Bulletin N° 1042

“Fantasia: Sorcerer's Apprentice"
by Walt Disney Productions,
based on the poem of the same name by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and the musical piece by Paul Dukas.
This prescient depiction (originally expressed in Goethe’s 1797 poem “Der Zauberlehrling,”) of what ominous changes lie ahead for us when “artificial intelligence” governs “the supernatural marriage” of industrial production and the capitalist profit motive. In our age of advanced militarism, some critics opine that this out-of-control technology/ideology threatens us with wholesale genocide, if not extinction.




Subject: The Pathologies of Neoliberals and their Neoconservative Henchmen.




May 20, 2022


Dear Colleagues and Friends of CEIMSA,


The madness of our times is truly palpable. The usual escape hatches are locked shut, as the submarine is sinking and we gasp for air. By all evidence, the western ruling classes have collective suicide on their minds, as the only principled response to the collapse of US imperialism. Life after capitalism seems beyond their collective imagination. Instead we are asked to believe the incredible, to expect the improbable, to express our solidarity with hopelessly lost leaders and celebrate famous villains who have impoverished us and are condemning future generations to servitude and worse.

The contradictions inherent in the capitalist system have never been so apparent. And the shameful silence from collaborating with this madness is deafening. Talking more and saying less is another symptom of this maladie, as fear and anxiety unleashes new waves of hysteria.  

The real causes of this crisis remain largely unacknowledged . . . . (See corrective below.)


The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma,

and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health”

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (audio edition read by Bruce Wagner)


Audiobook, Part I

(the Dedication & Acknowledgements to Chapter 6)




Audiobook, Part II

(Chapter 7 to the Afterword)





”The Real Anthony Fauci

(1035 page electronic MS)



(L’édition française : Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates et Big Pharma - Leur guerre mondiale contre la démocratie et la santé publique, trans. par Pierre Barois)


Table of Contents

Dedications and Acknowledgements…viii


Chapter 1: Mismanaging a Pandemic…(con’d.)

Chapter 2: Pharma Profits over Public Health…118

Chapter 3: The HIV Pandemic Template for Pharma Profiteering…126

Chapter 4: The Pandemic Template: AIDS and AZT…148

Chapter 5: The HIV Heresies…178


Chapter 6: Burning The HIV Heretics…209

All about the Money.
Today, the presumption that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS is the central presumption of a multibillion-dollar industry. Everyone agrees that at least part of the explanation for its stupefying resilience is Dr. Fauci’s relentless flow of cash. Charles Ortleb observed to me, “Science costs money and he who dispenses the money can control the science.”

“Look, there’s no sociological mystery here,” observed Mullis. “It’s just people’s income and position being threatened by the things Peter Duesberg is saying. Their personal income and positions are being threatened and that’s why they’re so nasty. In the 1980s, a lot of people started being dependent on Tony Fauci and his friends for their livelihood. All these people really wanted success in the sense of lots of people working for them and lots of power.”

Bialy agrees: “First of all, there are tremendous financial and social interests involved. Billions of dollars in research funding, stock options, and activist budgets are predicated on the assumption that HIV causes AIDS. Entire industries of pharmaceutical drugs, diagnostic testing, and activist causes would have no reason to exist.”

The 2004 documentary The Other Side of AIDS includes a remarkable scene in which Canadian PI, Mark Wainberg, MD, president of the International AIDS Society (the world’s largest organization of AIDS researchers and clinicians), angrily calls for Duesberg and others who “attempt to dispel the notion that HIV is the cause of AIDS” to be “brought up on trial.” He considers HIV/AIDS skeptics “perpetrators of death.”

“I suggest to you that Peter Duesberg is the closest thing we have on this planet to a scientific psychopath.”

Then he declares the interview over, rips the microphone from his lapel, and storms off.

What happened next was revealing.

The audience erupted in laughter, which turned to boos as the screen flashed a list of Wainberg’s patents and other financial ties to the HIV industry.

Other Causes.
If HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, one is bound to ask, then what does? Leading scientists have advanced multiple credible theories to account for AIDS’s pathogenesis. I will examine three of the most compelling, beginning with Duesberg’s theory, since his explanation arrived first chronologically and inspired the largest and most influential following. Subsequent theories—including hypotheses promoted, ironically, by Robert Gallo and Luc Montagnier—have equal persuasive power but enjoyed meager public interest or support. Duesberg’s battle royal had demonstrated Dr. Fauci’s sizable power to destroy careers, and no one after Duesberg had the courage and appetite to challenge the “Little Director” by advancing new theories.

Duesberg’s Theory.
Duesberg, Mullis, and their school of critics blame all the lethal symptomology known as AIDS on a multiplicity of environmental exposures that became ubiquitous in the 1980s. The HIV virus, this group insists, was a kind of free rider that was also associated with overlapping lifestyle exposures. Duesberg and many who have followed him offered evidence that heavy recreational drug use in gay men and drug addicts was the real cause of immune deficiency among the first generation of AIDS sufferers. They argued that the initial signals of AIDS, Kaposi’s sarcoma and Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP), were both strongly linked to amyl nitrite—“poppers”—a popular drug among promiscuous gays. Other common “wasting” symptoms were all associated with heavy drug use and lifestyle stressors. (Those interested in exploring the debate should read Chapter 3, Virus Hunting Takes Over, of Duesberg’s riveting book Inventing the AIDS Virus.) Suffice it to say that Duesberg makes a compelling case, and his arguments deserve to be aired and civilly debated.

Dr. Duesberg observed that critical AIDS cases in the 1980s were among men engaged in behaviors then commonplace in the post-Stonewall, drug-charged gay party scene. Risk factors included promiscuous sex with multiple partners and cumulative toxic exposures from psychoactive drugs including methedrine, cocaine, heroin, LSD, and a cocktail of antibiotics prescribed to treat ubiquitous sexually transmitted diseases. On average, the early AIDS patients had been on at least three antibiotics courses in the year preceding diagnosis.

Some 35 percent of early AIDS cases were among IV drug users. In his paper “The Role of Drugs in the Origin of AIDS,” Duesberg cites over a dozen medical references documenting AIDS-like immunodeficiency symptoms among drug addicts since 1900. The medical literature attests to the ravaging effects of heroin, morphine, speed, cocaine, and other injected drugs on the immune system: “From as early as 1909 evidence has accumulated that addiction to psychoactive drugs leads to immune suppression (clinical autoimmunity), similar to AIDS.” Today, thousands of American junkies who are not infected with HIV are losing the same CD4+ T-cells and getting the same diseases as AIDS patients. STDs from promiscuous sex and blood-borne diseases like hepatitis A, B, and C added to the immune suppression among this cohort.

Duesberg’s theory was by no means novel or outlandish. Dr. Fauci himself conceded in 1984 that drugs were a reasonable explanation for PCP and other signature symptoms of AIDS: “If I were to take drugs that would markedly immunosuppress me, there would be a reasonably good chance that I would get that pneumonia. That’s what happens to the AIDS individuals.”

Poppers and Drugs.
Prior to Gallo’s “discovery” of HIV, the initial guess by government researchers and leading scientists was that recreational drugs were the prime suspects. Duke Medical School’s renowned infectious disease expert, Professor David Durack, who served on NIH’s Bioethics Committee, asked the (still relevant) question in his lead article in the December 1981 NEJM: How can AIDS be so evidently new, when viruses and homosexuality are as old as history? Recreational drugs, according to Durack, should be considered as causes: “They are widely used in the large cities where most of these cases have occurred. Perhaps as suggested one or more of these recreational drugs is an immunosuppressive agent.” Durack observed that, other than drug-using homosexuals, the only patients with AIDS symptoms were “junkies.” In Duesberg’s view, the highest risk addiction was the ubiquitous use of amyl nitrite poppers, which had well-established links with autoimmune disease.

The first AIDS cases were five gay men—all unknown to one another—diagnosed with a rare (PCP) pneumonia and Kaposi’s sarcoma, a form of cancer that had previously afflicted only elderly men. Dr. Michael Gottlieb, a researcher searching California hospitals for new diseases with unusual symptomology, is credited with the initial discovery and characterization of the disease and its epidemiologic context. in Los Angeles in 1981, by Dr. Michael Gottlieb, a researcher searching California hospitals for new diseases with unusual symptomology. The men were all promiscuous party enthusiasts in the “fast lane” gay lifestyle. They were taking many different recreational drugs simultaneously and combining drugs in excess of patterns among straight drug users. They frequented bars, clubs, and bathhouses. They had daily multiple anonymous sexual partners—upward of a thousand per year—and contracted most of the common sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis, gonorrhea, and hepatitis B. They were, therefore, also functionally addicted to a pharmacopoeia of antibiotic prescription medications; “all of that created a situation where a handful of gay men,” says Mark Gabrish Conlan “were burning the candle at
both ends and putting a blowtorch to the middle. It’s no wonder that after a while, their immune systems started to collapse and they started getting sick in these unusual ways that previously had only been seen in older people whose immune systems had deteriorated from age.”

John Lauritsen, a gay activist, was probably the longest-running AIDS journalist: “My first major AIDS article was in 1985. The very early AIDS cases were really quite sick, and there were very good reasons why they were sick.”

Lauritsen and many leading medical researchers and government health officials concluded early in the epidemic that poppers were the lead culprit. Chemists developed amyl nitrite as a vasodilator in the 1850s and began, in the 1960s, packaging it in glass ampules that doctors would pop open under the noses of unconscious patients to reanimate them. That same mechanism that prompted
reanimation provided the relaxation of the anal musculature and a powerful rush that made poppers the reigning sex drug.

Poppers became a mainstay of the gay social scene in the late 1970s. Prior to 1987, every AIDS patient acknowledged heavy consumption of poppers. Every porn shop, bar, and bathhouse locker room sold poppers. Party gays huffed them continuously in dance clubs and during extreme sex. The saloons and dance halls reeked of their pungent chemical aroma. At the end of each evening, bartenders routinely announced, “Last call for alcohol,” “Last call for Poppers.” Researchers believe poppers to be the direct cause of Kaposi’s sarcoma, a rare form of skin cancer that afflicts the nose, throat, lungs, and skin. Kaposi’s sarcoma was the initial indicator disease of AIDS, but it was also common in gay men who were not infected with HIV.

Poppers can severely damage the immune system, genes, lungs, liver, heart, or the brain; they can produce neural damage similar to that of multiple sclerosis, can have carcinogenic effects, and can lead to “sudden sniffing death.”

“I discovered there was a very extensive medical literature on the volatile nitrites,” Lauritsen explains. “The simplest thing is that they are very powerful oxidizing agents, which is part of AIDS causes; in fact, several types of anemia. Secondly, poppers are powerfully mutagenic and carcinogenic—meaning that they cause cellular changes and cancer. One of my informants, Filson—who was very active and outgoing in the People With AIDS Coalition—claimed that he had interviewed several hundred gay men with AIDS and he said that virtually all of them had been heavy users of drugs. They said without a single exception. They had all been poppers users.” A study published by Toby Eisenstein showed that nitrites found in poppers are radically immunosuppressive in rodents.

Government researchers and regulatory officials supported the association. Prior to Gallo’s announcement, CDC had targeted poppers as the likely culprit for AIDS. A year before Gallo’s announcement, CDC’s in-house AIDS expert Harry Haverkos analyzed three surveys of AIDS patients conducted by the CDC. He concluded that drugs like poppers played a key role in the disease onset. L. T. Sigell wrote in the American Journal of Psychiatry that the
inhaled nitrites produced nitrosamine known for its carcinogenic effects—Thomas Haley of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued the same warning.

Following Gallo’s 1984 press conference, Dr. Fauci launched a mission to quash all conversation about cofactors like poppers. The CDC quickly fell in line. The CDC shelved the Haverkos study and began parroting Dr. Fauci’s hostility toward the drug connection. The CDC actively suppressed disagreeable data and published one of its signature junk science papers to “prove” poppers safe. The CDC researchers assumed that gays used poppers as single-use reanimators and exposed laboratory mice to lifetime doses 1/1,000 of what a gay man would get in one evening on the party circuit. The study was “utterly fraudulent,” remarks Lauritsen. For a partial list of studies that tested the association of nitrites to AIDS, seeOppenheimer, In the Eye of the Storm, note 34, p. 295.

Haverkos transferred to the FDA in 1984 to become AIDS coordinator there. His paper finally appeared in the journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases in 1985, prompting the Wall Street Journal to pen an article arguing that substance abuse was so universal among AIDS patients that drug use, and not Dr. Fauci’s virus, must be considered the primary cause of AIDS.

According to Randy Shilts, writing in his classic history of the AIDS crisis, And the Band Played On, the poppers’ starting point offers a “compelling” explanation for AIDS. “Everybody who got diseases seemed to snort poppers,” writes Shilts.

