Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Great Reset

The US government’s ‘psychopathic’ record on bioweapons should give us pause about ‘bird flu’ claims

Published

7 months ago

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

Farmers and citizens around the world must resist dangerous animal cullings and put governments on the defensive about the new ‘bird flu’ scare, given what we know about the abuse of bioweapons and gain-of-function research.

In a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, medical science author Kris Newby told the story of how she learned that what is known as Lyme disease is likely the product of a bioweapon. She dropped fascinating discoveries that helped lead her to this conclusion: The admissions of a CIA “black ops guy” to dropping poison ticks on Cubans and of a bioweapons contractor to mass producing fleas, ticks, and mosquitoes “weaponized” with “deadly or incapacitating” diseases.

The importance of this interview goes far beyond the question of whether Lyme disease is a bioweapon, for which she provided hard-to-ignore evidence. By giving a disturbing glimpse into U.S. military involvement in disease bioweapons, it steers even the “conspiracy skeptic” to admit to the possibility, or likelihood, that governments, including our own, continue to test and deploy such bioweapons.

One who is unafraid of facing facts and reason will come to the same conclusion as Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya upon reviewing Newby’s research: That the “mid-20th century US biomedical research establishment was psychopathic,” as shown by its knowingly “deadly investigations in the name of developing vaccines and bioweapons.”

But human nature doesn’t change, and if the biomedical establishment had psychopathic tendencies less than a century ago, there will be people within it with those same tendencies today, as Bhattacharya concludes, pointing out that this “may help explain many things about the COVID pandemic.”

This question of government involvement in bioweapons production is taking on fresh and urgent relevance as the WHO redoubles its efforts to pass a freedom-restricting, national sovereignty-overriding Pandemic Treaty and as a bird flu scare is emerging.

Despite the fact that evidence overwhelmingly shows COVID-19 was a gain-of-function bioweapon used as an excuse to push harmful “vaccinations” around the world, the public is expected to unquestioningly swallow the idea that there is no agenda or deliberation behind a bird flu outbreak. Moreover, we are to believe bird flu is such a threat that it necessitates the mass culling of millions of chickens, severely restricting our food supply.

Already, there are plans to kill over four million chickens in Iowa after the avian influenza was reportedly detected among a flock in Sioux County. A leaked Zoom meeting involving Canada’s chief public health officer, Theresa Tam, shows a government team discussing measures it can take to curb or prevent potential outbreaks in Canada: searching farms for positive bird flu cases in animals and quarantining those farms; surveillance and tracking of infection cases; honing in on the production of raw milk; and even searching for infection in “farm cats,” which they acknowledged is a delicate endeavor, since they are cherished as pets.

“I don’t think this is a threat to mankind. I think this is a giant threat to the food supply because of this elective mass destruction of livestock,” said Dr. McCullough, who went on to suggest that the animals ride out the infections without being killed by the masses. He also called for an investigation into gain-of-function research, suggesting that this bird flu, like COVID-19, may be the result of such research.

Remarkably, the scientist Dr. Michael Gregor, a vegan who once once testified on behalf of Oprah Winfrey in her “meat defamation” trial, has repeatedly claimed that chicken farms will trigger an apocalyptic virus that will threaten half of humankind. In 2006, he published a book called Bird Flu: A Virus of Our Own Hatching, in which he warns that “leading public health authorities now predict as inevitable a pandemic of influenza, triggered by bird flu and expected to lead to millions of deaths around the globe.”

In his 2020 book “How to Survive a Pandemic,” he recommends that humans eventually not eat poultry at all, asserting, “As long as there is poultry, there will be pandemics. In the end, it may be us or them.”

In fact, one Amazon book reviewer believes his title is a misnomer and should be replaced with the following: “How Raising and Consuming Animal Flesh Causes Pandemics, and (By the Way) How to Survive One.”

In other words, in order to avoid total apocalypse, humanity must face economic devastation as well as likely malnutrition and health deficits from the inability to consume animal flesh. Globalists including the World Economic Forum (WEF) and Bill Gates already want the world to transition to synthetic beef “for the climate.” Are we to believe that eliminating animal flesh, a staple of human diets going back thousands of years, is genuinely good for the welfare of mankind?

Targeting chickens also conveniently aims a blow at those who are seeking to opt out of the globalist system by producing their own food, especially since the most accessible source of animal protein is chicken eggs and meat, available even to non-farmers.

