basic chemicals, paper and cement manufacturing, are facing soaring costs and shutdowns or offshoring and loss of millions of skilled jobs. The energy inefficient wind and solar, today costs some 7 to 9 times more than gas.

Germany has little sun compared with tropical countries, so wind is seen as the major source for green power. There is a huge input of concrete and aluminum needed to produce solar or wind farms. That needs cheap energy—gas or coal or nuclear—to produce. As that is phased out, cost becomes prohibitive, even with no added “carbon taxes.”

Germany already has some 30,000 wind turbines, more than anywhere else in the EU. The gigantic wind turbines have serious problems of noise or infrasound health hazards for residents nearby the huge structures and weather and bird damage. By 2025 an estimated 25% of existing German windmills will need replacement and waste disposal is a colossal problem. The companies are being sued as the citizens realize what a disaster they are. To reach targets by 2030 Deutsche Bank recently admitted the state will need to create an “eco dictatorship.”

At the same time the German push to end gasoline or diesel transport by 2035 in favor of e-vehicles is on course to destroy Germany’s largest and most profitable industry, the auto sector, and take down millions of jobs. The lithium-ion battery-powered vehicles have a total “carbon footprint” when the effects of mining lithium and producing all parts are included, that is worse than diesel autos.

And the amount of added electricity needed for a zero carbon Germany by 2050 would be far more than today, as millions of battery chargers will need grid electricity with reliable power. Now Germany and the EU begin to impose new “carbon taxes,” allegedly to finance the transition to zero carbon. The taxes will only make electric power and energy even more expensive, insuring the faster collapse of German industry.

Depopulation

According to those advancing the Zero Carbon agenda, it is just what they desire: the deindustrialization of the most advanced economies, a calculated decades-long strategy as Maurice Strong said, to bring about the collapse of industrialized civilizations.

To turn the present world industrial economy backward to a wood-burning, windmill turning dystopia where blackouts become the norm as now in California, is an essential part of a Great Reset transformation under the Agenda 2030: UN Global Compact for Sustainability.

Merkel climate adviser, Joachim Schnellnhuber, in 2015 presented the radical green agenda of Pope Francis, the encyclical letter, Laudato Si , as Francis’ appointee to the Pontifical Academy of Science. And he advised the EU on its green agenda. In a 2015 interview, Schnellnhuber declared that “science” has now determined that the maximum carrying capacity of a “sustainable” human population was some six billion fewer people:

“In a very cynical way, it’s a triumph for science because at last we have stabilized something –- namely the estimates for the carrying capacity of the planet, namely below 1 billion people.”

To do that the industrialized world must be dismantled. Christiana Figueres, a World Economic Forum Agenda Contributor and former executive secretary of the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, revealed the true aim of the UN climate agenda in a February 2015 Brussels press conference where she stated, “This is the first time in human history that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally changing the economic development model that has reigned since the Industrial Revolution.”

Figueres’ 2015 remarks are echoed today by French President Macron at the January 2021 World Economic Forum’s “Davos Agenda” where he claimed that “under the current circumstances, the capitalist model and open economy are no longer feasible.” Macron, a former Rothschild banker, claimed that the “only way to get out of this epidemic is to create an economy that is more focused on eliminating the gap between the rich and the poor.” Merkel, Macron, Gates, Schwab and friends will do so by bringing living standards in Germany and the OECD down to levels of Ethiopia or Sudan. This is their zero carbon dystopia. Severely limit air travel, car travel, people movement, closing “polluting” industry, all to reduce CO2. Uncanny how conveniently the coronavirus pandemic sets the stage for the Great Reset and UN Agenda 2030 Net Zero Carbon.

Globalresearch.ca and first posted “New Eastern Outlook”

Let the Investigation (Games) Begin: The International Criminal Court, Israel and the Palestinian Territories

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark

Comment: the racist repugnant apartheid squatter state occupying Palestine is not above law or scrutiny. These thieves, cheaters and downright liars, cannot hide behind the holocaust while commit crimes of genocide on another people with impunity. This type of guilt-tripping leaves them bare of the fear they should have to the marrow of their bones. Their cries and attachment of the thoroughly worn out label of anti-semitism won’t stick on everything.

The Trump administration made a point of imposing sanctions on court staff, specifically targeting chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, whose entry visa to the US was revoked.  The moves were instigated in response to investigative efforts by the prosecutor into the alleged commission of war crimes by US, Taliban and Afghan forces in Afghanistan. 

Israel has also kept a witheringly hostile eye towards the activities of the ICC.  The acceptance by Palestinian authorities in 2015 of the court’s jurisdiction heralded the next troubling step in scrutinising Israeli actions in the occupied territories.  

In December 2019, Bensouda intimated that there was “a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes have been or are being committed in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip”.  Of interest was the 2014 Israel-Hamas conflict, Israel’s policy of settlements in occupied territory and aggressive responses to protests on the Gaza-Israeli border starting in March 2018. 

Often forgotten by various critics of the court is that Bensouda did not exclusively target the activities of the Israeli Defence Forces; she also included armed Palestinian groups as potential perpetrators of such crimes.  Her concerns were duly formalised in an application to the court as to whether such matters fell within the court’s jurisdiction.  Once resolved, an investigation could commence.

To the ICC pretrial chamber, she submitted “that the Court’s territorial jurisdiction extends to Palestinian territory occupied by Israel during the Six-Day war in June 1967, namely the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza.”  She admitted that the Occupied Palestinian Territory had a “unique history” with the issue of Palestinian statehood having never been definitively resolved.  But the accession of the Palestinians to the Rome Statute was an important factor in her considerations.

In a 2-1 decision, the court found that “Palestine qualifies as ‘the State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred’ for the purposes” of the Rome Statute.  This was so because Palestine had been accorded the status of a non-Member observer State in the United Nations, and in doing so, “would be able to become party to any treaties that are open to ‘any State’ or ‘all States’ deposited with the [UN] Secretary General”.  Palestine duly had “the right to exercise its prerogatives under the Statute and be treated as any other State Party would.”  It also followed that the territorial jurisdiction of the court “in the Situation in Palestine extends to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967”. 

The majority, made up of Marc Perrin de Brichambaut of France and Reine Adélaïde Sophie Alapini-Gansou of Benin, were also not convinced that “rulings on territorial jurisdiction necessarily impair a suspect/accused’s right to challenge jurisdiction under Article 19(2)(a) of the Statute.”  (Article 19 covers, in its entirety, challenges to the jurisdiction of the ICC or the admissible nature of a case.)

The response from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was one aged in the barrels of Israeli foreign policy for years: criticism of its military actions could only mean one thing.  “When the ICC investigates Israel for fake war crimes, this is pure anti-Semitism,” he raged in a video statement.  “The court established to prevent atrocities like the Nazi Holocaust against the Jewish people is now targeting the one state of the Jewish people.”  The court was investigating Israel for actions undertaken in pure defence “against terrorists” whilst ignoring the vicious activities of Iran and Syria.  “We will fight this perversion of justice with all our might.”

Israel’s Ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan similarly rebuked the ICC for its “distorted and anti-Semitic decision.”  It was “an attack on Israel and all democracies, undermining our ability to defend civilians against terrorism.”  Drawing in the country’s closest ally, Erdan claimed that it was “no accident that both Israel and the United States have refrained from becoming members of this biased and political institution.”

Despite such conflating bluster, much needs to still take place.  Bensouda’s term ends in June and her replacement may see things differently.  The nature of responsibility being investigated also poses difficulties.  ICC defence attorney Nick Kaufman raises a few points.  The use of any disproportionate use of military force is one thing; investigating “the alleged criminality of the settlement enterprise, which has been considered part of Israeli government policy for generations” raises another set of hurdles.  The biggest problem is obtaining probative evidence “that connects the decision makers with the crimes that were allegedly committed.”