As I wrote this book, Children’s Health Defense researcher Robyn Ross, Esq., alerted me to one of the unheralded ironies of this saga. As it turns out, Burroughs Wellcome holds the 1942 patent on the popper container and remained one of the largest manufacturers of poppers during the 1980s and ’90s. As early as 1977, a New York Daily News article described Burroughs Wellcome strategies for dodging criticism of widespread health injuries from its booming popper sales. As we shall presently see, Burroughs Wellcome and other popper manufacturers were the principal sources of advertising revenues to the gay press during that epoch, and they used that leverage to force censorship of any journalist attempting to link amyl nitrite to immune system collapse. If Duesberg and others are correct about that association, it means that Burroughs Wellcome was profiting from both causing the AIDS epidemic and then from poisoning a generation of gay men with the AZT “Cure.” Tony Fauci played traffic cop in this feedback loop. On the one hand, he was using his regulatory authority to promote AZT, and to kill its competition, effectively orchestrating Burroughs Wellcome’s monopoly control over AIDS treatment. At the same time, he was suppressing the study of the toxicity of poppers and directing the blame for AIDS on the virus, thereby shielding Burroughs Wellcome from significant liability.

Kaposi’s Sarcoma.
In 1990, four leading scientists at the CDC suggested in theLancet that Kaposi’s sarcoma was common in young gay men who indisputably did not have HIV. They concluded that KS—the disease most central to the definition of AIDS—“may be caused by an as yet unidentified infectious agent, transmitted mainly by sexual contact.”

This was a stunning development, because KS was the initial and defining symptom of AIDS. Prior to 1981, KS was a disease limited to very old people. Its sudden appearance in young men was the identifying signal that launched the AIDS crisis. It was fundamental doctrine within the medical establishment that KS was the diagnostic signal of the AIDS pandemic. The very existence of AIDS was inextricably linked to KS. If HIV was not responsible for the
outbreak of Kaposi’s Sarcoma, then there had to be another culprit. That insurmountable logic raised the question of whether poppers might also be causing the other symptoms of AIDS— particularly the other major manifestation, immunosuppression, which science also linked to amylnitrite.

While publicly cleaving to Dr. Fauci’s official HIV/AIDS orthodoxy, Robert Gallo himself privately signaled doubts about his own theory that HIV alone can cause either Kaposi’s sarcoma or AIDS. At a high-level meeting of US health authorities in 1994—titled “Do Nitrites Act as a CoFactor in Kaposi’s Sarcoma?”—Gallo made some astonishing confessions to his trusted colleagues. HIV, he acknowledged, might only be a “catalytic factor” in Kaposi’s: “There must be something else involved.” Then he added a breathtaking concession, which could have been taken from the very research in Duesberg’s article: “I don’t know if I made this point clear, but I think that everybody here knows—we never found HIV DNA in tumor cells of KS. So this is not directly transforming. And in fact, we’ve never found HIV DNA in T cells although we’ve only looked at a few. So, in other words we’ve never seen the role of HIV as a transforming virus in any way.”

One attendee of that meeting was Harry Haverkos, by then director of the AIDS department at National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Haverkos observed to Gallo that not a single case of Kaposi’s sarcoma had been reported among blood recipients where the donor had Kaposi’s sarcoma. If blood transfusions couldn’t spread the disease, Haverkos said, then semen exchanges could hardly be a plausible culprit. In response, Gallo allowed: “The nitrites (poppers)could be the primary factor.”

To fully appreciate the seismic implications of Gallo’s statement, we must recall that, in wealthy nations like the United States and Germany, Kaposi’s sarcoma was— along with PCP—the signature disease for diagnosing patients with “AIDS.” In 1987, for example, Der Spiegel described AIDS patients as the “sarcoma-covered skeletons” from the “same-sex scene.”

By 1990, government regulators were already scrambling to drop Kaposi’s sarcoma from the AIDS definitions. “At present, it is accepted [even by CDC
scientists] that HIV plays no role, either directly or indirectly, in the causation of Kaposi’s sarcoma,” wrote Australian biologist and AIDS expert Eleni Papadopulos in 2004.This was a momentous “bait and switch.” Kaposi’s was the AIDS-defining illness. “In the beginning,” says Farber, “AIDS was Kaposi’s sarcoma.” Because its association with AIDS was so well established, the official concession that the two conditions are distinct has never
penetrated the reigning orthodoxy. Kaposi’s sarcoma remains part of the official AIDS definition in industrialized countries (anyone with KS and a positive test result counts as an AIDS patient)—and, contrary to the facts, mainstream media outlets like the New Yorker still report that “Kaposi’s sarcoma is a sign of AIDS” (i.e., HIV causes KS).

AZT as Culprit.
After 1987, Dr. Duesberg and his followers argue, the vast majority of “AIDS deaths” were actually caused by AZT—Dr. Fauci’s radical “antiretroviral” chemotherapy purposefully concocted to kill human cells. Duesberg describes the syndrome as “AIDS by AZT.” Ironically, he argued AZT, the highly toxic medication that Dr. Fauci was prescribing to treat AIDS patients, actually does what the virus cannot—that is, it causes AIDS itself.

In a rational universe populated by critical thinkers, Duesberg’s suspicion that AZT causes immune collapse should never have seemed revelatory. The FDA, after all, had deemed AZT too toxic to use for even short-term cancer therapy. AZT is highly mutagenic, meaning that it destroys the genes themselves. It causes cancer in rodents. It targets the bone marrow where blood cells called lymphocytes are made. These are the very cells that an AIDS patient needs most for immunity. AZT randomly destroys bones, kidneys, livers, muscle tissue, the brain, and the central nervous system.

Cancer patients typically take chemo drugs for only two weeks. Thanks to Tony Fauci’s Fischl study, doctors were now prescribing AZT for life!  “Chemotherapy,” says Duesberg, “is restricted to a few months. The hope is that the cancer dies before you die.”

Duesberg believes that AZT was not only causing AIDS, it was killing more people than had previously been dying from autoimmunity caused by recreational drugs. “AZT is causing AIDS and its defining diseases. It doesn’t cause Kaposi’s sarcoma. But it does cause immune deficiency. It was designed to do that. In fact, the manufacturer says specifically that it can cause ‘AIDS-like diseases.’” Burroughs Wellcome’s insert warns that it is “often difficult
to distinguish adverse events possibly associated with administration of RETROVIR (AZT) from underlying signs of HIV disease or intercurrent illnesses.” In other words, even the company acknowledges that AZT causes the diseases that define AIDS.

“If you start taking any other chemotherapeutic agent for the rest of your life, it would be that agent probably to kill you,” Kary Mullis observed. “When you give chemotherapy to somebody with cancer, you give them a round of it for maybe fourteen days or a few days. Hopefully, you’re not going to kill the patient. You’re going to kill the cancer. Patient’s going to survive. But you don’t keep giving it to him until he dies, because he certainly will.” Luc Montagnier makes this same point about HIV: “Any drug active on HIV will be toxic because it’s not 100 percent specific of the HIV enzymes.”

If Duesberg is right, AIDS is an iatrogenic (doctor-caused) pandemic, and Dr. Fauci would be its author. It wouldn’t be the first one. Historically, there are many examples of prescribed medicines causing worse injuries than their target disease. The notorious Tuskegee Experiment (1932–1973), which my uncle, Senator Ted Kennedy, exposed and ended in 1973, began as an effort by public health regulators to unravel which syphilis symptoms were from the spirochete bacterium and which were from the mercury “cure” that doctors had, by then, been prescribing for more than 500 years. As it turned out, the most deadly and debilitating symptom of syphilis—the lethal second-stage neuropathy—was actually acute mercury toxicity, not surprising since mercury is nature’s most toxic substance.

“AIDS is a chronic long-term breakdown of the immune system that can be caused by multiple factors,” says Mark Gabrish Conlan, gay historian, publisher, “generally more than one of them operating within any particular person with AIDS or with what has been described as AIDS. And at the top of that, in the west would be recreational drug use, also pharmaceutical drug use and repeated infections, including with diseases that are genuinely sexually
transmitted, repeated antibiotic treatments for these: a lifestyle that involves a lot of partying, lack of nutrition, and in the less-developed world, AIDS is primarily disease of malnutrition, starvation, and the endemic infections that have been part of those environments for years.”

Drs. Duesberg, Willner, and others believed that AZT killed tens of thousands of Americans between 1986 and 1996 before less toxic chemotherapy drugs were introduced, causing far more fatalities than the immune deficiencies associated with the recreational drugs during the first wave of the AIDS pandemic. A scientific study in the New England Journal of Medicine article in late July 1987 headlined “The Toxicity of Azidothymidine (AZT) in the Treatment of Patients with AIDS and AIDS-Related Complex,” and a comprehensive investigation by The Independent of London in May 1993, “The rise and fall of AZT,” both supported Duesberg’s theory that AZT was a deadly killer of dubious efficacy against amorphous AIDS.

Rudolf Nureyev and Arthur Ashe.
Rudolf Nureyev, greatest ballet dancer of all time, was friends with my parents. He visited our family home in the 1960s and ’70s. Against his doctor’s advice, he began taking AZT. Nureyev was HIV-positive, but otherwise in robust health. His personal physician, Michel Canesi, recognized the deadly effects of AZT and warned Nureyev not to take the drug. But Nureyev insisted, “I want that drug!” He became sick soon after commencing treatment and died in Paris in 1993 at age fifty-four.

That year, former Wimbledon champion Arthur Ashe also died at age forty-nine. Ashe was also a family friend and a regular fixture at our family home at Hickory Hill and Hyannis Port. A heterosexual, Ashe learned he was HIV- positive in 1988. His doctor prescribed an extremely high AZT dose. In October 1992, Arthur wrote a column for the Washington Post voicing his extreme misgivings about AZT. “The confusion for AIDS patients like me is that there is a growing school of thought that HIV may not be the sole cause of AIDS, and that standard treatments such as AZT actually make matters worse,” Ashe acknowledged, adding, “There may very well be unknown cofactors, but the medical establishment is too rigid to change the direction of basic research and/or clinical trials.” Ashe wanted to stop taking AZT, but he didn’t dare: “What will I tell my doctors?” he asked the New York Daily News.

If Arthur Ashe’s suspicions and Duesberg’s suppositions are correct, Dr. Fauci would be the father of the AIDS pandemic and responsible for prolific deaths. So that story must never be found to be true.

Is AZT Mass Murder?

There is little question that the character of AIDS changed dramatically in the early 1990s with the proliferation of AZT. Kaposi’s sarcoma uncoupled from the disease and AIDS cases began to look increasingly like AZT poisoning.

“Then at a certain point, when really that sort of AIDS virtually ceased to exist, there came a new type of AIDS,” says John Lauritsen. “So they expanded the definition, and also they began giving the anti-HIV drugs to people who were in fact not even sick, but merely positive on the HIV test. And in that case, of course, when they finally became sick enough from the AIDS drugs they were called ‘AIDS patients.’ I would simply have to say that my main concern is the gay men, who have been murdered,” Lauritsen observed. “I don’t think ‘murder’ is too strong a word to use when you have a drug like AZT and all the
nucleoside analogues that followed, more or less on its coat tail, approved on the basis of fraudulent research, and where, as you know, Joseph Sonnabend said, ‘AZT is incompatible with life.’ Well, if it’s incompatible with life, it’s a poison and if it’s a poison that kills people, in context like that, it is murder.”


Concurring with Sonnaband’s assessment, John Lauritsen accuses Dr. Fauci of conducting genocides against gay men and Black Africans. The evidence seems to indicate that the proliferation of AZT increased death rates from “AIDS” dramatically.

The annual mortalities from so-called AIDS during the early years of the pandemic for 1983–1987—prior to AZT’s approval—were lower, perhaps ten to fifteen thousand people in a country of 250 million. It wasn’t until the late 1980s, when Dr. Fauci’s AZT came along, that the number of deaths attributed to AIDS shot up.

According to the CDC, in the fifth full year of AIDS, 1986, 12,205 people “with” AIDS died in the United States. At that time, CDC—in a now-familiar scheme to stoke pandemic fears—used deceptive protocols to inflate the
body counts. The CDC’s mortality numbers include anyone with an HIV positive antibody “status,” even if the deceased had no “AIDS defining illness,” and instead succumbed to suicide, a drug overdose, a car accident, or a heart attack.

The death rate climbed precipitously after the commercial introduction of AZT. In 1987, “AIDS” deaths rose by 46 percent with 16,469 people dying. In 1988, as more and more people received AZT, the death toll rose to 21,176, and then to 27,879 in 1989. Death rates rose to 31,694 in 1990, and 37,040 in 1991. At the end of the 1980s, HHS’s standard prescription for AZT was 1,500 mg a day. In 1988, the average survival time for patients taking AZT was four months. Even mainstream medicine couldn’t overlook the fact that the administration of higher doses led to much higher death rates. At the beginning of the 1990s, health officials lowered the daily dose to 500 mg. The average lifespan of AZT patients rose to twenty-four months in 1997, as deaths attributed to AIDS plummeted. Afterwards. CDC changed its counting metrics to make it difficult to count annual AIDS deaths.

