RFK Jr. Details the Vaccine Manufacturers’ Stunning Admission; Blood Clots from The Vaccine; International Crimes Investigative Committee; Cancer Cure; What is in Our Food

RFK Jr. Details the Vaccine Manufacturers’ Stunning Admission of Causing Injury & Harm

Each of the 405 diseases that have become epidemic since 1989 is listed as a side effect in the vaccine inserts. Autism is among those diseases listed.

“The Federal law says that they’re not allowed to list anything on that manufacturer’s insert unless [the] FDA determines that it is likely that the vaccine caused that injury.”



Brought to you by Pfizer


Image


The next episode of ☀️ICIC – International Crimes Investigative Committee with: Dr. Claus Köhnlein, Dr. Hans-Joachim Maaz & Samuel Eckert

Website: ICIC.law


NEW – John Kerry says, “we select group of human beings” are talking about “saving the planet” at the World Economic Forum.



The Cancer Cure drug that was suppressed.

Our Next Soul Level; Doctor Admits  99% Intubates Patients Died; MHRA Report Card; Mammogram Risks

Doctor Admits  99% Intubates Patients Died

It’s never been about health or a cure…its about big pharma and hospitals scheming for profit. This doctor calls it “politics.”

If a hospital admits a COVID-19 patient, they get paid $13k.

If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator, the hospital gets paid $39k—three times as much.

While HCQ is better known, has fewer side-effects, and costs about $20 a dose for out-patients, Remdesivir is a therapeutic course that costs $2,340/patient that has been proven to cause liver damage. Being intravenous, Remdesivir requires expensive hospital care (hospital receives an additional $13k from Medicare.)

There have been many accounts of hospitals placing non covid patients on covid floors…increasing exposure and the hospital’s chance of cashing in more. This is why some hospitals refuse to allow family in. It’s not a “safety” protocol.


MHRA YELLOW CARD REPORTING SUMMARY UP TO 23rd NOVEMBER 2022 (Data published 1st Dec 2022)
Adult & Child – Primary, Third Dose & Boosters (mono/bivalent)

People in UK who have received one or more vaccine = 53,813,491
(Up to 11th Sept 2022)

Yellow Card Adverse Event Reports – 177,925 (Pfizer) + 246,866 (AZ) + 47,045 (Moderna) + 52 (Novavax = N) + 2130 (Unknown) = 474,018 people impacted incl. bivalent vaccines (increase of 3995 in 4 weeks)

Overall 1-in-114 people injected experiences a Yellow Card Adverse Event, which may be less than 10% of actual figures according to MHRA.

TOTAL DOSES administered – 94.4million (Pfizer) + 49.16m (AZ) + 25.3m (Moderna) = 168,859,700 doses incl. all booster programmes

All boosters = 64,259,700
• Pfizer – 32.5m (mono) & 9.7m (bivalent)
• Astrazeneca – 59,700
• Moderna – 13.1m (mono) & 8.9m (bivalent)

Adverse event report figures below INCLUDE both mono- and bivalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

Booster Yellow Card Reports – 35,028 (Pfizer) + 655 (AZ) + 21,956 (Moderna) + 280 (Unknown) = 57,919

Reactions – 511,776 (Pfizer) + 874,912 (AZ) + 151,628 (Moderna) + 106 (Novavax = N) + 6508 (Unknown) = 1,544,930

Fatal – 857 (Pfizer) + 1334 (AZ) + 111 (Moderna) + 60 (Unknown) = 2362

Blood Disorders – 17,677 (Pfizer) + 7938 (AZ) + 2862 (Moderna) + 75 (Unknown) = 28,552

Anaphylaxis – 687 (Pfizer) + 888 (AZ) + 102 (Moderna) + 2 (N) + 3 (Unknown) = 1682

Acute Cardiac – 14,375 (Pfizer) + 11,813 (AZ) + 4177 (Moderna) + 5 (N) + 161 (Unknown) = 30,531

Eye Disorders – 8461 (Pfizer) + 15,107 (AZ) + 1939 (Moderna) + 105 (Unknown) = 25,612

Blindness – 180 (Pfizer) + 330 (AZ) + 46 (Moderna) + 5 (Unknown) = 561

Deafness – 331 (Pfizer) + 447 (AZ) + 70 (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 854

Infections – 13,600 (Pfizer) + 20,951 (AZ) + 3160 (Moderna) + 5 (N) + 263 (Unknown) = 37,979