US President Joe Biden and the State Department under Antony Blinken are unlikely to be as vicious as the Trump administration towards the ICC, but remain clear about keeping Israel out of the international court’s judicial orbit.  Last month, a State Department spokesman promised that the administration would be revisiting the sanctions regime.  “Much as we disagree with the ICC’s actions relating to the Afghanistan and the Israeli/Palestinian situations, the sanctions will be thoroughly reviewed as we determine our next steps.”  The Biden administration promises “to help the court better achieve its core mission of punishing and deterring atrocity crimes” with the prospect of even assisting in “exceptional cases”.    

The ICC decision was not one of those cases.  “The United States objects to today’s International Criminal Court decision regarding the Palestinian situation,” came the solemn words of State Department spokesman Ned Price.  “Israel is not a State Party to the Rome Statute.”  Price promised that the US would “continue to uphold President Biden’s strong commitment to Israel and its security, including opposing actions that seek to target Israel unfairly.”

A formal statement from the State Department took issue with what it considered an overreach of the ICC in attempting to exercise jurisdiction over Israeli personnel.  “The United States has always taken the position that the court’s jurisdiction should be reserved for countries that consent to it, or that are referred by the UN Security Council.”

Such statements signal a possible frustration of future investigative efforts, prompting the American Civil Liberties Union’s Jamil Dakwar to issue a reminder.  “It’s important to remember that the ICC investigation would also target Palestinian perpetrators of war crimes in the context of hostilities between Israel and Palestinian armed groups, especially in the Gaza Strip.”

Palestinian sources have been all praise for the decision.  The Palestinian Foreign Ministry called it a “historical day for the principle of accountability.”  Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh considered the ruling “a victory for justice and humanity, for the values of truth, fairness and freedom, and for the blood of the victims and their families.” 

Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri was also pleased, though decided to take from the ruling a very convenient reading.  “We urge the international court to launch an investigation into Israeli war crimes against the Palestinian people.”  His tune, and that of Hamas, may well change once the investigation gets going. 

Wide-Scale Demolition Operation

Israeli Occupation Demolishes 28 Homes and Facilities in Northern Jordan Valleys Displacing 85 Palestinians, including 45 Children.

Comment: The zionist apartheid occupation has tried to “rebrand” itself as the innocent victim. It has failed and will continue to fail to put icing on the fecal matter called the occupation of Palestine. With unquestionable speed and momentum, with blocking outside eyes taking a peak at what happens, their ongoing theft of Palestine continues. And because the deafening silence that permeates through the MSM is truly repugnant, it is about time the silence is shattered and the war criminals be stopped. If the tables were turned, howls from hell would be cried out in shrill unison.

On Monday morning, 01 February 2021, Israeli occupation forces (IOF) carried out a large-scale demolition operation against civilian properties in Hemsa al-Foqa area in the northern Jordan valleys, eastern Tubas.
Twenty-eight homes and facilities were demolished, displacing 85 Palestinians, including 45 children) in the operation. These demolitions are part of an accelerated campaign by IOF to demolish and destroy Palestinians’ homes and properties in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, under the Israeli annexation and settlement-expansion schemes in what can only be considered an act of ethnic cleansing against the indigenous Palestinian population.
According to PCHR’s investigations, at approximately 08:45 on Monday, IOF accompanied by Israeli Civil
Administration SUVs and construction vehicles, moved into Kherbet Hemsa al-Foqa in the northern Jordan valleys, eastern Tubas. Immediately, workers accompanying IOF proceeded to demolish and dismantle civilian homes and sheep barns, loaded them onto their trucks and confiscated their contents. The demolition included 14 residential tents, 7 tents and 5 barracks for cattle; the destroyed structures belonged to 11 families (85 civilians, including 45 children) who were rendered homeless. 
IOF told the affected area’s residents to accompany them to be transferred to Ein Shibley area, west of Al-Hamra checkpoint in the central Jordan valleys; however, they refused to leave the area. IOF threatened the residents that they would return the following day and expel them from Hemsa al-Foqa. It should be noted that on 03 November 2020, IOF conducted a wide-scale demolition campaign in the same area, that included the demolition of 70 homes and facilities and displacing 60 Palestinians (mostly children).
The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights condemns the Israeli demolitions and confiscation of Palestinian
properties and warns against the threat of the continued Israeli attempts to displace Palestinians and oust them from their lands by destroying their houses and confiscating/demolishing their properties. This is an Israeli systematic policy to impose a fait accompli to enforce its control and sovereignty on parts of the West Bank.

PCHR recalls that Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits “Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons ..” unless “the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” Additionally, Article 7.1.d of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court stipulates that “Deportation or forcible transfer of population when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population is a crime against humanity.” Also, Article 6, 7, and 8 of the Rome Statute assert that “Deportation or forcible transfer of population” is a war crime.
PCHR calls upon the international community and United Nations bodies to uphold their legal and moral duties, and to urgently intervene to stop the Israeli occupation’s crime against Palestinians and to guarantee their protection.

SARS-CoV-2 is a stitched together entity

that so far appears to exist only in theoretical viral databases rather than in real life. The deeper one goes down the COVID rabbit hole, the more bizarre and surreal the scamdemic becomes, and the more obvious it becomes that the New World Order (NWO) conspirators have conjured up a giant magic trick out of nothing. Well, perhaps not nothing; it would be more accurate to say they are demonizing humanity itself and turning every person into ‘the enemy’, as I alluded to in an earlier article The Eerie Similarities Between the Coronavirus and Climate Change Hoaxes. In that piece I talked about how the NWO is following the Club Of Rome directive to make mankind itself the enemy, and in the case of corona, they are doing that by re-diagnosing and re-classifying part of our immune system as a pathogen (see the article Deep Down the Virus Rabbit Hole – Question Everything for the background on exosomes). It is accurate to say that the dreaded SARS-CoV-2 is, in fact, a stitched-together Frankenstein virus containing sequences of human DNA.

The Max Igan-Andrew Kaufman Interview

Dr. Andrew Kaufman has done a tremendous job and fantastic public service ever since the beginning ot the coronavirus scamdemic by stepping out and speaking out loudly against the insanity. I have listened to many of his interviews, however this one with Max Igan (The Crowhouse) stands out, because Kaufman breaks down how the testing works in a way I have not heard anyone else do. He actually reveals how the sequences, and indeed entire SARS-CoV-2 viral genome (the standard against which they are testing people), is itself just a stitched-together construct made of up of all sorts of different sequences – including human DNA sequences! This is yet another reason why it is unsurprising that there are so many positive test results, since they are testing people’s DNA and matching the results against a standard which already includes human DNA. There is a false positive pandemic, not a viral pandemic. Here are Kaufman’s words verbatim:

“The PCR test … doesn’t for a virus at all. What that tests for is a sequence of RNA, which is genetic material. And the way they obtain that, is also they take the impure sample, basically like the lung fluid in this case from some people who are sick, or possibly a throat swab, and they amplify short little sequences, and sequences that they are specifically looking for mostly because they have this library of gene sequences of viruses. But the thing is if you go back, they’ve always characterized them this way. So they’ve never once had an intact virus particle, and then sliced it open, and taken the RNA out, and done a sequence from end to end. That’s never been done. What they do instead is they take this impure sample, and they look for specific sequences that they’ve pre-identified as being viral in nature, from this database. And then what they’re doing is amplifying these short little sequences, maybe 150-250 base pairs, and they’re splicing them together into this one long strand of 30,000, which they say is the viral genome, but it’s actually just this Frankenstein type of assembly of all these little pieces, that we don’t even have any proof [are] related. They could even come from different types of cells or different creatures. And when there’s gaps, they’re basically using sequences that they get from that database of other viruses that are also put together in this Frankenstein-type way, and they sew all those together and say that this is the genome sequence of this virus. And that’s the procedure. They’re testing for something from that but we don’t really know what it is, except it’s most likely our own sequences. So that’s why there’s so many positive results, because they are essentially testing our own genetic sequences.”