In his history of the era, historian Terry Michaels wrote, “. . . the CDC, for the years between about 1986 and 1996, created the illusion that tens of thousands in America died from AIDS or HIV in that decade, rather than AZT and other ‘monotherapy’ nucleoside analog drugs.”

According to Dr. Claus Köhnlein, MD, a German internist and coauthor of Virus Mania, “Most of the deaths attributed to AIDS, or HIV disease as eventually it would be called, from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s were the result of iatrogenic illness, resulting from prescription of high dose, toxic, DNA chain-terminating chemotherapy, specifically, azidothymidine (AZT) ending in premature death for scores of thousands of ‘HIV positive’ gay men, plus many hemophiliacs, IV drug users, Sub-Saharan Africans, and a few heterosexuals unlucky enough to have taken the specious HIV test, like the late tennis star, Arthur Ashe, who died in 1993.” Köhnlein observes, “The treatment causes a very similar condition we would expect from an AIDS patient. That’s why nobody noticed that there was something wrong with the treatment.”

The HIV dissent movement, propagandistically rendered the HIV “denialist” movement by the AIDS research establishment and media, was somewhat less under siege in Europe than in the United States.

The HIV establishment was transnational, sparking and condemning as a unified globalist voice. However, in European countries where funding is less reliable upon Dr. Fauci’s approval, dissenting professionals could generally keep working, without intelligence to the state apparatus.

Dr. Claus Köhnlein, an oncologist from Kiel, Germany, was less subject to the financial discipline by the state actors or the political hysteria that was censoring dissident scientists in the United States and was in some ways more of a threat to the HIV propaganda juggernaut than even Peter Duesberg, as he spoke from direct clinical experience. Köhnlein saw his first AIDS patients in 1990 and treated several hundred over the decades in his very conventional Kiel clinic. Ignoring “HIV,” and instead treating each symptom, he got almost all of his patients out alive. “I lost maybe a handful,” he said in an email, when contacted for this book.

His views on AZT were unequivocal. “We virtually killed a whole generation of AIDS patients without even noticing it because the symptoms of the AZT intoxication were almost indistinguishable from AIDS,” he said in one interview. He elucidated during an RT interview in 2010, during a “Rethink” conference in Vienna, “When I worked at the University in Kiel, I witnessed the mass intoxication of the patients with AZT. AZT was the first recommended treatment, and we all know today that the dosage was much too high. We gave 1500 mg on a daily basis and that literally killed everybody that took this treatment. That is the reason why everybody believes that HIV is a deadly virus but there is still no proof of this assumption.”

The reporter was incredulous, so Köhnlein elaborated, “They were all over-treated at that time and the reason why doctors didn’t notice it was easy to explain because the placebo control was stopped after four months,” he replied. “It was said that for ethical reasons nobody can withhold AZT treatment. After these four months the mortality rose tremendously in both groups.

“This mistreatment was the very reason why everybody believed HIV [to be] a deadly virus and that HIV positive tests put everybody at equal risk, which is completely nonsense. So, a healthy pregnant mother today, an HIV positive pregnant mother, is told she carries the same deadly virus as a hopeless . . . IV drug addict.”

In an email, Köhnlein pegged the evidence against both HIV theory and AZT to three studies:

“Harm is usually underreported,” he wrote. “To prove it you need
three studies: The AZT licensing Fischl study, the Hemophiliac
study in Nature where [editor] John Maddox showed that the HIV
positive hemophiliacs started dying only the very year AZT was
introduced. And lastly, the Concorde Lancet study which
showed: the more AZT, the more Death.”

In his Oct. 30, 2020 exposé, “The Other Media Blackout,”Wall Street Journal columnist and editorial board member Holman W. Jenkins Jr. complained that the medical community has failed “to acknowledge complicity in poisoning hundreds of thousands of human beings. The illness and death that resulted from high AZT doses administered in the 1980s and 1990s is irrefutable.”

“From my personal contacts with people in the field,” says Dr. David Rasnick, PhD, an AIDS researcher, chemist, and designer of protease inhibitors, “I can tell you that I’ve found no evidence anywhere that people live longer, better lives who take these anti-HIV drugs, these protease inhibitors, either alone or in cocktails, as compared to a similar group of HIV-positive people who do not take these drugs. So I do not know where the evidence is for the claims that you see in New York Times or on CNN, or wherever you see it that people are living longer, better lives as a consequence of taking these drugs.”

Duesberg points out that the annual mortality rate of HIV-positives undergoing antiviral therapy is 7 to 9 percent —far higher than the mortality rate of all HIV-positives worldwide, at about 1 to 2 percent per year. Furthermore, there is ample evidence that treated HIV-positives die much faster of liver failure or cardiac failure than both HIV-infected individuals and AIDS patients who
do not take AZT.

Gays Join Dr. Fauci.
In marshaling institutional resistance to dissent from the growing cadre of prominent scientists and doctors, Dr. Fauci found an unlikely ally: the AIDS community.

Beginning after his 1987 reconciliation with Larry Kramer in Toronto, Dr. Fauci quickly moved to build financial bridges to gay leadership and quiet dissent from AIDS activists. That year, he began by funding ACT UP and amfAR and leading AIDS activists, like Kramer and Martin Delaney. NIAID funneled extravagant annual public education grants to advocacy groups. The funding effectively muted their criticisms of Dr. Fauci.

The AIDS establishment—hospitals, medical and research centers, and pharmaceutical companies—created opulently paid consulting contracts for important members of gay organizations. The gay community thereby became powerful gatekeepers for the AIDS establishment.

Other political, economic, and ideological rationales helped Dr. Fauci recruit gay community leaders to his campaign to build a cancel culture against Duesberg and drown out his voice in the liberal mainstream press. In an era when Christian conservatism was so powerful that it credibly claimed to have put Ronald Reagan in the White House, ideology and medical opinions attributing the “gay disease” to orgies and excess partying tended to feed anti-
gay bigotry. The gay community, therefore, happily endorsed Dr. Fauci’s one-bug theory.

There were compelling mercantile drivers, as well. During the 1970s, the principal financial supports of the gay press were ads for the $50,000,000-a-year popper industry and for the bars that flourished on popper sales.

As Ian Young explains in “The Poppers Story: The Rise and Fall and Rise of The Gay Drug,” in Steam, “During the seventies and early eighties, much of the gay press, including the most influential glossy publications, came to rely on poppers ads for a huge chunk of its revenue, and poppers became an accepted part of gay sex. There was even a comic strip called Poppers, by Jerry Mills. The unwritten agreement was almost never breached: poppers ads appeared only in gay publications.”

The gay press glossed over urgent medical warnings from scientists about the dangers of poppers. The Advocate, a popular US magazine for homosexuals, refused to print letters from dissident scientists like Duesberg while accepting parades of poppers advertisements from Great Lakes Products, the era’s largest manufacturer of sex drugs. Those advertisements exonerated poppers from any connection to AIDS, openly declaring them harmless. Pharmaceutical companies including Hoffmann-La Roche invested money in the gay community with innumerable advertisements for AIDS medications. Burroughs Wellcome ran an ad for poppers calling amyl nitrite (i.e., poppers) “the real thing.” Gay publications and organizations continued to promote poppers and censure stories about their health risks.

His historical cultivation of relationships with gay leaders was one of the factors that made Dr. Fauci a darling of liberals during the early COVID crisis. Numerous other historical and personal factors induced liberals to accept Dr. Fauci without scrutiny. Blind faith in Saint Anthony Fauci may go down in history as the fatal flaw of contemporary liberalism and the destructive force that subverted American democracy, our constitutional government, and global leadership.(pp.220-231)

. . .

In her book, Science Sold Out: Does HIV Really Cause AIDS?, Rebecca Culshaw writes, “The persistence of this intellectually bankrupt theory in the public mind is attributable entirely to the campaign of fear, discrimination, and terror that has been waged aggressively by a powerful group of people whose sole motivation was and is behavior control. Yes, the money and the vast interests of the pharmaceutical industry and government-funded scientists are important, but the seeds of the HIV/AIDS hypothesis are sowed with fear. If the fear were to end, the myth would end.”(p.237)


Chapter 7: Dr. Fauci, Mr. Hyde: NIAID’s Barbaric and Illegal Experiments on Children…243

“The Nazi medical experiments are an example of this sadism, for in
the use of concentration camp inmates and prisoners of war as
human guinea pigs very little, if any, benefit to science was achieved.
It is a tale of horrors of which the German medical profession cannot
be proud. Although the ‘experiments’ were conducted by fewer than
two hundred murderous quacks— albeit some of them held eminent
posts in the medical world—their criminal work was known to
thousands of leading physicians of the Reich, not a single one of
whom, so far as the record shows, ever uttered the slightest public

                                                                 —William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich


Science advances one funeral at a time.”

                                                                 —Max Planck


During the nearly four decades since Dr. Anthony Fauci took the agency’s reins, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) has often treated America’s most vulnerable children as collateral damage in its director’s single-minded pursuit of profitable pharmacological solutions for steadily declining public health. AZT’s sketchy and corrupt path to regulatory approval in 1988 blazed a trail for a multibillion-dollar boom in new HIV drugs, and Dr. Fauci gave broad leeway to his pharmaceutical partners and their PIs to conduct unethical human experimentation that exposed both children and adults to toxic compounds.

The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and its predecessor agency, the Public Health Service, already had a long history of morally repugnant experiments on vulnerable subjects, including imprisoned convicts, institutionalized adults with intellectual disabilities, and orphaned children in hellholes like Staten Island’s Willowbrook and the Fernald School in Waltham, Massachusetts. In 1973, Dr. Stanley Plotkin penned a letter to the New England Journal of Medicine in which he justified his experiments on vulnerable intellectually disabled children, saying they “are humans in form but not in social potential.” Those sorts of prejudices did nothing to damage his lofty reputation among his colleagues. Vaccinologists consider the annual Stanley Plotkin Award the Nobel Prize of vaccinology. In 2019, the British Medical Journal called Plotkin “the Godfather of vaccines.” Thesehomegrown American medical Mengeles most often targeted impoverished American Indians and Blacks in Africa, the Caribbean, and in the United States as their laboratory rats. I am proud that my uncle, Senator Edward Kennedy, played a key role in ending the government’s forty-year Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (begun in 1932), another notorious medical research assault on a vulnerable population, when he learned about it in 1972 from a CDC whistleblower.

Government regulators and their pharmaceutical industry partners often combined racial discrimination with child abuse in HHS’s drug and vaccine development campaigns. During the government/industry polio vaccine experiments of the 1950s–1960s, US vaccinologists like Hilary Koprowski and Stanley Plotkin worked with Belgian colonial authorities in the Congo to recruit millions of Black African child “volunteers” for dozens of mass-population trials with experimental vaccines that were perhaps considered to be too risky to test on white children. As late as 1989, the CDC conducted lethal experiments with a hazardous measles vaccine on Black children in Cameroon, Haiti, and South-Central Los Angeles, killing dozens of little girls before halting the program. CDC did not tell “volunteers” that they were participating in an experiment. In 2014, another CDC whistleblower, the agency’s senior vaccine safety scientist, Dr. William Thompson, disclosed that top CDC officials had forced him and four other senior researchers to lie to the public and destroy data that showed disproportionate vaccine injuries—including a 340 percent elevated risk for autism—in Black male infants who received the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR) vaccine on schedule. So it was only natural that Dr. Fauci and his Pharma partners employed Black and Hispanic foster children for cruel and barbaric treatments in their efforts to develop their second-generation antivirals and chimeric HIV vaccines that provided the initial stepping-stones for his career.

In 1989, Dr. Fauci declined President George H. W. Bush’s offer to become NIH director, explaining, “I was training for the AIDS epidemic before it even happened. My being involved with it has been my passion and my life’s work.” Dr. Fauci’s philanthropic demurrer might have been disingenuous. By then, his power as NIAID director dwarfed the authority wielded by his nominal boss at NIH. His successful early machinations during the AIDS drugboom had won NIAID a massive discretionary budget and global influence over scientific research and international health policy, including de facto control over its sister HHS agencies, FDA and CDC. The NIAID directorship also offered dizzying publicity opportunities and lucrative partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as NIAID became Pharma’s chief incubator and collaborator in new drug development and promotion. Biocontainment handling expert and trainer Sean Kaufman, who designed and built mock biosafety level (BSL) laboratories for NIAID in the mid-2000s, is a longtime admirer of Dr. Fauci and trained hundreds of BSL workers in safety protocols for NIAID. Kaufman told me, “Everyone knows that Dr. Fauci runs the whole show at HHS. All the other agency heads are figureheads. Tony Fauci pulls all the strings.”