The globalists, however – pardon the pun – prefer to kill two birds with one stone. A bird flu outbreak could accomplish another major destructive goal of the globalists: Dr. McCullough thinks that the “end game” of this bird flu is “mass vaccination.” He pointed out that the military contractor Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) has already helped develop a bird flu vaccine which has been cleared by the FDA, and on Thursday, it was reported that the U.S. government is close to an “agreement to fund a late-stage trial of Moderna’s mRNA bird flu vaccine.”

Farmers and citizens around the world must resist mass animal cullings and put governments on the defensive, in light of what we know about the abuse of bioweapons and gain-of-function research. We have every right to question the origins and true danger of a new “pandemic,” considering what we’ve learned and witnessed during the COVID-19 outbreak. We cannot let globalists destroy lives in the name of saving them.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Daily Caller / 6 hours ago

‘Embarrassingly Wrong’: Corporate Media’s Talking Heads Confess Their Biggest Blunders Of 2024

Canadian Energy Centre / 6 hours ago

Top 10 good news stories about Canadian energy in 2024

Bruce Dowbiggin / 19 hours ago

Latvia Loss Reminds That World Juniors No Longer Canadian Walkover

Digital ID

Age of online privacy coming to an end as Australia adopts digital ID

Published on December 28, 2024

By

 

 

By Didi Rankovic

 

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Defends Controversial Online Age Verification Digital ID Methods

Julie Inman Grant, Australia’s eSafety Commissioner (to her critics – the country’s chief censor), has attempted to explain how Online Safety Amendment – Social Media Minimum Age Bill 2024 – will be enforced.

The bill mandates online age verification, and bans minors under 16 from using social platforms, in what is described as “the strictest crackdown” yet in the world – with many in the world, no doubt, looking at how things pan out in Australia before they make their own restrictive moves.

The “small” question that remains to be answered Down Under now is – how does the government propose to determine the age of a person using an online platform, before the government orders them to be banned?

Grant may be trying to sell one method as less invasive, less potentially harmful, and otherwise controversial than another – but they appear to be as bad as each other, only in different ways.

“There are really only three ways you can verify someone’s age online, and that’s through ID, through behavioral signals, or through biometrics,” she told NPR.

The “ID” route means that every internet user would have to provide government-issued documents to platforms, revealing their real-world identity to these platforms and anyone else they’re in business with (such as governments and data brokers) and ending online anonymity for everyone.

And that, in fact, is the only sure-fire way to determine someone’s age. The other two produce estimates. The biometrics Grant mentions refer to uploading selfies to companies like Yoti, who then guess a user’s age.

Related: The 2024 Digital ID and Online Age Verification Agenda

Better than the “ID” method – that is, if you believe it’s a good idea for minors, or anyone, to just hand over biometric data to third parties.

Then, there are “behavioral signals” – and it sounds positively bonkers that a government would entertain the idea of deploying such technology on/against its citizens.

Grant said she met with yet another third party in the US – “an age assurance provider” – this unnamed company doesn’t monitor and analyze your facial features, but hand gestures. For age verification.

Like so: “Say you do a peace sign then a fist to the camera. It follows your hand movements. And medical research has shown that based on your hand movement, it can identify your age.”

One way to look at all this is that tech is being developed to step up online surveillance, while a flurry of “think of the children” laws may be here to legitimize and “legalize” that tech’s use.
Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Here’s How The Trump Admin Could Help Crush The Censorship Industry

Published on December 28, 2024

By

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Katelynn Richardson

The Trump administration has a major opportunity to deal a blow to the sprawling censorship industry, both inside the government and in the private sector.

Trump promised in a campaign video from Dec. 2022 to “shatter the left-wing censorship regime” by, among other proposals, signing an executive order banning agencies from collaborating with private platforms to suppress speech and ordering the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate parties involved in censorship.

“If Trump takes the steps that he has indicated he will, one focus of anti-censorship efforts I anticipate is nonprofits like the Atlantic Council and Stanford Internet Observatory [SIO] that operate as middlemen between the government and the tech companies,” New Civil Liberties Alliance attorney Jenin Younes told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “As President, Trump should ensure that the White House and his executive agencies do not work with these groups to censor ‘mis’ or ‘disinformation.’ In fact, all government efforts in the MDM [misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation] sphere should end, since this clearly results in suppressing First Amendment protected speech.”