Max Igan replies:

“This is crazy. This is not unlike Tim [he actually means Neil – Ed.] Ferguson with his computer models from Imperial College. You get the data out of the model that you put into the model, and with what you’re describing there, they’re getting the test results based on what they’re putting it, the material they’re putting in there. This is crazy! How could you even see this as any type of test [unintelligible] … It doesn’t make sense at all. This is what they [based] the entire world lockdown on … This is unbelievable when you explain it like that!”

The Emperor Has No SARS-CoV-2 Clothes

When it comes to computers and programming, you get out what you put in. There’s no such thing as a neutral algorithm or piece of code, because it reflects the creators’ preferences and purposes. Despite the promises of the transhumanists, computers lack a soul and consciousness, so their advice can only ever be as good as the data and programming that created them. NWO frontman Bill Gates funded places like the Imperial College and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), so they are naturally going to produce results favorable to the NWO agenda. Likewise, the PCR tests are based on taking a DNA sample and matching it to a gold standard of what the virus already is, however due to the fact SARS-CoV-2 fails Koch’s postulates and has never been isolated and purified, there is no true gold standard (an actual virus) but instead a surrogate gold standard (an abstract digitally created database virus).

COVID Positives are Not Cases; Asymptomatic People are Not Sick!

Operation Coronavirus is a tightly woven, interconnected web of scams, much like a set of Russian dolls, where the outer layer contains a series of successive inner layers until you get to the core. Another aspect of the scam which has been well exposed by doctors such as Dr. Lee Merritt and Dr. Tim O’Shea is the deliberate fusing of the terms ‘positive’, ‘infection’ and ‘case’. According to Merritt, since ancient times, a case referred to someone who was demonstrably sick. An ill person. Medically speaking, it never, ever referred to someone who was asymptomatic or who had no symptoms of illness. However in the COVID scamdemic, the term has been hijacked and re-defined to include anyone who tests positive with the highly flawed COVID PCR test. As Merritt emphatically states, “That is not epidemiology. That’s fraud.”

Dr. Tim O’Shea reveals that fully 99% of COVID positives never get sick. Even of those who do, only 1% of them requires any treatment whatsoever. We have known this for a long time, especially since Iceland tested 1% of its population months ago, and found of those who were positive, about half had very mild symptoms, and the other half had no symptoms whatsoever. Of course they didn’t – they tested positive in a test that used human DNA sequences (and God knows what else) as part of its benchmark standard for a supposed new virus!

SARS-CoV-2: The Hoax of Asymptomatic Transmission

Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO Emerging Diseases and Zoonosis unit, confessed months ago (before the backtrack) that asymptomatic transmission of COVID was “very rare.” Other official sources have admitted that asymptomatic spread is not the major driver of coronavirus infection, e.g. when Fauci admitted that “asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks” and that “an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.” Remember, this is at its heart a psychological operation. The NWO controllers orchestrating this plandemic are trying to erode your self-trust, self-confidence and self-knowledge. They are attempting to trick you into thinking that you can’t possibly know if you are healthy; you can’t feel your own body and the fact you have no pains, aches or symptoms. You could still be contagious! You have to rely on something outside of yourself (COVID PCR tests, antibody tests, drugs, vaccines), whether it’s Big Pharma or Big Government, for your health and safety. This, like all the other NWO agendas, is a battle of perception and a form of mind control.

Final Thoughts

The takeaway from this is that the NWO controllers orchestrating Operation Coronavirus have taken a normal part of our immune system and classified it as a virus or pathogen. Then, they are appointing their minions to go around and test everyone, knowing the tests are testing for sequences of human DNA itself, rendering them meaningless and leading to a barrage of false positives. Consequently, people are being stripped of freedom and their rights based on faulty tests and fraudulent re-definition of medical terms like cases – when they are not even sick, and even if they were, when the governmental has absolutely no right to violate them in this way. Ultimately, there is still no proof that SARS-CoV-2 is a real world virus, not just some Frankenstein  theoretical virus existing only in a database.

By Makia Freeman

Comment: if we don’t wake up to what is going on and act in a positive way, the cementation of what is being imposed upon us will be devastating. We hear about abuse (sexual,psychological and physical) during the imprisonment our ‘leaders’ have imposed upon us, the suicide rates soaring, the psychological affects on all ages, and all because of our reactions to fear. Diseases in the recent past (think HIV/AIDS) should have stopped the world in its tracks, but we all forged forward. Why did we let this happen to us? Why are we putting our kids through a period of isolation from friends (building blocks for their future)? Why are we afraid to touch others? We need to let go of our pride that we have been made fools and stand up. We need to open our economy, schools at all levels, our lives up. If anything has been taught to us, it’s that governments don’t care and will do anything to hold on to their powers, and that a more just way of living, earning, educating is needed. We need real human contact again.

Ten Reasons Why SARS-CoV-2 Is an “Imaginary” and “Theoretical Virus”. “They Never Isolated the Virus”

By Makia Freeman

The Imaginary and Theoretical Virus known as SARS-CoV-2, a concept which has been used by the NWO (New World Order) controllers to shut down the world, is becoming more and more exposed as the months go by.

Although those who believe in the COVID cult – both those orchestrating the scamdemic and those blindly following along – will insist the virus is real, the truth is that there has still been no compelling or conclusive evidence that a real SARS-CoV-2 virus exists.

Admissions by governmental scientists and organizations worldwide, as well as omissions and obfuscations by those same people and agencies, reveal the shocking truth. As hard as it may be for the COVID cultists to admit, the emperor truly has no clothes.

There is no virus, other than a digital, theoretical abstraction made on a computer from a genomic database. The virus has never been isolated, purified, sequenced, characterized and proven 100% to exist.

Don’t believe it? That’s okay; it’s good to be skeptical. See the evidence below for yourself and make up your own mind.

#1 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: The Virus Has Never Been Isolated According to Koch’s Postulates or River’s Postulates

We’ll start with this, because this is the cornerstone of the whole scam. All the following information and evidence below stems from the fact the so-called experts have never isolated and purified the virus according to the gold standard of Koch’s postulates, or even the modified River’s Postulates. Koch’s postulates are:

  1. The microorganism must be identified in all individuals affected by the disease, but not in healthy individuals.
  2. The microorganism can be isolated from the diseased individual and grown in culture.
  3. When introduced into a healthy individual, the cultured microorganism must cause disease.
  4. The microorganism must then be re-isolated from the experimental host, and found to be identical to the original microorganism.

River’s postulates were proposed by Thomas M. River in 1973 to establish the role of a specific virus as the cause of a specific disease. They are modifications of Koch’s postulates. They are as follows:

  1. The viral agent must be found either in the host’s (animal or plant) body fluids at the time of disease or in cells showing lesions specific to that disease.
  2. The host material with the viral agent used to inoculate the healthy host (test organism) must be free of any other microorganism.
  3. The viral agent obtained from the infected host must produce the specific disease in a suitable healthy host, and/or provide evidence of infection by inducing the formation of antibodies specific to that agent.
  4. Similar material (viral particle) from the newly infected host (test organism) must be isolated and capable of transmitting the specific disease to other healthy hosts.

Whichever set of postulates is used, SARS-CoV-2 fails the test. Dr. Andrew Kaufman does a great job explaining why in this video. The coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (allegedly causing the disease COVID-19) has not been shown to be present only in sick people and not in healthy ones.

The virus has never been isolated, which must be done with proper equipment such as electron microscopes and which cannot be achieved through CT scans (as the Chinese were using) and the flawed RT-PCR test.

The January 24th 2020 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine entitled A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019 describes how the scientists arrived at the idea of COVID-19: they took lung fluid samples and extracted RNA from them using the PCR test. It admits that the coronavirus failed Koch’s postulates:

“Further development of accurate and rapid methods to identify unknown respiratory pathogens is still needed … our study does not fulfill Koch’s postulates.”