Jonathan Fishbein, MD, who served as head of the Division of AIDS (DAIDS) Office of Policy in Clinical Research Operations from 2003–2005, told me that Fauci’s expanding influence seemed to eclipse that of his boss, NIH Director Dr. Elias Zerhouni: “When Zerhouni could have taken the high road and righted the misconduct that I exposed in the Division of AIDS, he chose to stay uninvolved. Fauci is a master at marketing himself and his Institute and leveraged AIDS to generate huge appropriations from Congress to the NIH. Who would ever have stood up to him? Certainly not Zerhouni or his  successors! NIAID money is spread throughout the major medical institutions in the United States and for that reason, he wields enormous influence in the medical community.”

Dr. Fauci’s corrupt collaboration with pharmaceutical companies that yielded NIAID’s scandalous approval of AZT in 1987 consolidated his symbiotic relationship with the Pharma PIs and lowered NIAID’s standards for product approvals. His relationships with his PIs and their Pharma patrons yielded a cascade of beneficial personal opportunities, and Dr. Fauci quickly learned to overlook Pharma’s excesses. The 1980 Bayh–Dole Act allowed NIAID—and Dr. Fauci personally—to file patents on the hundreds of new drugs that his agency-funded PIs were incubating, and then to license those drugs to pharmaceutical companies and collect royalties on their sales. NIAID’s drug development enterprise quickly eclipsed HHS’s regulatory function. Millions of dollars began flowing in from drug royalties to NIH and to NIAID’s high-level personnel, including Dr. Fauci—further blurring the boundaries between public health and Pharma profits.

According to an exposé by the Associated Press, “In all, 916 current and former NIH researchers are receiving royalty payments for drugs and other inventions they developed while working for the government.” That investigation concluded that scientists and administrators at the National Institutes of Health flagrantly disregard ethical and legal requirements of financial disclosure.

Financial conflicts with pharmaceutical companies quickly became the defining feature of Dr. Fauci’s governance style. As early as 1992, a Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General investigation concluded that NIAID failed to police conflicts of interest by his PIs in a vaccine clinical trial.

All that new NIH and NIAID money made clinical trials a vast, booming industry. Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav spent her long career investigating abusive human experiments by NIAID and other agencies. Sharav told me,“Beginning around 1990, clinical trials became the profit center for the medical community. The insurance industry and HMOs were squeezing doctors so that it became hard  to make big money practicing medicine. The most ambitious doctors left patient care and gravitated toward clinical trials. Everybody involved was making money except the subjects of the human experiments. At the center of everything was NIH and NIAID. While people were not paying attention, the agency quietly became the partner of the industry.”

Pharma’s ethics quickly pervaded and corrupted NIAID’s culture. The agency routinely overlooked and often sanctioned and engaged in routine manipulation of science to “prove” efficacy of dangerous and ineffective drugs. Callous disregard toward suffering and deaths among clinical trial volunteers became a feature of NIAID’s modus operandi.

According to the AP investigation, NIH scientists who violate ethical and legal requirements and use underhanded recruitment tactics pose a very real and
present threat to public safety: “hundreds, perhaps thousands, of patients in NIH experiments made decisions to participate in experiments that often carry risks without full knowledge about the researchers’ financial interests.”

In 2004, investigative journalist Liam Scheff chronicled Dr. Fauci’s secretive experiments on hundreds of HIV-positive foster children at Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC) in New York City and numerous sister facilities in New York and six other states between 1988 and 2002.11 Those experiments were the core of Dr. Fauci’s career-defining effort to develop a second generation of profitable AIDS drugs as an encore to AZT.

Scheff described how Dr. Fauci’s NIAID and his Big Pharma partners turned Black and Hispanic foster kids into lab rats, subjecting them to torture and abuse in a grim parade of unsupervised drug and vaccine studies: “This former convent houses a revolving stable of children who’ve been removed from their own homes by the Agency for Child Services [ACS]. These children are Black, Hispanic, and poor. Many of their mothers had a history of drug abuse and have died. Once taken into ICC, the children become subjects of drug trials sponsored by [Dr. Anthony Fauci’s] NIAID (National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Disease, a division of the NIH), NICHD (the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development) in conjunction with some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies–– laxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Genentech, Chiron/Biocine and others.”

NIAID’s Pharma partners remunerated Incarnation Children’s Center (ICC) for supplying children for the tests. As usual, Dr. Fauci had the safety oversight board rigged with his loyal PIs, foremost of whom was Dr. Stephen Nicholas, a generously funded NIAID AIDS drug researcher. “Stephen Nicholas was not only director of the ICC until 2002; he also simultaneously sat on the Pediatric Medical Advisory Panel, which was supposed to oversee the tests—which signifies a serious conflict of interest,” criticizes Vera Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP), a medical industry watchdog organization.

Scheff continued, “The drugs being given to the children are toxic—they’re known to cause genetic mutation, organ failure, bone marrow death, bodily deformations, brain damage, and fatal skin disorders.

“If the children refuse the drugs, they’re held down and force fed. If the children continue to resist, they’re taken to Columbia Presbyterian hospital, where a surgeon puts a plastic tube through their abdominal wall into their stomachs. From then on, the drugs are injected directly into their intestines.

“In 2003, two children, ages six and twelve, had debilitating strokes due to drug toxicities. The six-year-old went blind. They both died shortly after. Another fourteen-year-old died recently. An eight-year-old boy had two plastic surgeries to remove large, fatty, drug-induced lumps from his neck.”

“This isn’t science fiction. This is AIDS research.”

Even the foster children who survived Fauci’s experiments reported dire side effects, ranging from skin outbreaks and hives, nausea, and vomiting, to sharp drops in immune response and fevers—all common adverse reactions associated with the drugs he was targeting for development.

During one of his trials involving the drug Dapsone, at least ten children died. A May 2005 Associated Press investigation reported that those “children died from a variety of causes, including four from blood poisoning.” Researchers complained they were unable to determine a safe, useful dosage. Their guessing game cost those children their lives.

“An unexpected finding in our study,” the researchers pitilessly observed, “was that overall mortality while receiving the study drug was significantly higher in the daily Dapsone group.” NIAID researchers shrugged off the deaths as a mystery: “This finding remains unexplained.”

Vera Sharav spent years investigating Dr. Fauci’s torture chambers as part of her lifelong mission to end cruel medical experimentation on children. Sharav told me, “Fauci just brushed all those dead babies under the rug. They were collateral damage in his career ambitions. They were throw-away children.” Sharav said that at least eighty children died in Dr. Fauci’s Manhattan concentration camp and accused NIAID and its partners of disposing of children’s remains in mass graves.

BBC’s heartbreaking 2004 documentary, Guinea Pig Kids, chronicles the savage barbarity of Dr. Fauci’s science projects from the perspective of the affected children. That year, BBC hired investigative reporter Celia Farber to conduct field research for the film, which exposes the dark underside of Big Pharma’s stampede to develop lucrative new AIDS remedies. “I found the mass grave at Gate of Heaven cemetery in Hawthorne, New York,” she told me. “I couldn’t believe my eyes. It was a very large pit with AstroTurf thrown over it, which you could actually lift up. Under it one could see dozens of plain wooden coffins, haphazardly stacked. There may have been 100 of them. I learned there was more than one child’s body in each. Around the pit was a semi-circle of several large tombstones on which upward of one thousand children’s names had been engraved. I wrote down every name. I’m still wondering who the rest of those kids were. As far as I know, nobody has ever asked Dr. Fauci that haunting question.

“I remember the teddy bears and hearts in piles around the pit and I recall the flies buzzing around. The job of recording all those names took all day. NIAID, New York, and all the hospital PIs were stonewalling us. We couldn’t get any accurate estimate of the number of children who died in the NIAID xperiments, or who they were. I went to check the gravestone names against death certificates at the NYC Department of Health, which you could still do at that time. BBC wanted to match these coffins to the names of children who were known to have been at ICC. It was a very slow, byzantine project with tremendous institutional resistance, but we did turn up a few names. We learned the story of a father who had come out of prison looking for his son. He was told his son had died at ICC of AIDS and there were no medical records, as they’d all been ‘lost in a fire.’He was devastated. This story ran in the NY Post, believe it or not. But one after the other, every media outlet that touched this story got cold feet. Even then, the medical cartel had this power to kill this kind of story. Dr. Fauci has built his career on that attitude. Nobody even asks him a follow-up question. NIAID’s narrative, at that time, was that these children were among the doomed as they ‘had AIDS,’ so supposedly they were all going to die anyway. When people died, in large numbers, gruesome deaths, NIAID’s medical researchers called it ‘lessons learned.’”

Two years later, Farber would follow the trail of child casualties left by Dr. Fauci’s AIDS branch, DAIDS, in Uganda, exposing the pattern of abusing African mothers and children.

After the BBC documentary aired, AP reporter John Solomon made his own efforts to calculate the number of children who died in Dr. Fauci’s AIDS drug experiments. Solomon’s May 2005 AP investigation revealed that at least 465 NYC foster children were subjects in NIAID’s trials and that Dr. Fauci’s agency provided fewer than one-third (142) of those children with an advocate—the minimum legally mandated protection.

A March 2004 letter from Vera Sharav to Dr. David Horowitz, director of FDA’s Office of Compliance, charged Dr. Fauci’s HIV drug trials with numerous violations of federal law, including NIAID’s failure to protect the rights and safety of foster children, particularly during the perilous Phase I stages in which drug companies determine toxicity effects by exploring maximum tolerance levels. Sharav accused Dr. Fauci’s team of illegally failing to provide state wards and orphans with independent guardians to represent their interests and protect their rights during brutal, dangerous, and often agonizingly painful experiments.

The 2004 FDA investigation of Dr. Fauci’s AIDS research division urged the head of NIH to insist on better management from NIAID. “The overall  management of this Division requires careful review,” the report said. A May 2005 Congressional hearing also concluded that NIAID’s experiments had violated federal statutes.

In testimony before Congress, NIAID and its local partner—New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services (ACS)—sought to justify the unethical research practices by claiming they were providing first-class, cutting-edge treatments to HIV-infected children who could otherwise not afford expensive medicines.

However, AHRP’s investigation revealed that many of the children NIAID subjected to Dr. Fauci’s experiments were perfectly healthy and may not even have been HIV-infected. Those investigations focused on thirty-six of the trials. For obvious reasons, clinical trials virtually always occur in hospital settings with trained medical personnel, doctors and nurses, in attendance. However, ICC was a non-medical facility. The decision to allow experiments with highly toxic drugs at an orphanage devoid of medical personnel was, itself, a stunning act of malpractice. Subsequent events suggest that the decision was
deliberate, calculated to avoid scientific and ethical objections that might have put Pharma PIs at odds with trained medical professionals. Publicly, NIAID pretended it would permit pharmaceutical companies to conduct their dangerous dose tolerance experiments only on children who had terminal AIDS and were therefore likely to die anyhow. However, AHRP found that NIAID was quietly allowing its Pharma partners to experiment not only on children with laboratory-confirmed HIV infection, but also those “presumed” to be infected. In other words, NIAID required no proof that these children actually had HIV. AHRP accused NIAID of exposing children who might never have developed AIDS to lethal risks and the horrific adverse effects of highly toxic drugs for purposes that were not therapeutic, but purely experimental.

On March 8, 2004, NIH rejected a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the adverse event reports from NIAID’s trials conducted at ICC, citing FOIA’s “trade secrets” and “privacy” exemptions. AHRP then filed a complaint on March 10 with the FDA and the Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP), charging that NIAID was depriving foster children of legally mandated federal protections against research risks. Two subsequent
investigations validated AHRP’s complaint.

John Solomon’s AP investigation finally brought Dr. Fauci’s experiments to national prominence. AP identified at least forty-eight AIDS experiments NIAID conducted on foster children in seven states—mostly in violation of the federal requirement that NIAID provide those children an advocate. In addition to the Dapsone trial that killed at least ten children, NIAID sponsored another study testing a combination of adult antiretroviral drugs. AP reported that of the fifty-two children in the trial, there were twenty-six moderate to severe reactions—nearly all in infants. The side effects included rash, fever, and dangerous drops in infection-fighting white blood cells.(pp.243-249)

. . .

2008 NIH Report.
Even after this scandal exploded, there was no evidence that Dr. Fauci made any effort to reform NIAID. Six years later, two biomedical ethicists inside the NIH concluded in a January 2008 article in Pediatrics that the agency still did not have adequate protections for vulnerable foster children: “Enrolling wards of the state in research raises two major concerns: the possibility that an unfair share of the burdens of research might fall on wards, and the need to ensure interests of individual wards are accounted for. . .. Having special protections only for some categories is misguided. Furthermore, some of the existing protections ought to be strengthened.”

During the decades since Dr. Fauci took over NIAID, he has sanctioned drug companies to experiment on at least fourteen thousand children, many of them Black and Hispanic orphans living in foster homes. He permitted these companies to operate without oversight or accountability. Under Dr. Fauci’s laissez faire rubric, these companies systematically abused and, occasionally, killed children.

Dr. Fauci presided over these atrocities, collaborating with pharmaceutical company researchers and winking at their loose definitions of “informed consent” and “volunteer.” Instead of looking out for the best interests of children, Dr. Fauci gave outlaw drug makers56 free rein to torture vulnerable children behind closed doors, with neither parental permission nor requisite oversight from child welfare authorities.