Under the Biden administration, White House staff made explicit requests for platforms to restrict COVID-19 related speech. Other agencies participated in speech suppression, with the Center for Disease Control (CDC) flagging posts for removal and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) forwarding misinformation reports from local election officials to platforms, a practice they called “switchboarding.”

CISA likewise helped create of the Election Integrity Partnership in 2020, which the SIO played a key role in running, to monitor “misinformation” and report it to platforms during the 2020 election. A federal judge declined last week to dismiss a lawsuit against the SIO, along with several other groups, over their alleged targeting of conservative speech.

“Private entities cannot be permitted to partner with the government to censor Americans’ speech,” Nicholas R. Barry, America First Legal Senior Counsel, said in a statement.

Younes told the DCNF she would like to see “punishment for government actors who have violated Americans’ First Amendment rights.”

“At this time, such individuals manage to escape accountability for their actions because of doctrines like qualified immunity,” she said. “However, there can be exceptions to qualified immunity when government officials knowingly flout people’s civil rights, and those exceptions should be applied in the First Amendment context.”

Trump’s other suggestions included firing bureaucrats who have engaged in censorship, ensuring federal dollars do not go towards nonprofits and universities labeling domestic speech as misinformation and asking Congress to revise Section 230 to “get big online platforms out of censorship.”

The Biden administration has issued $267 million in grant funding for projects including the term “misinformation,” including $127 million specifically relating to COVID-19, according to a November Open The Books report. The DCNF reported in 2023 on several projects funded by the NSF to develop censorship tools, including a dashboard to forecast misinformation “trends” and another studying how misinformation influences online networks.

‘Smash This Censorship Cartel’

Many Trump nominees have been vocal about their commitment to promoting free speech.

Andrew Ferguson, who Trump selected as the new Federal Trade Commission (FTC) chair, said on War Room in late November that Trump can cut off some censorship outright, ordering officials to stop communicating with platforms and ending government funding for entities participating in speech suppression. But private censorship would likely move to “new fronts,” he noted, making it important for the FTC to take “investigative steps.”

Ferguson said “advertiser cartels” could violate antitrust laws by agreeing to boycott certain shows, podcasts and platforms.

“If the government is going to get out of the business here in the states of cooperating and colluding with the platforms to suppress the speech that they don’t like, then it’s up to the FTC to make sure that that sort of cooperation and collusion doesn’t move into the private sector,” Ferguson said.

Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Brennan Carr likewise said in a NewsNation interview that one of his top priorities would be to “smash this censorship cartel.”

Other appointees took strong stances on censorship. Jay Bhattacharya, Trump’s choice for National Institute for Health (NIH) head, co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration pushing back on COVID-19 lockdowns and responses. United States Department of Health and Human Services Secretary nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. brought his own lawsuit against the Biden administration for alleged First Amendment violations.

Harmeet Dhillon, who is set to run the DOJ’s civil rights division, worked with her firm on a case challenging the California Secretary of State’s Office coordination with Twitter to suppress speech.

Continued Litigation

While the Supreme Court found in June that plaintiffs who challenged the Biden administration’s censorship efforts failed to link their accounts’ restrictions to the government’s communications with platforms, the Missouri v. Biden lawsuit is ongoing. In November, the district court allowed the plaintiffs to pursue more discovery to establish the government’s involvement.

“Depending on the approach the Administration takes, it is conceivable that cases like ours could resolve in a consent decree, in which the government acknowledges its wrongdoing and takes various specific steps to safeguard against future violations of Americans’ First Amendment free speech rights,” Younes told the DCNF regarding the case.

The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) recently launched a new Center for Free Speech aimed at targeting censorship entities, pointing to the “new opportunity” free speech defenders will have as Trump takes office.

ADF Senior Counsel Phil Sechler told the DCNF the center is intended to create “substantial pushback on global censorship,” which he said has increased over the past decade by both private and government actors.

Potential targets include state level election laws, like the California laws targeting political satire that ADF already filed a lawsuit against on behalf of the Babylon Bee, along with debanking practices and other censorship by private actors.

“There is a lot of work to be done to dismantle this censorship industrial complex that’s been built up over many years,” Sechler told the DCNF.

Continue Reading

Trending

X