#2 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: Top Chinese Scientist Admitted They Never Isolated the Virus

All claims that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated have turned out to be unsubstantiated. Meanwhile, there have been actual admissions by officials that they haven’t isolated it. The chief epidemiologist of the Chinese CDC (Center for Disease Control) admitted “they didn’t isolate the virus” in this video clip.

#3 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: CDC Stated No Quantified Isolate Was Available

The US CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) in its July 2020 report CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel admits that it had been running PCR tests based not on an actual viral isolate (an actual sample or specimen taken from an infected human), but rather “stocks” of “transcribed RNA” taken from a gene bank to “mimic clinical specimen”:

“Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/μL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen.” (pg.43)

#4 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: CDC Admitted They Made a Digital Virus of 30,000 Base Pairs Using 37 Actual Sample Base Pairs

As covered in my previous article SARS-CoV-2: The Stitched Together, Frankenstein Virus, the CDC has already admitted that SARS-CoV-2 is a computer-generated digital virus, not a real living virus. As I wrote:

“In other words, it is a Frankenstein virus which has been concocted and stitched together using genomic database sequences (some viral, some not). It has never been properly purified and isolated so that it could be sequenced from end-to-end once derived from living tissue; instead, it’s just digitally assembled from a computer database. In this paper, the CDC scientists state they took just 37 base pairs from a genome of 30,000 base pairs which means that about 0.001% of the viral sequence is derived from actual living samples or real bodily tissue. In other words, they took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs. This computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud.”

In this article In June Study CDC Scientists Make 2 COVID Admissions that Destroy Official Narrative I reveal how the CDC admitted in their paper that they extrapolated their make-believe virus. Here is the quote:

“Whole-Genome Sequencing

We designed 37 pairs of nested PCRs spanning the genome on the basis of the coronavirus reference sequence (GenBank accession no. NC045512). We extracted nucleic acid from isolates and amplified by using the 37 individual nested PCRs.”

Another way to say this is that the “virus” has been constructed using a technique called de novo assembly which is a method for constructing genomes from a large number of (short or long) DNA fragments, with no a priori knowledge of the correct sequence or order of those fragments. You can read more about it here.

#5 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: European Corman-Drosten Paper Used an “In Silico” Genome of an “In Silico” Virus

The original Corman-Drosten paper admits they used a theoretical virus sequence for all their work and calculations. They, like the CDC and every government and agency, claim this is only because no isolate was ever available. I wonder if any of these scientists every asked WHY the isolate has never been available?

“In the present case of 2019-nCoV, virus isolates or samples from infected patients have so far not become available to the international public health community.”

A subsequent study highlighting fatal flaws in the Corman-Drosten paper was published entitled External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.

It highlights how the authors used in silico or theoretical sequences from computer banks, not real isolated samples from infected people. “In silico” is pseudo-Latin for “theoretical”; in plain English, synonyms for theoretical are “imaginary” and “make-believe.”

“The first and major issue is that the novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (in the publication named 2019-nCoV and in February 2020 named SARS-CoV-2 by an international consortium of virus experts) is based on in silico (theoretical) sequences, supplied by a laboratory in China, because at the time neither control material of infectious (“live”) or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 nor isolated genomic RNA of the virus was available to the authors. To date no validation has been performed by the authorship based on isolated SARS-CoV-2 viruses or full length RNA thereof.

Nevertheless these in silico sequences were used to develop a RT-PCR test methodology to identify the aforesaid virus. This model was based on the assumption that the novel virus is very similar to SARS-CoV from 2003 (Hereafter named SARS-CoV-1) as both are beta-coronaviruses … in short, a design relying merely on close genetic relatives does not fulfill the aim for a “robust diagnostic test” as cross reactivity and therefore false-positive results will inevitably occur. Validation was only done in regards to in silico(theoretical) sequences and within the laboratory-setting, and not as required for in-vitro diagnostics with isolated genomic viral RNA. This very fact hasn’t changed even after 10 months of introduction of the test into routine diagnostics.” (emphasis added)

#6 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: UK Government Couldn’t Produce Evidence

The governments of many nations around the world couldn’t seem to come up with a real virus either when challenged to do so. More evidence proving the “virus” is constructed on a computer database from a digital gene bank comes from Frances Leader, who questioned the UK MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) whether a real isolated virus was used to make the COVID vaccine. Leader found that the WHO protocols that Pfizer used to produce the mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Leader asked if the “virus” was actually a computer generated genomic sequence, and ultimately the MHRA confirmed they had no real specimen:

“The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person.”

In July 2020, a group of concerned academics wrote a letter to the UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson in which they asked him to produce independently peer reviewed scientific evidence proving that the SARS-CoV-2 “virus” has been isolated. To date they have not received a reply. Similarly, UK researcher Andrew Johnson made a Freedom of Information Request to Public Health England (PHE). He asked them to provide him with their records describing the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus to which they responded:

“PHE can confirm it does not hold information in the way suggested by your request.”

#7 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: Australian Government Couldn’t Produce Evidence

In other Commonwealth nations it’s the exact same story. In Australia scientists from the Doherty Institute falsely announced that they had isolated the SARS-CoV-2 virus. When asked to clarify the scientists said:

“We have short (RNA) sequences from the diagnostic test that can be used in the diagnostic tests.”

Perhaps this is the reason for this disclaimer by the Australian Government:

“The reliability of COVID-19 tests is uncertain due to the limited evidence base…There is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available COVID-19 tests.”

#8 SARS-CoV-2 the Theoretical Virus: Canadian Government Couldn’t Produce Evidence

Researcher Christine Massey made a similar Freedom Of Information request in Canada, to which the Canadian Government replied:

“Having completed a thorough search, we regret to inform you that we were unable to locate any records responsive to your request.”

[The complete letter from Health Canada / Santé Canada is on file]

#9 SARS-Cov-2 the Theoretical Virus: Over 40 Institutions Worldwide Can’t Answer the Basic Question

In fact, Christine Massey and her colleague in New Zealand

“have been submitting Freedom of Information requests to various institutions in Canada, NZ, Australia, Germany, the U.K., the U.S. etc., seeking any records that describe the isolation of a “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased human … As of December 16, 2020, >40 institutions in Canada, U.S., New Zealand, Australia, U.K., England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Denmark, and the European CDC have provided their responses, and none could locate any record describing the isolation of any “COVID-19 virus” aka “SARS-COV-2” directly from a diseased patient.”

Massey posts their replies here and here.

#10 SARS-Cov-2 the Theoretical Virus: Previous Coronaviruses Have Not Been Isolated

The Spanish health journal Salud published a great article in November 2020 entitled “Frauds and falsehoods in the medical field” where it exposes the lack of evidence not only for the isolation of SARS-CoV-2, but also for the isolation of other past coronaviruses (unofficial translation here). The scam runs deep. Jon Rappoport has done great work exposing how the exact same scam blueprint was played out in the 1980s (with Fauci in charge, leading the fraud) when scientists asserted there was a new virus called HIV, and it was causing AIDS. The COVID scamdemic greatly mimics other historical fake pandemics such as the 1976 swine flu pandemic. The article is Salud states:

“The genetic sequences used in PCRs to detect suspected SARS-CoV-2 and to diagnose cases of illness and death attributed to Covid-19 are present in dozens of sequences of the human genome itself and in those of about a hundred microbes. And that includes the initiators or primers, the most extensive fragments taken at random from their supposed “genome” and even the so-called “target genes” allegedly specific to the “new coronavirus”. The test is worthless and all “positive” results obtained so far should be scientifically invalidated and communicated to those affected; and if they are deceased, to their relatives. Stephen Bustin, one of the world’s leading experts on PCR, in fact says that under certain conditions anyone can test positive!