In 1965, my father kicked down the door of the Willowbrook State School on Staten Island, where pharmaceutical companies were conducting cruel and often-deadly vaccine experiments on incarcerated children.57 Robert Kennedy declared Willowbrook a “snake pit” and promoted legislation to close the institution and end the exploitation of children. Fifty-five years later, national media and Democratic Party sachems have beatified a man who presided over similar atrocities, somehow elevating him to a kind of secular sainthood.

What dark flaw in Anthony Fauci’s character allowed him to oversee—and then to cover up—the atrocities at Incarnation Children’s Center? At very best, there must be some arrogance or imperiousness that enables Dr. Fauci to rationalize the suffering and deaths of children as acceptable collateral damage in what he sees as his noble search for new public health innovations. At worst, he is a sociopath who has pushed science into the realm of sadism. Recent disclosures support the latter interpretation.

Freedom of Information documents obtained in January 2021 by the White Coat Waste project show that Dr. Fauci approved a $424,000 NIAID grant in 2020 for experiments in which dogs were bitten to death by flies.58 The insects carried a disease-carrying parasite that can affect humans. The researchers strapped capsules containing infected flies to the bare skin of twenty-eight healthy beagle puppies and kept them in agonizing suffering for 196 days before euthanizing them. NIAID acknowledged it subjected other animals, including mice, Mongolian gerbils, and rhesus monkeys to similar experiments.

That same year, Dr. Fauci’s agency gave $400,000 to University of Pittsburgh scientists to graft the scalps of aborted fetuses onto living mice and rats. NIAID sought to develop rat and mouse “models” using “full-thickness fetal skin” to “provide a platform for studying human skin infections.” Dr. Fauci’s sidekick and putative boss, Francis Collins—who casts himself as a pious Catholic —kicked in a $1.1 million sweetener from NIH for this malignant project.

Of all the desperate public health needs in America, of all the pain that a well-spent $2 million might alleviate, Tony Fauci and his government confederates deemed these demented and inhumane experiments the most worthwhile expenditures of America’s taxpayer dollars.

These disclosures beg many other questions: From what moral wilderness did the monsters who devised and condoned these experiments descend upon our idealistic country? How have they lately come to exercise such tyrannical power over our citizens? What sort of nation are we if we allow them to continue? Most trenchantly, does it not make sense that the malevolent minds, the elastic ethics, the appalling judgment, the arrogance, and savagery that sanctioned the barbaric brutalization of children at the Incarceration Convent House, and the torture of animals for industry profit, could also concoct a moral justification for suppressing lifesaving remedies and prolonging a deadly epidemic? Could these same dark alchemists justify a strategy of prioritizing their $48 billion vaccine project ahead of public health and human life? Did similar hubris—that deadly human impulse to play God—pave the lethal path to Wuhan and fuel the reckless decision to hack the codes of Creation and fabricate diabolical new forms of life—pandemic superbugs—in a ramshackle laboratory with scientists linked to the Chinese military?

On my birthday in January 1961, three days before I watched my uncle John F. Kennedy take his oath as president of the United States, outgoing President Dwight Eisenhower, in his farewell address, warned our country about the emergence of a Military Industrial Complex that would obliterate our democracy. In that speech, Eisenhower made an equally urgent—although less celebrated—warning against the emergence of a federal bureaucracy, which, he believed, posed an equally dire threat to America’s Constitution and her values:

“In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes
more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is
conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been
overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing
fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the
fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a
revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge
costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute
for intellectual curiosity. The prospect of domination of the nation’s
scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power
of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

 . . .[We]must . . . be alert to the danger that public policy could itself become
the captive of a scientific technological elite.”


Eisenhower demanded that we guard against this insipid brand of tyranny, by entrusting our government to responsible officials ever-vigilant against the deadly gravities of technocratic power and industry money that would pull our nation away from democracy and humanity and into diabolical dystopian savagery:

“It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate
these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our
democratic system—ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our
free society.”

During his half-century as a government official, Dr. Fauci has utterly failed in this charge. As we shall see, he has used his control of billions of dollars to manipulate and control scientific research to promote his own, and NIAID’s, institutional self-interest and private profits for his pharma partners to the detriment of America’s values, her health, and her liberties. Of late, he has played a central role in undermining public health and subverting democracy and constitutional governance around the globe and in transitioning our civil governance toward medical totalitarianism. Just as President Eisenhower warned. Dr.Fauci’s COVID-19 response has steadily deconstructed our democracy and elevated the powers of a tyrannical medical technocracy.(pp.252-254)



Chapter 8: White Mischief: Dr. Fauci’s African Atrocities…257

Chapter 9: The White Man’s Burden…278

Chapter 10: More Harm Than Good…323

Chapter 11: Hyping Phony Epidemics: “Crying Wolf”…357

Chapter 12: Germ Games…378


Author’s Note…450



The following 20 + items represent discussions and interpretations selected recently from the Anglophone social media. These essays and articles should elucidate our collective situation and raise questions about the competence of capitalist leaders who have declared themselves in solidarity with “The Great Reset” (as the authors of these manufactured crises are wont to call their creation).



Francis McCollum Feeley


Professeur honoraire de l'Université Grenoble-Alpes
Ancien Directeur des Researches
Université de Paris-Nanterre
Director of The Center for the Advanced Study
of American Institutions and Social Movements
The University of California-San Diego




Assange Defended at PEN International


by Joe Lauria



CHD.TV Exclusive With Dr. Richard Fleming


by Children’s Health Defense




Dr. McCullough/John Leake Interview – The Courage To Face The TRUTH About COVID-19 & Those Behind It


with Ryan Cristián




Two Senate Testimonies in 2020 by Dr. Pierre Kory


by Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance

(28:52) & (16:05)

Twice in 2020, Dr. Pierre Kory was invited to testify to the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on the treatments he and his colleagues in the FLCCC Alliance were using successfully and recommending to health authorities and other medical professionals for use in combatting the coronavirus pandemic. Videos of his testimony can be viewed at the links below.



Kyle's vaccine injury update
with Dr. John Campbell



Pfizer Document Dump Shows Doctor With Ties to Gates Foundation Deleted Trial Participant’s Vaccine Injury


by Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.

An 80,000-page cache of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine documents released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sheds light on Pfizer’s extensive vaccine trials in Argentina, including the unusually large size of the trials and the story of a trial participant whose vaccine reaction was deleted.



Video: Pfizer's "Secret" Report on the Covid Vaccine. Beyond Manslaughter. The Evidence is Overwhelming. The Vaccine Should Be Immediately Withdrawn Worldwide
with Prof Michel Chossudovsky





Crimes Against Humanity


with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich




The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d'État and the "Great Reset"


by  Prof Michel Chossudovsky



Neoliberalism Coupled with GMO: Farmers’ Struggle Not Over, Corporate Takeover of Indian Agriculture Still Looms


by Colin Todhunter and Ranjit Singh Srai



The Complete History Of Monsanto, “The World’s Most Evil Corporation”


by Hanzai E



 ‘Genetically Edited’ Food – The next stage of the Great Reset?


by Kit Knightly



 ‘I wouldn’t even feed this to my dog’: The inhumane reality of prison food


with Charles Hopkins

Everyone knows prison food is bad, but it’s even worse than you think, and the damage it does to incarcerated people’s health lingers long after they’ve served their time.



Which countries could go the Sri Lanka way


with Gravitas




Jim Steele on How Bad Global Warming Science Hurts the Environmental Movement


with James Corbett




As the Planet Warms, Let’s Be Clear: We Are Sacrificing Lives for Profits


by Sonali Kolhatkar



The Final Battle for Humanity: It Is ‘Now or Never’ in the Long War Against Homo Sapiens


by  Robert J. Burrowes



Say Political Prisoners Names While They’re Still Alive


with Margaret Kimberley

(audio, 15:54)



Chile Finalizes New Draft Constitution in Bid to Bury Pinochet's Neoliberal Legacy


by Kenny Stancil



FULL INTERVIEW: Corbett & Knightly on the WHO’s “Global Pandemic Treaty”


with Kit Knightly and James Corbett




NEW International Health Regulations: You have just HOURS left to make yourself heard


by Off-Guardian



Did the Long Pandemic Spawn a New Kind of Repression?


by By Nina Burleigh



Pfizer Appears to Have Committed Fraud, and If It Can be Proven in Court, Then Pfizer Will be Liable for All Injuries and Deaths Caused by Its COVID Vaccines


by Ethan Huff



Pfizer Booster Protection Against Omicron Wanes in Just Weeks, Study Finds


by Susan C. Olmstead



Nearly 30,000 Deaths After COVID Vaccines Reported to VAERS, CDC Data Show


by Megan Redshaw



Video: Bill Gates Says Adults Over 50 Will Probably Have to Get COVID Boosters Every 6 Months… Until We Get Better Vaccines


by Cristina Laila




Great Disorder & Extravagant Lies


by Vijay Prashad



ALERT! The WHO "pandemic treaty" will create a world of slaves, if We the People don't refuse it


by Mark Crispin Miller



Exposing the "Digital ID is a Human Right" Scam


by Derrick Broze



CBDC: A Country-by-Country Guide


by James Corbett



IRAN: Digital Food Rationing rolls out using Biometric IDs amid food riots


by Ice Age Farmer






Trump DOJ Casting Long Shadow Over Biden Admin: Analysis


by Brett Wilkins



Greenwald: Biden Wanted $33B More For Ukraine. Congress Quickly Raised it to $40B. Who Benefits?


by  Glenn Greenwald



Watch BREAKING: Rand Paul Blocks $40B Ukraine Bill, Explains Why"


with Rand Paul




Rand Paul Blocks $40 Billion Ukraine Funding Bill


with Rand Paul




We’re gonna shut it down: Sen. Rand Paul


with Rand Paul




Mitch McConnell: 'Name Russia State Sponsor Of Terrorism!'


by Alexander Bolton



with Ron Paul

(35 :50)



Who Gains The Most From The Ukraine-Russia War & What Could End Putin's Assault?


with John Mearsheimer




Joe Biden and the Democrats Have Nothing to Offer Organized Labor, the ALU Included



How Obama & Biden Lied About Protecting Abortion"


with Jimmy Dore




Senator McConnell Expects Wednesday Vote On $40 Billion Ukraine Aid


by Dave DeCamp



I led talks on Donbas and Crimea in the 90s. Here’s How the War Should End


by John Quigley





America has Been on a "Hot War Footing"against Russia since 2014


by Prof Michel Chossudovsky



Russia Names Democratic Party Leaders As Biolab Culprits, Tornado Battalion & More Jabs Less Safety


with  Ryan Cristián




Ambassador Says Russian Diplomats In D.C. Being Approached & Harassed by CIA, FBI


by Tyler Durden



Russia’s Relations with North Africa and the Middle East. Lavrov’s Diplomatic Initiative


by  Kester Kenn Klomegah



Michael Brenner on the High Risks of Cultivated Ignorance


by Michael Brenner





Opinion | Neofascist Minority Rule by the GOP Is Laying Waste to the United States


by Thom Hartmann



Investigation Shows Hundreds of US Cops Being Trained by Far-Right Extremists


by Kenny Stancil



As Evisceration of Roe Looms, Poll Finds Support for Abortion Rights at New High


by Andrea Germanos



The Post-Roe World: A Reality Check On The Implications Of The Leaked Supreme Court Opinion


by Jonathan Turley



Censorship and the War on Black America


with Danny Haiphong and Margaret Kimberley

(audio, 1:03:23)


Black and Palestinian Solidarity


with Margaret Kimberley

(audio, 52:15)


Richard Wolff on Crypto, Meta, and Techno-Feudalism


with Richard Wolff






Teach-in Webinar - War in Ukraine: How the Lies of Empire Stand in the Way of a Diplomatic Resolution



with :



To Honor Odessa Anti-Fascists, Stop Weapons to Ukraine!


by John Parker



Watch Azovstal: UK Media calls it an 'evacuation'


with Alex Christoforou, Alexander Mercouris and Gonzolo Lira




Showdown at “Credibility Gulch” in Ukraine War


by Dee Knight



The War in Ukraine. Scott Ritter's Switcheroo: "Why I Radically Changed My Overall Assessment"


by Mike Whitney



Nazi troops surrender in Mariupol


by Patrick Lancaster

Patrick Lancaster reports from Azovstal steelworks, as Scott Ritter's followers consider his new view of Russia's military progress



Why Ukraine War Has No Winners


by Mike Whitney



“The Once Bright City Became Gloomy and Sad:” Survivor of 2014 Odessa Massacre Reflects Back on Tragedy


by Jeremy Kuzmarov



The New Iron Curtain


by Patrick Lawrence



Germany Weighs Possible Consequences of Heavy Weaponry Supplies to Ukraine


by Paul Antonopoulos



Will the Ukraine War End Without Destroying All Life on the Planet?


by Patrick Cockburn



Ukraine and the Resurgence of American Militarism


with Chris Hedges




If the US Wanted Peace in Ukraine


by Caitlin Johnstone



Info-Warrior Malcolm Nance


by John Kiriakou



Live-Action Role Play in Ukraine


by Scott Ritter



At Least 300 Azov Fighters Surrender To Russians At Azovstal Plant, Ending Lengthy Siege


by Tyler Durden



UKRAINE: Foolish for Finland & Sweden to Join NATO


by Jan Oberg



Those cheering for "Ukraine" are cheering for the slaughter of Ukrainians (and others)


from Mark Crispin Miller



Death By A Thousand Cuts - Where Is The West's Ukraine Strategy?


by Pepe Escobar



The Subtleties of Anti-Russia Leftist Rhetoric


by Edward Curtin



Charlie Robinson Interview - In A World Of Deceit, Questioning The Narrative Is A Revolutionary Act


with Ryan Cristián






London and Washington are Being Propelled by Hubris – Just as Putin was 


by Patrick Cockburn



Five Reasons for Washington’s War Addiction


by William J Astore

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the U.S. military-industrial complex recognized a giant business opportunity, writes William J. Astore.



Did CIA Train Ukrainian Torturers?


by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida



$40 Billion More for the Ukraine War: A Wakeup Call for Those Who Still Believe in “Lesser-Evilism


by Ryan Costello



UKRAINE: US Gas & Europe’s Decarbonization Hit


by Michael Davies-Venn



"Gas-for-rubles is pulling down Euro. US intel & Ukrainian Twitter. North Donbass developments"


by The  Dreizin






The Israeli Execution of Al Jazeera Reporter Shireen Abu Akleh


by Chris Hedges



Israeli War Crimes and the Execution of Al Jazeera Reporter Shireen Abu Akleh


by Chris Hedges



Al Jazeera Reporter Killed Covering IDF Raid


by Jake Johnson


Rights Groups Call for Full Probe After Israeli Forces Kill Journalist


by Brett Wilkins



Israel Conclusively Killed Al-Jazeera Journalist Shireen Abu Akleh


by Robert Inlakesh



The massacre that changed Gaza




Families, prisoners recount hell of Israeli detention


by Rewaa Khella and Mohammed Rafik Mhawesh



Never forget the Nakba


by Amjad Ayman Yaghi



I vividly remember the Nakba


by Hasan Abu Nimah



German police attack Palestine supporters on Nakba Day


by Ali Abunimah



Family of Palestinian American grandfather killed by Israel wants US probe


by Ali Abunimah



Israeli police attack Shireen Abu Akleh’s funeral in Jerusalem


by Yumna Patel



US Groups Demand Full Probe After Israeli Forces Kill Journalist Shireen Abu Akleh


by Brett Wilkins



As the Midterms Approach, AIPAC Throws Its Weight - and Money - Around Washington


by Jessica Buxbaum



Al Jazeera’s Iconic “Voice of Palestine” Killed During Israeli Raid


by Ali Abunimah



Will Shireen Abu Akleh’s Murder Mark a Turning Point in the Liberation of Palestine?


by Miko Peled





The New Rift Between WHO And China


by Jeffrey Tucker



The NATO-Russia Conflict in Ukraine Prevents Progress at the China-EU Summit


by Jan Oberg



Taiwan "surrounded" by Chinese warships & warplanes"


with Gravitas




What kind of cooperation do U.S. and ASEAN want?


with The Point




Cause to Fear a Remilitarized Japan


by Ra Mason



Latin America’s Renewed Chance at Integration


by Marco Fernandes  





Young America's Dilemma: The Predatory Choice Between Student Loan Debt and Military Enlistment


by Liz Walters



Why Should Russia and the United States Be Enemies When They Have a 240-Year History of International Friendship and Support?




How 50 years of class war changed the state of Wisconsin


with Maximillian Alvarez

(audio, 1:39:01)



Louisiana Adds COVID Jabs/Booster To Required School Schedule & What's A "Stabilized Spike Protein"?


with Ryan Cristián






‘The residential school era did not end’ for Indigenous people


by Marc Steiner

(audio, 27:25)

In April, Pope Francis apologized for the Catholic Church’s role in driving the horrific residential school system, but the hurt and horror live on.



Buffalo gunman's racism directly tied to mainstreaming of white nationalism, say critics


by Jon Queally



The Buffalo Shooting and the Great Replacement


by David Rosen



Buffalo Shooter Linked To Azov Movement As The Clumsy "Vanilla ISIS" Agenda Stumbles Forward


with Ryan Cristián






Operation Surprise: leaked emails expose secret intelligence coup to install Boris Johnson


by Kit Klarenberg



US Air Force’s British Expansion


by Matt Kennard



Ending ‘West’s Neocolonial Oppression’: On the New Language and Superstructures


by Ramzy Baroud




Cost of the Ukraine War Felt in Africa, Global South


by Ramzy Baroud



BAR Book Forum: Gao Yunxiang’s “Arise Africa! Roar China!”


by Roberto Sirvent



The Sun Never Sets: Why Is AFRICOM Expanding in Zambia?


by Jeremy Kuzmarov



Black Soldiers of Imperialism, George Padmore, 1931


by The Editors of Black Agenda Report



Obama and Liberals Killed Abortion Rights


by Margaret Kimberly





The OffG View: Fake binaries, fake crises, fake heroes


by The Off-Guardian



The Function of the Fake Binary





The Battle For Control Of Your Mind


by Aaron Kheriaty



Cambridge Analytica Reborn? Private Spy Agency Weaponizes Facebook Again


by Kit Klarenberg



Western Media Engages in a War on Truth


by Russell Bentley



Disney Not in This Much Trouble Since 1941


by Thomas Doherty





‘Preemptive Nuclear War’: The Historic Battle for Peace and Democracy. A Third World War Threatens the Future of Humanity


by Prof Michel Chossudovsky




Selected Articles: Global COVID Summit Declaration Representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists - Global Research


by Global Research News



This Week in the New Normal #30


by The Off-Guardian



After years of battling the (imaginary) threat of Nazis in America, the ADL and SPLC both SUPPORT the real ones in Ukraine


from Mark Crispin Miller

As long as those rampaging Nazis don't say anything unpleasant about Israel (at least out loud), THEIR hate speech doesn't faze our "anti-racist" Ministry of Truth



“Everything You Need to Know About Inflation”


with Richard Wolff






“Why the rise of a new cloud-based ruling class is crushing democracy”


with Yanis Varoufakis






Albany, NY - Rally at New York State Capitol


by Children’s Health Defense






From: News from Underground
Date: May 16, 2022
Subject: Daily digest for

1.      How "leftist" foghorns mingle truth with lies, to serve the anti-Russian propaganda chorus (MUST-READ/SHARE) - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:09 EDT)

2.      10 signs that you've been dazed by MENTICIDE, and what to do about it - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:44 EDT)

3.      On the EU coup, food shortages, propaganda/censorship and more from SASMIZDAT - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:45 EDT)

4.      Watch out! Pfizer testing Lyme vaccine on kids - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 10:02 EDT)

5.      *CORRECTION: "Leftist" foghorns mixing truth and lies re: Russia include Chomsky and The Intercept (NOT Consortium News) - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 10:55 EDT)

6.      Omicron was created by the "vaccination" drive; and this ordeal WON'T end until the "vaccinations" STOP - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 14:52 EDT)

7.      Is Putin fighting "vaccination"? Maybe in your dreams, but not in Russia.... - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 16:52 EDT)

8.      Sleepwalking into disaster: Vladimir Golstein on the West's ferocious censorship to shield the Big Lie on "Ukraine" - Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 17:56 EDT)

1.      How "leftist" foghorns mingle truth with lies, to serve the anti-Russian propaganda chorus (MUST-READ/SHARE) by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:09 EDT)
Reply to list

When Truth is Mixed with Falsehoods: The Subtleties of Anti-Russia Leftist Rhetoric

By Edward Curtin


While the so-called liberal and conservative media – all stenographers for the intelligence agencies – pour forth the most blatant propaganda about Russia and Ukraine that is so conspicuous that it is comedic if it weren’t so dangerous, the self-depicted cognoscenti also ingest subtler messages, often from the alternative media.

A woman I know and who knows my sociological analyses of propaganda contacted me to tell me there was an excellent article about the war in Ukraine at The Intercept, an on-line publication funded by billionaire Pierre Omidyar I have long considered a leading example of much deceptive reporting wherein truth is mixed with falsehoods to convey a “liberal” narrative that fundamentally supports the ruling elites while seeming to oppose them.  This, of course, is nothing new since it’s been the modus operandi of all corporate media in their own ideological and disingenuous ways, such as The New York Times, CBS, the Washington Post, the New York Daily News, Fox News, CNN, NBC, etc. for a very long time.

Nevertheless, out of respect for her judgment and knowing how deeply she feels for all suffering people, I read the article.  Written by Alice Speri, its title sounded ambiguous – “The Left in Europe Confronts NATO’s Resurgence After Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine” – until I saw the subtitle that begins with these words: “Russia’s brutal invasion complicates…”  But I read on.  By the fourth paragraph, it became clear where this article was going.  Speri writes that “In Ukraine, by contrast [with Iraq], it was Russia that had staged an illegal, unprovoked invasion, and U.S.-led support to Ukraine was understood by many as crucial to stave off even worse atrocities than those the Russian military had already committed.” [my emphasis]

While ostensibly about European anti-war and anti-NATO activists caught on the horns of a dilemma, the piece goes on to assert that although US/NATO was guilty of wrongful expansion over many years, Russia has been an aggressor in Ukraine and Georgia and is guilty of terrible war crimes, etc.

There is not a word about the U.S. engineered coup in 2014, the CIA and Pentagon backed mercenaries in Ukraine, or its support for the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and Ukraine’s years of attacks on the Donbass where many thousands have been killed.  It is assumed these actions are not criminal or provocations.  And there is this:

The uncertain response of Europe’s peace activists is both a reflection of a brutal, unprovoked invasion that stunned the world and of an anti-war movement that has grown smaller and more marginalized over the years. The left in both Europe and the U.S. have struggled to respond to a wave of support for Ukraine that is at cross purposes with a decades long effort to     untangle Europe from a U.S.-led military alliance. [my emphasis]

In other words, the article, couched in anti-war rhetoric, was anti-Russia propaganda.  When I told my friend my analysis, she refused to discuss it and got angry with me, as if I therefore were a proponent of war.  I have found this is a common response.

This got me thinking again about why people so often miss the untruths lying within articles that are in many parts truthful and accurate.  I notice this constantly.  They are like little seeds slipped in as if no one will notice; they work their magic nearly unconsciously.  Few do notice them, for they are often imperceptible.  But they have their effects and are cumulative and are far more powerful over time than blatant statements that will turn people off, especially those who think propaganda doesn’t work on them.  This is the power of successful propaganda, whether purposeful  or not.  It particularly works well on “intellectual” and highly schooled people.

For example, in a recent printed  interview, Noam Chomsky, after being introduced as a modern day Galileo, Newton, and Descartes rolled into one, talks about propaganda, its history, Edward Bernays, Walter Lippman, etc.  What he says is historically accurate and informative for anyone not knowing this history.  He speaks wisely of U.S. media propaganda concerning its unprovoked war against Iraq and he accurately calls the war in Ukraine “provoked.”  And then, concerning the war in Ukraine, he drops this startling statement:

I don’t think there are ‘significant lies’ in war reporting. The U.S. media are   generally doing a highly creditable job in reporting Russian crimes in Ukraine. That’s valuable, just as it’s valuable that international investigations are underway in preparation for possible war crimes trials.

In the blink of an eye, Chomsky says something so incredibly untrue that unless one thinks of him as a modern day Galileo, which many do, it may pass as true and you will smoothly move on to the next paragraph.  Yet it is a statement so false as to be laughable.  The media propaganda concerning events in Ukraine has been so blatantly false and ridiculous that a careful reader will stop suddenly and think: Did he just say that?