We have been warning you since March: you cannot have specific tests for a virus without knowing the components of the virus you are trying to detect. And the components cannot be known without having previously isolated/purified that virus. Since then we continue to accumulate evidence that no one has isolated SARS-CoV-2 and, more importantly, that it can never be isolated … In this report we are going to add the results of a particular research we have done from the data published on the alleged SARS-CoV-2 and on the protocols endorsed by the WHO for the use of RT-PCR as well as the data corresponding to the rest of the “human coronaviruses”. And the conclusions are extremely serious: none of the seven “human coronaviruses” have actually been isolated and all the sequences of the primers of their respective PCRs as well as those of a large number of fragments of their supposed genomes are found in different areas of the human genome and in genomes of bacteria and archaea …”

Their report analyzed human coronaviruses 229E (said to have been isolated in 1965), OC43 (in 1967), SARS-CoV (in 2003), NL63 (in 2004), HKU1 (in 2005) and MERS-CoV (in 2012). And just to repeat in case you missed it: they discovered the alleged sequences of SARS-CoV-2 are found in both humans and bacteria! This means all the various in silico models of SARS-CoV-2 contain existing human genetic sequences, so it is little wonder that people test positive when the primer or standard being tested against contains human sequences.

Conclusion: The COVID Cult is a Colossal Fraud and Superstition

How did this all start? Chinese scientists took lung fluid samples and claimed they had discovered a novel or new virus. The Gates-Rockefeller WHO backed them up. In the WHO’s Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCov Situation Report 1, they state:

“The Chinese authorities identified a new type of coronavirus, which was isolated on 7 January 2020……On 12 January 2020, China shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus for countries to use in developing specific diagnostic kits.”

With the evidence presented above, the WHO’s assertions and claims are utterly baseless. They constitute outright fraud.

The world has been shut down over a lie – a coldly calculated, carefully curated lie – that was simulated and war-gamed for decades in advance. The COVID cult is an irrational superstition based on nothing but in silico, theoretical, make-believe viral sequences. Yet, the real-world consequences for millions who have been thrown into stress, despair, poverty, joblessness, alcoholism and suicide is anything but theoretical.

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Makia Freeman

B’Tselem’s Historic Declaration: Israel’s Open War on Its Own Civil Society

By Ramzy Baroud

Comment: as is known, zionist apologists/supporters of the Apartheid Regime occupying Palestine, “antisemitism” will be cried out at deafening volumes. However this report is coming from within. My question to the authors of this report is: why did it take two decades to finally call it what’s it’s been? This organisation has been documenting for over two decades, Palestinians have been saying this for over seven decades. Will things now change? We’ll have to wait and see. But I personally have my doubts. When in the throes of death does the body lash out and grab on to anything to stay alive. We need to join the BDS movement wholeheartedly.

A Regime of Jewish Supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is Apartheid,” was the title of a January 12 report by the Israeli rights group B’Tselem. No matter how one is to interpret B’Tselem’s findings, the report is earth-shattering. The official Israeli response merely confirmed what B’Tselem has stated in no uncertain terms.

Those of us who repeatedly claimed that Israel is not democratic, governed by an apartheid regime and systematically discriminates against its ethnic and racial minorities, in favor of the country’s Jewish majority, purportedly have nothing to learn from B’Tselem’s declaration. Thus, it may seem that the report, which highlighted racial discrimination in four major areas – land, citizenship, freedom of movement and political participation – merely restated the obvious. In actuality, it went much further.

B’Tselem is a credible Israeli human rights organization. However, like other Israeli rights groups, it rarely went far enough in challenging the Israeli state’s basic definition of itself as a democratic state. Yes, on numerous occasions it rightly accused the Israeli government and military of undemocratic practices, rampant human rights violations and so on. But to demolish the very raison d’etre, the basic premise that gives Israel its legitimacy in the eyes of its Jewish citizens, and many more around the world, is a whole different story.

B’Tselem rejects the perception of Israel as a democracy (inside the Green Line) that simultaneously upholds a temporary military occupation (beyond it),” the Israeli rights group concluded based on the fact that the “bar for defining the Israeli regime as an apartheid regime has been met after considering the accumulation of policies and laws that Israel devised to entrench its control over Palestinians.”

Let’s be clear on what this actually means. Israel’s leading human rights organization was not arguing that Israel was turning into an apartheid state or that it was acting contrary to the spirit of democracy or that Israel is an undemocratic apartheid regime only within the geographic confines of the occupied Palestinian territories. None of this. According to B’tselem, which has for decades diligently documented numerous facets of Israeli government practices in the realm of politics, military, land-ownership, water distribution, health, education, and much more, Israel is, now, wholly an apartheid, undemocratic regime.

B’Tselem’s assessment is most welcomed, not as a belated admission of a self-evident reality but as an important step that could allow both Israelis and Palestinians to establish a common narrative on their relationship, political position and collective action in order to dismantle this Israeli apartheid.

Relatively, Israeli groups that criticize their own government have historically been allowed much larger margins than Palestinian groups that have done the same thing. However, this is no longer the case.

Palestinian freedom of speech has always been so limited and the mere criticism of the Israeli occupation has led to extreme measures, including beatings, arrests, and even assassinations. In 2002, a government-funded organization, NGO Monitor, was established precisely to monitor and control Palestinian human rights organizations in the occupied territories, including Addameer, al-Mezan Center, al-Haq, PCHR among others. The Israeli army raid on the Ramallah-based offices of the Palestinian human rights group Addameer in September 2019 was one of many such violent examples.

However, Israeli government actions of recent years are pointing to an unmistakable paradigm shift where Israeli civil society organizations are increasingly perceived to be the enemy, targeted in myriad ways, including defamation, financial restrictions and severing of access to the Israeli public.

The latter point was put on full display on January 17, when Israeli Education Minister, Yoav Galant, tweeted that he had instructed his ministry to “prevent the entry of organizations calling Israel ‘an apartheid state’ or demeaning Israeli soldiers, from lecturing at schools”.

Oddly, Galant demonstrated B’Tselem’s point, where the group challenged Israel’s very claim to democracy and freedom of expression, by curtailing Israeli human rights workers, intellectuals and educators’ own right to express dissent and to challenge the government’s political line. Simply stated, Galant’s decision is a functional definition of totalitarianism at work.

B’Tselem did not back down. To the contrary, the group expressed its determination “to keep with its mission of documenting reality,” and making its “findings publicly known to the Israeli public, and worldwide”. It went even further as B’Tselem director Hagai El-Ad met with hundreds of Israeli students on January 18 to discuss the inconsistency between military occupation and the respect for human rights. Following the meeting, El-Ad tweeted “The @btselem lecture did take place this morning. The Israeli government will have to contend with us until the apartheid regime ends.”

The B’Tselem-Galant episode is not an isolated spat, but one out of many such examples, which demonstrate that the Israeli government is turning into a police state against, not only Palestinian Arabs, but its own Jewish citizens.

Indeed, the decision by the Israeli Ministry of Education is rooted in a previous law that dates back to July 2018, which was dubbed the “Breaking the Silence law”. Breaking the Silence is an Israeli civil society organization of army veterans who became vocal in their criticism of the Israeli occupation, and who have taken it upon themselves to educate the Israeli public on the immorality and illegality of Israel’s military practices in occupied Palestine. To silence the soldiers, former Israeli Education Minister Naftali Bennett ordered schools to bar these conscientious objectors from gaining access and directly speaking to students.

The latest government’s decision, taken by Galant, has merely widened the definition, thus expanding the restrictions imposed on Israelis who refuse to toe the government’s line.

For years, a persisting argument within the Palestine-Israel discourse contended that, while Israel is not a perfect democracy, it is, nonetheless, a ‘democracy for Jews’. Though true democracies must be founded on equality and inclusiveness, the latter maxim gave some credibility to the argument that Israel can still strike the balance between being nominally democratic while remaining exclusively Jewish.