2. 10 signs that you've been dazed by MENTICIDE, and what to do about it by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:44 EDT)
Reply to list

Margaret Anna Alice
May 11
“Menticide is an old crime against the human mind and spirit but systematized anew. It is an organized system of psychological intervention and judicial perversion through which a powerful dictator can imprint his own opportunistic thoughts upon the minds of those he plans to use and destroy.”
* * *
“Ready made opinions can be distributed day by day through press, radio, and so on, again and again, till they reach the nerve cell and implant a fixed pattern of thought in the brain. Consequently, guided public opinion is the result, according to Pavlovian theoreticians, of good propaganda technique, and the polls a verification of the temporary successful action of the Pavlovian machinations on the mind.”
—Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind (Kindlepaperbackhardcoveraudiobook)

10 Signs You’re Suffering from MenticideIf you are a victim of menticide, you don’t know it. That’s the first sign.
Here are nine more signs you can use to identify whether you’re suffering from this reversible condition:
1) You watch television.2) You read newspapers and magazines.3) You listen to the radio.4) You absorb social media immersion campaigns.5) You follow popular culture.6) You support the current thing.
“The sentiments and ideas of all the persons in the gathering take one and the same direction, and their conscious personality vanishes. A collective mind is formed, doubtless transitory, but presenting very clearly defined characteristics.”
—Gustave Le Bon, The Crowd: Study of the Popular Mind (Kindlepaperbackhardcoveraudiobook)
“The specialists in the art of persuasion and the moulding of public sentiment may try to knead man’s mental dough with all the tools of communication available to them: pamphlets, speeches, posters, billboards, radio programs, and T.V. shows. They may water down the spontaneity and creativity of thoughts and ideas into sterile and streamlined clichés that direct our thoughts even although we still have the illusion of being original and individual.”
—Joost Meerloo, The Rape of the Mind (Kindlepaperbackhardcoveraudiobook)


3.On the EU coup, food shortages, propaganda/censorship and more from SASMIZDAT by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 09:45 EDT)
Reply to list

Interessante artikelen week #17-19
De Audiokrant editie 75 (De laatste)
In de vijfenzeventigste & tevens laatste editie van De Audiokrant praat ik met journalist Elze van Hamelen, Guido Jonkers & Tilasmi Frigge.
blckbx today: Europese energiezekerheid onder druk, Macron pakt door met Digital ID en meer... (youtube)
Better Way Conference 2022
“This solutions-focused event brings together leaders from around the world for three exciting days of learning, exploring, creating, and collaborating”. Very interesting guests and program.
[EN] Declaration IV - Restore Scientific Integrity (globalcovidsummit)
“A Joint Statement, representing 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists to end the National Emergency, Restore Scientific Integrity, and Address Crimes Against Humanity”.
[NL] Dr. Malone en collega's: ‘Wereld moet onmiddellijk stoppen met vaccineren' (blckbx)
Nieuwe beroepsvereniging voor goede artsen: NTG! (deblauwetijger)
Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency Documents (phmpt)
Legislative Train Schedule EU (europarl)
Runaway train..
The EU Army is on the horizon (off-guardian)
The building blocks of supra-national military already exist…they’re just waiting for a reason.
Europese Commissie wil Europees digitaal patiëntendossier invoeren (security)
Why the rush? A call for critical reflection on the legal and human rights implications of a potential new international treaty on pandemics (ejiltalk)
Naomi Wolf: It’s Not Over. It’s Just Begun (brownstone)
Ook middeninkomens vrezen rekeningen niet te kunnen betalen, horen ze bij Nibud (NOS)
Middle class is also experiencing challenges with making ends meet. Will they stand in line for an UBI and food coupons, or will this ignite revolt?
The Malone Institute presents: World Economic Forum Project (maloneinstitute)
Kabinet stuurt opvolger tijdelijke coronawet na zomer naar de Kamer (NOS)
“Het kabinet wil dit najaar de tijdelijke coronawet vervangen door een wijziging van de Wet publieke gezondheid, zodat er een permanente grondslag komt voor beperkende maatregelen. Minister Kuipers van Volksgezondheid wil de wetswijziging voor 1 september indienen, schrijft hij aan de Tweede Kamer”.
Ambtsmisdrijven; staan ambtenaren boven de wet? (indepen)
The Psychology And History Of Manipulation: 6 Lessons From The Master Of Propaganda (technocracy)
Behind NATO’s ‘cognitive warfare’: ‘Battle for your brain’ waged by Western militaries (thegrayzone)
Your Guide to Fifth-Generation Warfare (corbettreport)
The Minds of Men | Official Documentary by Aaron & Melissa Dykes (bitchute)
EV Chaos: 25% Of San Francisco’s EV Charging Stations Don’t Work (technocracy)
REPORT: “90% of nations planning Central Bank Digital Currency “ (Off-Guardian)
As A Teacher Who Sees Rampant Tech Addiction Up Close, I’m Sending My Kids To Screen-Free Schools (thefederalist)
Your Face Is Now A Weapon Of War (zerohedge)
Wob-documenten: Rijk wil grote hoeveelheden data surveilleren via cyberwaakhond NCSC (danielvdtuin)
“De epidemie werd aangegrepen om zorgdata te gaan surveilleren. Wetgeving moet het mogelijk maken om alle bedrijfs- en overheidsdata te centraliseren bij het Rijk, die dit zonder instemming kan delen”
Burgerrechtencoalitie: Eerste Kamer moet datasurveillancewet ‘Super SyRI’ afwijzen (privacyfirst)
CDC tracked 20+ million US phones to monitor COVID lockdown compliance says new report (americanmilitarynews)
Elon Musk will probably use Twitter data to feed his Neuralink AI tech (tweaktown)
Elon Musk: Champion of Free Speech or Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? (off-guardian)
Gemeenten krijgen later dit jaar regels voor online monitoring van burgers (security)
The Declaration for the Future of the Internet (armstrongeconomics)
MEMS becoming more human (electronicsweekly)
“The first signs are appearing that MEMS devices could emulate and sense their environment with human-like capabilities, using the five best-known senses in a “phy-gital” meta-world, forecasts Yole Developpement”
All the Sensors in Your Smartphone, and How They Work (gizmodo)
“Genetically Edited” Food – The next stage of the Great Reset? (off-guardian)
5 signs they are CREATING a food crisis (off-guardian)
Biden Cynically Uses Ukraine to Cover Food Sabotage (williamengdahl)
Exclusive: Pilots Injured by COVID Vaccines Speak Out: ‘I Will Probably Never Fly Again’ (childrenshealthdefense)

Airlines Playing Russian Roulette with Passengers’ Lives (armstrongeconomics)
BMJ’s Peter Doshi Tells FDA About Serious Concerns Over Pfizer Trial Data and Lack of FDA Oversight (dailyexpose)
Serious adverse jab reactions 40 times higher than previously reported (freewestmedia)
“A German study has found that the number of serious side effects after Corona vaccines was 40 times higher than previously reported. The Charité, a well-known hospital in Berlin, interviewed 40 000 vaccinated people after they had received their mandated jabs”.
Why Do Doctors Close Their Eyes to Medical Injuries? (amidwesterndoctor)
Letselschade door mondkapjes (viruswaarheid)
Wob-documenten: Rijk wilde niets weten van vroegbehandeling met hydroxychloroquine (danielvdtuin)
“Ondanks goede resultaten met vroegbehandeling van coronapatiënten deed het Rijk het medicijn in de ban. Onderzoek werd tegengewerkt en artsen werden aangepakt, onder toeziend oog van het kabinet”.
De vaccinatiedoden moeten hun getal hebben (overnu)
1 in 10 Surveyed Doctors Believe COVID Shots Aren’t Safe — But Is the Number Even Higher? (childrenshealthdefense)
“A survey of primary care physicians conducted 11 months ago revealed one in 10 doctors don’t believe COVID-19 vaccines are safe or effective. Given what has transpired since that number is likely much higher”.
1.2 Million Reports of Injuries After COVID Vaccines, VAERS Data Show
COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies (globalresearch)
13 Reasons the CDC is Right and You Should Get the COVID Vaccine (jennifermargulis)
(NL) Samizdat: clandestien geschreven informatie die in de Sovjet tijd verspreid werd in netwerken van dissidenten.
"Samizdat: ik schrijf zelf, ik redigeer zelf, ik censureer zelf, ik geef zelf uit, ik verspreid zelf"
(EN) Samizdat was clandestine and censored information information in the Soviet era that was created by dissidents and spread in underground networks.
"Samizdat: I write, I research, I redact, I spread, I publish"
Vrijwillige bijdragen ter ondersteuning van de de blog, nieuwsbrief en vlogs zijn welkom!
Voluntary contributions to my newsletter and other work are very welcome!
Paypal adres: Elze_C@protonmail.com E. VAN HAMELEN > IBAN NL55 ABNA 0460 0225 55 > BIC ABNANL2A
Privacy: het emailadres dat je gebruikt voor het ontvangen van de nieuwsbrief, wordt slechts gebruikt voor het wekelijks verzenden van de brief.
Wil je je afmelden? Antwoord dan op deze email met ‘afmelden’ in de titel.
Privacy: the email address you use to receive this newsletter is only used for sending a weekly newsletter. If you would like to unsubscribe, please reply to this email with ‘unsubscribe’ in the title.
Met vriendelijke groeten / With kind regards,
Elze van Hamelen

4. Watch out! Pfizer testing Lyme vaccine on kids by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 10:02 EDT)
Reply to list

Pfizer Tests Lyme Disease Vaccine on Kids, But Experts Question Need
Pfizer on Tuesday said results of Phase 2 clinical trials of its experimental Lyme disease vaccine delivered “positive” results, including among pediatric trial participants. The vaccine “offers Pfizer the chance to add a growth driver to its mammoth vaccine unit,” but some experts say treatment is a better solution.

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D.
Pfizer on Tuesday said results of Phase 2 clinical trials of its experimental Lyme disease vaccine delivered “positive” results, including among pediatric trial participants.
The drugmaker is developing the VLA15 vaccine in conjunction with the French biotech firm Valneva, which Pfizer described as “a specialty vaccine company focused on prevention of diseases with major unmet needs.”
VLA15 is a “multivalent protein subunit vaccine,” targeting “the outer surface protein A (OspA) of Borrelia,” the bacteria which causes Lyme disease, Pfizer reported.
The Phase 2 study included adult subjects and children 5 to 17 years old. Overall, 600 healthy participants were enrolled in the study.
“VLA15 has demonstrated strong immunogenicity and safety data in pre-clinical and clinical studies,” Pfizer said.
According to the two companies, the “positive” results arising from Phase 2, including “positive pediatric data,” will allow them to proceed with a planned Phase 3 trial.
In Phase 2, the companies tested the experimental VLA15 vaccine at two different administration schedules: a two-dose regimen six months apart, and a three-dose regimen with follow-up shots administered at two and six months after the initial administration.
Both schedules involved 180 μg doses.
“VLA15 was found to be more immunogenic than in adults with both vaccination schedules tested,” and “the safety and tolerability profile seen in the 5- to 17-year age group was similar to the previously reported profile in adults,” the companies said.
Similar to claims Pfizer made about booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccines, the drugmaker also said that while the two-dose regimen of VLA15 demonstrated immunity, a third VLA15 dose “increased the level of antibodies against an outer surface protein.”


5.*CORRECTION: "Leftist" foghorns mixing truth and lies re: Russia include Chomsky and The Intercept (NOT Consortium News) by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 10:55 EDT)
Reply to list

When Truth is Mixed with Falsehoods: The Subtleties of Anti-Russia Leftist Rhetoric
By Edward Curtin

While the so-called liberal and conservative media – all stenographers for the intelligence agencies – pour forth the most blatant propaganda about Russia and Ukraine that is so conspicuous that it is comedic if it weren’t so dangerous, the self-depicted cognoscenti also ingest subtler messages, often from the alternative media.
A woman I know and who knows my sociological analyses of propaganda contacted me to tell me there was an excellent article about the war in Ukraine at The Intercept, an on-line publication funded by billionaire Pierre Omidyar I have long considered a leading example of much deceptive reporting wherein truth is mixed with falsehoods to convey a “liberal” narrative that fundamentally supports the ruling elites while seeming to oppose them. This, of course, is nothing new since it’s been the modus operandi of all corporate media in their own ideological and disingenuous ways, such as The New York Times, CBS, the Washington Post, the New York Daily News, Fox News, CNN, NBC, etc. for a very long time.
Nevertheless, out of respect for her judgment and knowing how deeply she feels for all suffering people, I read the article. Written by Alice Speri, its title sounded ambiguous – “The Left in Europe Confronts NATO’s Resurgence After Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine” – until I saw the subtitle that begins with these words: “Russia’s brutal invasion complicates…” But I read on. By the fourth paragraph, it became clear where this article was going. Speri writes that “In Ukraine, by contrast [with Iraq], it was Russia that had staged an illegal, unprovoked invasion, and U.S.-led support to Ukraine was understood by many as crucial to stave off even worse atrocities than those the Russian military had already committed.” [my emphasis]
While ostensibly about European anti-war and anti-NATO activists caught on the horns of a dilemma, the piece goes on to assert that although US/NATO was guilty of wrongful expansion over many years, Russia has been an aggressor in Ukraine and Georgia and is guilty of terrible war crimes, etc.
There is not a word about the U.S. engineered coup in 2014, the CIA and Pentagon backed mercenaries in Ukraine, or its support for the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion and Ukraine’s years of attacks on the Donbass where many thousands have been killed. It is assumed these actions are not criminal or provocations. And there is this:
The uncertain response of Europe’s peace activists is both a reflection of a brutal, unprovoked invasion that stunned the world and of an anti-war movement that has grown smaller and more marginalized over the years. The left in both Europe and the U.S. have struggled to respond to a wave of support for Ukraine that is at cross purposes with a decades long effort to untangle Europe from a U.S.-led military alliance. [my emphasis]
In other words, the article, couched in anti-war rhetoric, was anti-Russia propaganda. When I told my friend my analysis, she refused to discuss it and got angry with me, as if I therefore were a proponent of war. I have found this is a common response.
This got me thinking again about why people so often miss the untruths lying within articles that are in many parts truthful and accurate. I notice this constantly. They are like little seeds slipped in as if no one will notice; they work their magic nearly unconsciously. Few do notice them, for they are often imperceptible. But they have their effects and are cumulative and are far more powerful over time than blatant statements that will turn people off, especially those who think propaganda doesn’t work on them. This is the power of successful propaganda, whether purposeful or not. It particularly works well on “intellectual” and highly schooled people.
For example, in a recent printed interview, Noam Chomsky, after being introduced as a modern day Galileo, Newton, and Descartes rolled into one, talks about propaganda, its history, Edward Bernays, Walter Lippman, etc. What he says is historically accurate and informative for anyone not knowing this history. He speaks wisely of U.S. media propaganda concerning its unprovoked war against Iraq and he accurately calls the war in Ukraine “provoked.” And then, concerning the war in Ukraine, he drops this startling statement:
I don’t think there are ‘significant lies’ in war reporting. The U.S. media are generally doing a highly creditable job in reporting Russian crimes in Ukraine. That’s valuable, just as it’s valuable that international investigations are underway in preparation for possible war crimes trials.
In the blink of an eye, Chomsky says something so incredibly untrue that unless one thinks of him as a modern day Galileo, which many do, it may pass as true and you will smoothly move on to the next paragraph. Yet it is a statement so false as to be laughable. The media propaganda concerning events in Ukraine has been so blatantly false and ridiculous that a careful reader will stop suddenly and think: Did he just say that?