That shaky argument is now falling apart. Even in the eyes of many Israeli Jews, the Israeli government no longer possesses any democratic ideals. Indeed, as B’Tselem has succinctly worded it, Israel is a regime of Jewish supremacy “from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.”

The mRNA COVID Vaccine Is Not a Vaccine

By Makia Freeman

Comment: I hear people (even those very close to me) and read sign all over the place that state “We’re All In This Together”. I am not “In This Together” with anyone who endorses poverty and bankruptcy of small businesses, closure of educational institutions, restructuring our work lives and abandoning our loved ones, because a regime of greedy people created this mess for some billionaires’ benefit (think of all those who called Doug Ford and Justin Trudeau ‘hero’ for robbing us of our lives then giving it back by way of the CERB). I’m not “In This Together” with anyone who says playing in a park in the open fresh air will cause your kids to bring a virus back to grandparents and kill them (as I have heard far too many times), and yet keep liquor and pot stores open as ‘essential servises’… Because that’s what we need, more junkies and drunks. I am not “In This Together” with those who blindly think a drug company will save the day when the very same drug companies rattle off the lethal side effects in their advertising. And I’m not “In This” with anyone who claims that we need to be locked up and kept away from everyone for the sake of not getting sick by the healthy. These are mechanisms built to make everyone suspicious of every single person around them. As the Chief Medical Doctor of Canada said (to paraphrase) ‘we don’t know this will work as we’ve never tried this before’. It clearly hasn’t been tried for the flu and pneumonia (which have been counted together in the WHO and CDC’s data) that takes more lives than this SARS Cov2 has, and has changed the definition of herd immunity to ‘by vaccine’. I’m also not “In This Together” to become human experiments for drug companies – whoever wants to become a guinea pig is their choice. We keep hearing the talking heads on CBC use words “modelling”, “projected” and the likes, which should tell us this is all a total scam run by a computer nerd who wants to be referred to as a ‘philanthropist’ (the biggest joke I’ve ever heard! I want to be known as an astronaut but I know it’s not happening any time soon). I hear many doctors and nurses say their hospitals are empty. I hear too often that we need to “keep testing” with a test that is not used to diagnose illness. And test for what? A virus that has not been purified or isolated that we don’t know even exists?! Why aren’t those who have been fooled willing to admit they have been fooled? Is it pride?


Doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits Expose How So-Called COVID Vaccine is Not a Vaccine

Listen to this short excerpt featuring doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits (who have both been very outspoken thus far in exposing the COVID plandemic) who are speaking with Robert Kennedy Jr. and lawyer Rocco Galati, who is representing a Canadian freedom group suing the government for the entire COVID scam. David Martin makes some extremely important points about how we can’t accurately label the device Moderna and Pfizer are pushing as a vaccine, because both medically and legally, is not a vaccine:

“This is not a vaccine … using the term vaccine to sneak this thing under public health exemptions … This is a mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine! Vaccines actually are a legally defined term … under public health law … under CDC and FDA standards, and a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both an immunity within the person receiving it, but it also has to disrupt transmission … They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop transmission. It is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities, because then people would say “What other treatments are there?”

The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable … because it actually is the sucker punch to open and free discourse … Moderna was a started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARS … if we said we’re going to give people prophylactic chemo for the cancer they don’t have, you’d be laughed out of a room, because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is! This is a mechanical device, in the form of a very small packet of technology, that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.

The only reason why the term [vaccine] is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobsen case that has been misrepresented since it was written. If we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device, that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within the cell. It is a medical device, not a drug, because it meets the CDRH [Center for Devices and Radiological Health] definition of a device.

It is made to make you sick … 80% of the people who are exposed to allegedly the virus [SARS-Cov-2] have no symptoms at all … 80% of people who get this injected into them have a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce a[n] immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick, and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.”

Judy Mikovits also chips in with this:

“It’s a synthetic pathogen. They’ve literally injected this pathogenic part of the virus into every cell of the body … it can actually directly cause multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease … it can cause accelerated cancer … that’s what the expression of that piece of virus … has been known to do for decades.”

COVID Vaccine is an Operating System, Says Moderna

The COVID mRNA Vaccine is an operating system which can program your DNA, and therefore program you, at your core essential blueprint level. Is this an exaggeration? No it’s not. Moderna states on their website that their mRNA technology platform is a “software of life” and “functions very much like an operating system on a computer.” This is straight from their website:

“It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

The Game Plan: Making Every Human into a Digital Node on the Control Grid

We are fast moving into the world of transhumanism, where our natural biological bodies are hijacked and infiltrated with synthetic parts, starting at the nanoparticle level. The NWO controllers want to download some kind of Microsoft office system or software into your body and brain, and hook you up to the JEDI and/or Amazon-CIA cloud, so they can have direct access to your brain. Then, they can roll out “vaccines” which are not vaccines to continually update you, just like computer software gets regular updates. Viruses, real or not, and vaccines, real or not, are just means to achieve this goal.

Turning Humans into Commodities via Social Credit Currency

Alison McDowell sums up the current transhumanistic NWO path of highest probability below, which involves social credit, 5G, the Smart Grid and AI to induce planetary-wide compliance:

“Within the tech-no-logic system, total compliance will be demanded. Approved behavior becomes currency, tokenized on blockchain and monitored by sensors and AI. They are training us for a future where we compete with one another to see who is the best behaved, the most docile. Surviving will mean conforming to the strident terms of psychopathic financial agreements. To obtain the data needed to verify claims embedded in twisted “pay for success” deals, our mother, the earth, must be remade as a geo-fenced digital prison using 5G and satellite constellations. All of your data will be added to your “permanent record” to evaluate your value as human capital for investor portfolios. The billionaires envision a future where freedom is a privilege limited to themselves, their functionaries, and the robots they control. Be assured AI is already keeping tabs, and social credit scoring is well underway.”

It is a grim future, however it is not set in stone. I agree wholeheartedly with McDowell that we do NOT have to accept this as our fate or experience such a painful timeline IF we can wake up quickly and change. However, we must first accept this is the probable path we are on. Like it or not, this is the current trajectory. How do we change it? Firstly by looking within. To change ourselves, we must change our inner world and change our perception, and so therefore change our reality:

“This planned future, however, is NOT preordained. Totalitarian transhumanism is not a foregone conclusion. Trudell’s remedy? Change our perception of reality through active non-cooperation. Manifest in our hearts, minds, and actions the world we desire. Where they engineer disconnect, RECONNECT with intention; not only with one another, but with ALL our relations and the land and the spiritual beings that exist beyond our senses. We must synchronize to change the vibrational reality, and that power exists within us as children of the earth.”

This is not airy-fairy talk, but rather a realization that we are participating in co-creating a nightmare world by allowing our perception to be programmed to bring about the NWO. They are using our energy to do it! To reclaim our sovereignety, we must reclaim our perception by breaking down the programming that was inserted into us.

Final Thoughts: A Technocratic, Transhumanistic Tool

It is vital to know, and to tell others, that the current mRNA COVID vaccine is not a vaccine. This is not just because calling it a vaccine gives Big Pharma legal immunity from damages, but also for all the reasons listed above. These devices are designed to reprogram you at the fundamental level. They are not vaccines, they are not drugs, and in my opinion, they are not treatments or medicine. As scary as these terms are, I would go beyond just calling them chemical devices, operating systems, synthetic pathogens and chemical pathogen production devices, which are already illuminating terms and horrible enough. I would call them technocratic, transhumanistic tools to permanently change your genetics and transform you into a synthetic human. They are symbolic of just how swiftly the NWO agenda is being made manifest in our physical reality, and hopefully a wake-up call to everyone to strive harder to stop this dark, nefarious agenda while there is still time.

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Ten Things You Need to Know about the Experimental COVID Vaccines

By Makia Freeman

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Never-Before-Used Tools to Modify and Program Your Genetics

The COVID vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna are called mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines – a completely new type of vaccine that has never been licensed or used on humans before. We have absolutely no idea what to expect from this vaccine, nor no way to know if it will be effective or safe. Traditional vaccines introduce pieces of a weakened virus to stimulate an immune response. mRNA vaccines inject molecules of synthetic genetic material from non-humans sources into your cells, thus hijacking your genes and permanently reprogramming them to produce antibodies to kill the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus causing COVID (although, as regular readers of The Freedom Articles know, the virus has never been isolated, purified or proven 100% to exist). These newly created proteins are not regulated by your DNA and are thus completely foreign to your body.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: mRNA Vax is an Operating System

The mRNA vaccines of Moderna and Pfizer could barely be regarded as medicine in the traditional sense. They are transhumanistic tools to synthetically alter you at the genetic level. In fact, Moderna has even admitted on their website that their new COVID vaccines are an “operating system” and the “software of life”:

“Recognizing the broad potential of mRNA science, we set out to create an mRNA technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

Catherine Austin Fitts has recently been pointing out that these tools are ‘vaccines’ in name only, called so to give them legal immunity from liability, when actually they are operating systems:

“Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates. Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-macine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do.”

“Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. Injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Immunity for insurance companies is not the creation of human immunity. We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Safety Abandoned

Vaccines usually take 7-20 years to adequately research, test and bring to market. The slew of COVID vaccines produced by Big Pharma companies are being rushed to market in less than 12 months, which is nowhere enough time to meet established safety standards. No long-term safety studies were conducted, so no one has any real idea of the danger these vaccines could cause down the line. Many of the trials only lasted 3-4 months. Animal trials, an important part of safety testing, were skipped. While long-term safety is completely unknown, short-term safety looks extremely sketchy (see next section and list of links at end of article). It is no understatement to say that much of the worldwide population has just become Big Pharma’s guinea pigs.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Dangerous Adverse Effects

The COVID vaccines promote disease enhancement due to pathogenic priming. In other words, they make people sicker than the disease would have. In Moderna’s trials alone, FDA documents record that 13 people died (6 from the vaccine and 7 from the placebo), while the FDA also issued a new warning regarding Bell’s Palsy as a potential side effect (results were correct up until December 3rd 2020). Since the rollout of the COVID vax, doctors and nurses have fainted live on TV (nurse manager Tiffany Dover fainted while speaking to the media about receiving the vaccine, and later died), contracted Bell’s palsy and become paralyzed. Some people have even died following the vaccine, including in places like Miami, Portugal, Israel, Switzerland, Iceland and more (see links in last section of article).Experimental COVID Vaccines: COVID Vax Only Designed to Stop Mild Symptoms

With the risks of the COVID vaccine so undeniably grave, you might think the benefits are large. Think again. Big Pharma has stated that the vaccine only protects against mild (not moderate or severe) symptoms, which makes the vaccine virtually pointless, given the large majority of people who allegedly have COVID have little or no symptoms whatsoever.
The study Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell us published in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) by Professor Peter Doshi raises at least 2 very good points about the failure of the COVID vaccines to stop moderate/severe symptoms and to stop transmission. He quotes, among others, Moderna chief medical officer Tal Zaks:

“But what will it mean exactly when a vaccine is declared “effective”? To the public this seems fairly obvious. “The primary goal of a covid-19 vaccine is to keep people from getting very sick and dying,” a National Public Radio broadcast said bluntly. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said, “Ideally, you want an antiviral vaccine to do two things . . . first, reduce the likelihood you will get severely ill and go to the hospital, and two, prevent infection and therefore interrupt disease transmission.” Yet the current phase III trials are not actually set up to prove either. None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus.”

“Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna, told The BMJ that the company’s trial lacks adequate statistical power to assess those outcomes. “The trial is precluded from judging [hospital admissions], based on what is a reasonable size and duration to serve the public good here,” he said. Hospital admissions and deaths from covid-19 are simply too uncommon in the population being studied for an effective vaccine to demonstrate statistically significant differences in a trial of 30 000 people. The same is true of its ability to save lives or prevent transmission: the trials are not designed to find out. Zaks said, “Would I like to know that this prevents mortality? Sure, because I believe it does. I just don’t think it’s feasible within the timeframe [of the trial]—too many would die waiting for the results before we ever knew that.” What about Hotez’s second criterion, interrupting virus transmission, which some experts have argued should be the most important test in phase III studies? “Our trial will not demonstrate prevention of transmission,” Zaks said, “because in order to do that you have to swab people twice a week for very long periods, and that becomes operationally untenable.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: COVID Vax Not Designed to Stop Transmission

Likewise, Big Pharma admitted they didn’t design the vaccine to stop transmission. Therefore, if someone else gets the vaccine, it doesn’t stop them from transmitting the virus to you, and if you get the vaccine, it does not stop you from transmitting the virus to others. This may be why NIAID head Dr. Anthony Fauci continued to push the dehumanizing agenda when he stated on MSM TV that people should still socially distance and wear masks even after getting vaccinated:

“Obviously, with a 90+% effective vaccine, you could feel much more confident [about not getting sick] … but I would recommend to people to not abandon all public health measures just because you have been vaccinated.”

genomic virus Fran Leader

Experimental COVID Vaccines: No Real Isolated Virus Was Used to Make the Vaccine

The vaccine cannot possible be truly effective since it was not based on an actual isolated sample of the SARS-CoV-2 virus

The WHO protocols that Pfizer used to produce the mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. I have been covering this point ever since the COVID scamdemic began, especially in articles like SARS-CoV-2: The Stitched Together, Frankenstein Virus where I highight that COVID or SARS-CoV-2 is a theoretical digital virus, constructed from a computer database, that doesn not exist in the real world. Fran Leader questioned the UK MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) about this, asserting that the ‘virus’ was actually a computer generated genomic sequence, and ultimately they confirmed:

“The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: WHO Admits There’s No Evidence COVID Vax Works

The World Health Organization chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan Yadav admitted that there is no “evidence on any of the [COVID] vaccines to be confident that it’s going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Contains PEGylated Lipid Nanoparticles Which Can Cause Disease

Dr. Frank Shallenberger writes about the dangers of PEGylated lipid nanoparticles which are used to hide the mRNA from our bodies:

“The mRNA molecule is vulnerable to destruction. So, in order to protect the fragile mRNA strands while they are being inserted into our DNA they are coated with PEGylated lipid nanoparticles. This coating hides the mRNA from our immune system which ordinarily would kill any foreign material injected into the body. PEGylated lipid nanoparticles have been used in several different drugs for years. Because of their effect on immune system balance, several studies have shown them to induce allergies and autoimmune diseases. Additionally, PEGylated lipid nanoparticles have been shown to trigger their own immune reactions, and to cause damage to the liver.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Pfizer Vaccine Fallout

An astonishing number of people have been hurt, damaged, injured and killed from the Pfizer COVID vax. Take a look at the following headlines, data and links from our friends at For Our Rights:

CDC data shows that 3,150 people are now “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work”after vaccination. This is 2.7% of people who took it

Portuguese health worker, 41, dies two days after getting the Pfizer covid vaccine as her father says he “wants answers”

https://trib.al/eEWi66p

Mexican doctor hospitalized after receiving COVID-19 vaccine

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-mexico-vaccines-idUSKBN2970H3

Hundreds of Israelis get infected with Covid-19 after receiving Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine

https://www.rt.com/news/511332-israel-vaccination-coronavirus-pfizer/

Wife of ‘perfectly healthy’ Miami doctor, 56, who died of a blood disorder 16 days after getting Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is certain it was triggered by the jab, as drug giant investigates first death with a suspected link to shot