Support News from Underground: https://bit.ly/NFUSupport
Visit News from Underground: https://markcrispinmiller.com
For archives, please go to: https://archives.simplelists.com/nfu

6.Omicron was created by the "vaccination" drive; and this ordeal WON'T end until the "vaccinations" STOP by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 14:52 EDT)
Reply to list

Dr. Paul Alexander

This pandemic will stop if they stopped the vaccine, its that simple. They who are doing this, know this.
They each know, basic immunology, as long as you inoculate ‘into’ an epidemic or pandemic with high infectious pressure, using a non-sterilizing injection that does not stop transmission, then variants will emerge and the pandemic will not end. They, Fauci, Bourla, Francis Collins et al. all know that you will never cut the chain of transmission and will never EVER get to population level herd immunity given the hobbled sub-optimal vaccinal antibodies that do not sterilize (neutralize) the virus (eliminate it); they know that basic evolutionary biology will see Darwinian natural selection functioning to ‘select’ from among the prevailing variants (that come from us who are infected), the variants that are the ‘fittest’ and have a ‘competitive advantage’; these will be selected and enriched in the environment (proliferate) and the most ‘fittest will become the new dominant sub-variant; highly infectious for it could overcome the sub-optimal immune pressure that was not working to eliminate the virus, just placing the virus infectiousness (aka the ‘spike protein) under pressure and the result is highly infectious variants and as such the pandemic WILL never end.
It is designed with these vaccines to go for 100 years. The scary part is that in the infectious variants, could emerge a more virulent lethal one that could threaten humanity and this is a real possibility, rare as it may be. We may be setting our children and grand children up for disaster. They all know at CDC and NIH and NIAID, all the leaders and people in govn, that this pandemic will go on as long as we continue vaccinating with these particular vaccines. Were they, these mRNA vaccines, designed so? Deliberate? They cannot be all that collectively stupid and inept. Cannot.

Something other than science and immunology and vaccinology is at play here. Albert Bourla (CEO) of Pfizer and Bancel of Moderna, IMO, developed the perfect biological weapon with this mRNA lipid-nanoparticle injection delivery platform, this gene-based platform, this is NOT a vaccine…a slow ‘harm’ slow ‘kill’ weapon of sorts, that from what I know and have shared privately and openly, will kill many thousands of people including our children across time, if this injection is not stopped NOW!


7. Is Putin fighting "vaccination"? Maybe in your dreams, but not in Russia.... by Mark Crispin Miller (15 May 2022 16:52 EDT)
Reply to list

Is Putin fighting to stop the clot-shots?An important question
Edward Slavsquat
May 15
friend or foe of Permanent Biosecurity?
What is Russia fighting for in Ukraine? We have heard many interesting theories. Some are more plausible than others.
In some corners of the internet, the conflict has been described as a grandmaster shadow-play which (among other geopolitical checkmates) will liberate Russia, and possibly the whole world, from Virus Tyranny.
We’ve already listed some reasons why this claim is highly tenuous. But there is another aspect of this creative theory that we find puzzling: it presupposes Vladimir Putin actually wants to topple Permanent Biosecurity.
Edward Slavsquat
Biosecurity grooming
At the end of March, Russia’s Federal COVID Nanny, Anna Popova, was forced to capitulate on many of her ingenious health-preserving rituals for schools, including “minimizing physical contact between different classes” and arranging desks to create “zigzag seating for exams…
Read more
11 days ago · 64 likes · 43 comments · Edward Slavsquat
Does he though? Your humble Moscow correspondent is not so sure.
Perhaps it’s time for a quick refresher course on Putin’s ceaseless clot-shot peddling. Below are a few observations for your consideration.
1. Putin is a clot-shot shill
Putin—who claims to be giga-vaxxed—has been a tireless promoter of Sputnik V, placing particular emphasis on the drug’s unimpeachable safety and efficacy.
“After many millions of administered doses, our authorities have not recorded a single lethal outcome from the use of this drug, while other manufacturers, unfortunately, have such tragic cases,” Putin explained to journalists on June 4, 2021.
He’s correct of course—but only because the Russian government does not disclose post-vaccination complications.
Russia does not have a VAERS-like database for reporting and monitoring suspected adverse reactions, and doctors who question the vaccine’s safety or efficacy have been threatened with exorbitant fines and prison time.
This is probably because Sputnik V is an unproven, WEF-linked genetic injection that has maimed and killed countless people.
Edward Slavsquat

An 18-year-old was coerced into taking Sputnik V. Now she's dead.
Like the Big Pharma COVID shots, Sputnik V is an unproven experimental genetic vaccine. Unlike the Big Pharma COVID shots, it’s difficult to assess the safety of Sputnik V because the Russian government does not publish data on post-vaccination complications…
Read more


8.Sleepwalking Into Disaster: How US Establishment Lost Fear of Escalating Ukraine Crisis

The following interview was originally published on Sputnik News, a website which is currently banned in UK.

IMAGE: Vladimir Golstein, Associate Professor of Slavic Studies at Brown University. 
On 9 May, US President Joe Biden signed a lend-lease Bill to streamline US lethal military aid to Ukraine, while the American press continues to present a one-sided picture of the Ukraine crisis. Vladimir Golstein, associate professor at Brown University in Rhode Island, has explained why this approach is fraught with great risks for the US.
Sputnik: After the beginning of Russian special operation in Ukraine, US Big Tech labelled and banned major Russian media outlets. Now, the Department of Homeland Security has announced the creation of a so-called Disinformation Governance Board to fight “Russian disinformation”. What’s so scary about Russian news, in your opinion? How far can this go?
Vladimir Golstein: This trend is highly disturbing, to say the least. As is the case with all sorts of censorship, political in particular, it reveals the weakness of the censoring side. Why are they afraid to discuss issues if they are convinced that they are doing the right thing? What exactly are they hiding? Why are they afraid to be challenged?
Needless to say, this idea of censorship goes against the most fundamental and cherished principles of the United States. This is especially important, when the information which is being suppressed relates to a distant land and complex and highly contentious issues. Americans have the right to know what kind of a cause their money is supporting, and what kind of cause is worth pursuing at the risk of global conflagration.
The whole idea of “fake news” or “disinformation” is highly dubious. Any complex event has a multitude of manifestations and causes. There is no single set of eyes that can see and register it all. As St Paul observed, in the affairs of this world we see “through a glass darkly”, consequently, it is highly erroneous for one side to claim that they see clearly, whereas another side produces only fake news.
Besides myopia and the self-defeating dimension of censorship, one should highlight two obvious facts related to censorship and the dismissal of alternative interpretations as propaganda:
First, governments resort to this tactic to achieve some sort of consensus, which they don’t want to be challenged. Indeed, ever since the violent overthrow of the legitimate government in Kiev in 2014, the western consensus has been established: “Ukraine is resisting Russian aggression. This aggression is getting more and more out of hand and is bound to spread further. To stop it, we need a stronger NATO. So, dear taxpayers, get ready to pay more for NATO expansion and a build-up of the military.”
Second, the war hysteria and the unchallenged demonisation of the other side serve one additional purpose: a diversion; a diversion from all sorts of failures by the government.
So I am not surprised that numerous western governments, British and American in particular, have decided to resort to various forms of modern censorship for the sake of these two myopic goals: military build-up and diversion.
Sputnik: Adam Kinzinger (the Republican Representative for Illinois’ 16th congressional district) introduced an authorisation for use of military force (AUMF) resolution which would allow the US president to send US troops to Ukraine. Does anyone among those supporting Kinzinger understand that this step could translate into all-out war between Russia and NATO?
Vladimir Golstein: This political resolution is nothing but posturing. The United States is not ready to send military forces to Ukraine, knowing very well that that would result in all-out war. At least, top people in the government, the Pentagon in particular, are aware of that, and the president has been rather clear on the issue.
What is more disturbing is the fact that Adam Kinzinger believes that he can get political momentum by acting as an even greater war-monger than the Democrats. He obviously believes that the American campaign of demonising Russia has been so successful that his constituents would welcome further belligerent actions. Here again, we are dealing with the concrete results of the massive propaganda campaign undertaken by the US government along with all sorts of liberal outlets which used to be rather pacifist.
In recent years, however, the endless barrage of news to which Americans have been exposed, seems to carry two messages: first, Russians are barbaric and therefore performing all sorts of barbaric policies, including wars; second, they are not competent at what they do and are therefore being defeated by the courageous Ukrainian forces.
Consequently, Mr Kinzinger’s average voter concludes that if barbaric Russians can’t win against Ukraine, they are surely no match for the all-powerful American war machine. Thus, there is no longer any fear connected with this war escalating to another level. This is very disturbing. There is a well-known book by Christopher Clark on the history of the First World War called ‘The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914’. That’s exactly what we are facing now: sleepwalking politicians, such as Mr Kinzinger, gain in popularity, while their voters sleepwalk into electing them, ignoring what unfolds in front of their own eyes.
Sputnik: Some observers say that the US and other NATO countries are already at war with Russia via their proxies in Ukraine. Do you agree with this view? What’s your take on Finland and Sweden’s NATO bid amid Russia’s special operation, which itself was triggered by NATO expansion?
Vladimir Golstein: The nature of this proxy war is obvious, and it has been obvious to any unbiased observer. The speed with which Ukraine has been armed by NATO, the provocative Ukrainian stance, the West’s refusal to engage in diplomacy, the well-organised sanction campaign, the all-powerful media blitzkrieg, and finally, the acknowledgment of the top figures in western establishment that their purpose is to weaken Russia so it won’t be capable of any military action, all testify to the highly elaborate plans of subjugating Russia before tackling the next country that threatens NATO hegemony: China.
Needless to say, China is not interested in seeing Russia fall. Russia, China, India and other major countries are much more interested in a multi-polar world, and any action that would consolidate western leadership, such as further expanding NATO to include Finland and Sweden, are bound to have all sorts of repercussions, ranging from economic to military pushback. Further expansion of NATO means further undermining of the post-Second World War peace architecture, further escalation and military build-up, further abuse of valuable Earth resources for the sake of militarism.
One hopes that the depth and scope of these repercussions are made clear to the citizens of Sweden and Finland. Unfortunately, here we return to the issue of censorship and the dismissals of the Russian point of view. Somehow, Russian security concerns are consistently delegitimised in the western press, and that includes the Swedish and Finnish media.
This is highly regrettable and, more importantly, extremely dangerous. Poking a nuclear bear is one of the most idiotic things anyone can do, and Scandinavian people, who know Russians well, and who have been interacting with Russians for centuries, should know better.
Sputnik: What forces are interested in poking Russia, cancelling Russian culture, attacks on Russians abroad, further NATO expansion plans and arming Ukraine? What goals are they trying to reach?

[Message clipped]  View entire message
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video blckbx today: Europese energiezekerheid onder druk, Macron pakt door met Digital ID en meer...




FULL INTERVIEW with the prophet Elijah Magnier: “It’s an act of self harm. Europe is destroying its own economy”


with George Galloway




Watch U.S. Congressman on the CIA Overthrowing the Governments of Guatemala and Chile (1987)


with US Representative James Claude Wright, Jr. (December 22, 1922 – May 6, 2015)