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9119431/Miami-doctor-58-dies-three-weeks-receiving-Pfizer-Covid-19-vaccine.html

75-year-old Israeli man dies 2 hours after getting Covid-19 vaccine

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/293865

Death of Swiss man after Pfizer vaccine

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-swiss-death-idUSKBN29413Y

88-year-old collapses and dies several hours after being vaccinated

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/293952

Thousands negatively affected after getting Covid-19 vaccine

https://m.theepochtimes.com/thousands-negatively-affected-after-getting-covid-19-vaccine_3625914.html

Hospital worker with no prior allergies in intensive care with severe reaction after Pfizer Covid vaccine

4 volunteers develop FACIAL PARALYSIS after taking Pfizer Covid-19 jab, prompting FDA to recommend ‘surveillance for cases’

https://www.rt.com/usa/509081-pfizer-vaccine-fda-bells-palsy-covid/

Investigation launched as 2 people die in Norway nursing home days after receiving Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine

https://www.rt.com/news/511623-norway-covid19-vaccine-deaths/

Hundreds Sent to Emergency Room After Getting COVID-19 Vaccines

https://m.theepochtimes.com/hundreds-sent-to-emergency-room-after-getting-covid-19-vaccines_3644148.html

US officials report more severe allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN29B2GS

NHS told not to give COVID vaccine to those with history of allergic reactions

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/09/pfizer-covid-vaccine-nhs-extreme-allergy-sufferers-regulators-reaction

COVID-19: Single vaccine dose leads to ‘greater risk’ from new coronavirus variants, South African experts warn

news.sky.com/story/amp/covid-19-single-vaccine-dose-leads-to-greater-risk-from-new-coronavirus-variants-south-african-experts-warn-12180837

CDC reveals at least 21 Americans have suffered life threatening allergic reactions to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine

www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9119029/amp/At-21-Americans-life-threatening-anaphylaxis-receiving-Pfizers-vaccine-CDC-reveals.html

Woman experiences side effects of COVID-19 vaccine

www.everythinglubbock.com/news/local-news/woman-experiences-side-effects-of-covid-19-vaccine/amp/

COVID vaccine side effects more common after 2nd dose

www.boston.cbslocal.com/2021/01/05/covid-vaccine-side-effects-fever-reaction/amp/

Bulgaria reports 4 cases of side effects from Pfizer COVID vaccine

www.ndtv.com/world-news/bulgaria-reports-4-cases-of-side-effects-from-pfizer-covid-vaccine-2347667%3famp=1&akamai-rum=off

Two NHS workers suffer allergic reaction to Pfizer vaccine

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-vaccine-pfizer-nhs-oxford-covid-uk-cases/amp/

Conclusion: Watch Out!

The above are just 10 reasons to watch out for the COVID vax, however for those wishing to dig deeper, I suggest investigating things such as unsafe epitopes (parts of proteins capable of causing immune and auto-immune conditions), ADE (antibody-dependent amplification, long known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats. All cats that initially tolerated the vaccine well, died after catching the wild virus), nanoparticles (graphene and hydrogel) and more, all of which are likely linked to the COVID vaccines. These concoctions take the NWO scheme to a whole new level. The agenda has arrived at your doorstep and, indeed, at your bloodstream.

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Sources

https://www.modernatx.com/mrna-technology/mrna-platform-enabling-drug-discovery-development

https://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2021/01/the-injection-fraud-its-not-a-vaccine-2666018.html

https://nypost.com/2020/11/15/social-distancing-masks-necessary-after-getting-vaccine-fauci/

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/13-people-died-during-modernas-covid-vaccine-trial

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037

https://hive.blog/worldnews/@francesleader/email-exchange-with-uk-mhra-exposing-the-genomic-sequence-of-sarscov2

https://banned.video/watch?id=5febeb84c3c5ce1ce2f7cdfa

https://davidicke.com/2021/01/12/doctor-demolishes-gates-covid-vaccine-in-devastating-analysis/

The Assange Verdict: What Happens Now

By Craig Murray

Comment: The only conclusion I personally have come to is this “judge” has no judicial integrity.

I had the strong impression that Baraitser was minded to grant bail and wanted the decision to be fireproof. I have spoken to two others who were in court who formed the same impression. Indeed, in the past, she has more than once indicated that she will reject a bail application before one has been made. I can think of no reason why she would steer Fitzgerald so strongly to delay the application if there were not a very strong chance she would grant it. She gave him the advice and then adjourned the court for 45 minutes so Fitzgerald and Gareth Peirce could discuss it with Julian, and on return they took her advice. If she were simply going to refuse the bail application, there was no reason for her not to get it over with quickly there and then.

Fitzgerald briefly made the point that Assange now had very little incentive to abscond, as there had never been a successful appeal against a refusal to extradite on medical grounds. Indeed it is very difficult to see how an appeal can be successful. The magistrate is the sole determinant of fact in the case. She has heard the evidence, and her view of the facts of Assange’s medical condition and the facts of conditions in American supermax prisons cannot be overturned. Nor can any new evidence be introduced. The appeal has rather to find that, given the facts, Baraitser made an error in law, and it is difficult to see the argument.

I am not sure that at this stage the High Court would accept a new guarantee from the USA that Assange would not be kept in isolation or in a Supermax prison; that would be contrary to the affidavit from Assistant Secretary of State Kromberg and thus would probably be ruled to amount to new evidence.

Not to mention that Baraitser heard other evidence that such assurances had been received in the case of Abu Hamza, but had been broken. Hamza is not only kept in total isolation, but as a man with no hands he is deprived of prosthetics that would enable him to brush his teeth, and he has no means of cutting his nails nor assistance to do so, and cannot effectively wipe himself in the toilet.

Not only is it hard to see the point of law on which the USA could launch an appeal, it is far from plain that they have a motive to do so. Baraitser agreed with all the substantive points of argument put forward by the US government. She stated that there was no bar on extradition from the UK for political offences; she agreed that publication of national security material did constitute an offence in the USA under the Espionage Act and would do so in the UK under the Official Secrets Act, with no public interest defence in either jurisdiction; she agreed that encouraging a source to leak classified information is a crime; she agreed Wikileaks’ publications had put lives at risk.

On all of these points she dismissed virtually without comment all the defence arguments and evidence. As a US Justice Department spokesman said yesterday:

“While we are extremely disappointed in the court’s ultimate decision, we are gratified that the United States prevailed on every point of law raised. In particular, the court rejected all of Mr Assange’s arguments regarding political motivation, political offence, fair trial, and freedom of speech. We will continue to seek Mr Assange’s extradition to the United States.” That is a fair categorisation of what happened.

Appealing a verdict that is such a good result for the United States does not necessarily make sense for the Justice Department. Edward Fitzgerald explained to me yesterday that, if the USA appeals the decision on the health and prison condition grounds, it becomes open to the defence to counter-appeal on all the other grounds, which would be very desirable indeed given the stark implications of Baraitser’s ruling for media freedom. I have always believed that Baraitser would rule as she did on the substantial points, but I have always also believed that those extreme security state arguments would never survive the scrutiny of better judges in a higher court. Unlike the health ruling, the dispute over Baraitser’s judgement on all the other points does come down to classic errors in law which can successfully be argued on appeal.

If the USA does appeal the judgement, it is far more likely that not only will the health grounds be upheld, but also that Baraitser’s positions on extradition for political offences and freedom of the media will be overturned, than it is likely that the US will achieve extradition. They have fourteen days in which to lodge the appeal – now thirteen.

An appeal result is in short likely to be humiliating for the USA. It would be much wiser for the US to let sleeping dogs lie. But pride and the wound to the US sense of omnipotence and exceptionalism may drive them to an appeal which, for the reasons given above, I would actually welcome provided Julian is out on bail. Which I expect he shall be shortly.

More analysis of Baraitser’s judgment will follow.

This article was first read on http://www.globalresearch.ca