Herpes – 2341 (Pfizer) + 2725 (AZ) + 363 (Moderna) + 2 (N) + 30 (Unknown) = 5461

Spontaneous Abortions – 505 + 19 stillbirths/foetal deaths (Pfizer) + 240 + 6 stillbirths/foetal deaths (AZ) + 74 + 1 stillbirth (Moderna) +11 (Unknown) = 830 miscarriages

Gastrointestinal Disorders – 44,248 (Pfizer) + 81,396 (AZ) + 13,828 (Moderna) + 6 (N) + 506 (Unknown) = 139,984

Strokes and CNS hemorrhages – 878 (Pfizer) + 2429 (AZ) + 108 (Moderna) + 1 (N) + 27 (Unknown) = 3443

Nervous System Disorders – 84,728 (Pfizer) + 184,225 (AZ) + 24,827 (Moderna) + 16 (N) + 1088 (Unknown) = 294,884

Seizures – 1201 (Pfizer) + 2113 (AZ) + 340 (Moderna) + 34 (Unknown) = 3688

Paralysis – 553 (Pfizer) + 916 (AZ) + 148 (Moderna) + 15 (Unknown) = 1632

Vertigo & Tinnitus – 4426 (Pfizer) + 6935 (AZ) + 925 (Moderna) + 56 (Unknown) = 12,342

Respiratory Disorders – 23,064 (Pfizer) + 30,230 (AZ) + 5592 (Moderna) + 3 (N) + 279 (Unknown) = 59,168

Epistaxis (nosebleeds) – 1148 (Pfizer) + 2307 (AZ) + 240 (Moderna) + 12 (Unknown) = 3707

Psychiatric Disorders – 10,798 (Pfizer) + 18,699 (AZ) + 3025 (Moderna) + 1 (N) + 158 (Unknown) = 32,681

Skin Disorders – 35,879 (Pfizer) + 53,819 (AZ) + 15,036 (Moderna) + 7 (N) + 464 (Unknown) = 105,205

Reproductive/Breast Disorders – 31,789 (Pfizer) + 20,983 (AZ) + 5438 (Moderna) + 1 (N) + 271 (Unknown) = 58,482

Bell’s Palsy – 677 (Pfizer) + 646 (AZ) + 127 (Moderna) + 1 (N) + 3 (Unknown) = 1454

CHILDREN & YOUNG PEOPLE SPECIAL REPORT
Suspected side effects reported in individuals under 18yrs old

• Pfizer – 4,200,000 children (1st doses) + 2,900,000 (2nd doses) + 400,000(mono)/52,500(bivalent) boosters resulting in 4205 Yellow Cards

• AZ – 11,400 children (1st doses) + 8.500 (2nd doses) + ‘extremely limited boosters’ resulting in 267 Yellow Cards (reporting rate 1-in-43)

• Moderna – 2100 children (1st doses) + 2000 (2nd doses) + 32,400(mono)/1000(bivalent) boosters resulting in 39 Yellow cards

• Brand Unspecified – 37 Yellow Cards

Total = 4,213,700 children injected (under 18s)
Total doses (1st, 2nd & boosters) = 7,609,900
Total Yellow Cards Under 18s = 4548

For full reports including 387 pages of specific reaction listings – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions


 

The Business of Breast Cancer: Mammogram Risks

An epidemic of low-value screenings is driving millions of women to get unnecessary tests and treatments
Jan 14 2023

 

Getting older is a complicated business. As we age, trips to the doctor increasingly conclude with requisitions for different screenings—tests meant to help diagnose potential problems and keep us healthy for the long haul.

Although many tests used to detect cancer have been hailed as life-saving miracles of modern medicine, some have a dark side. Concerns over the prolific use of mammograms for detecting breast cancer have been growing in the scientific community as journals publish research revealing these tests come with their own risks. With roughly seventy percent of women in the U.S. over forty having mammograms at least every two years, it raises questions about their safety, if information about potential dangers is being obscured, and who might really be benefitting from this widespread testing.

What if millions of women are fueling a billion-dollar industry with ever-increasing profits by using screening that not only hasn’t improved outcomes, but may be harming the women it is supposed to save?

Cancer in Our Society

Cancer is pervasive and widely feared due to its relentlessness, brutality, and the grueling nature of many cancer treatments. The National Cancer Institute spends billions on cancer research each year and cancer fundraisers are a perennial activity in our communities. Virtually every cancer has a month dedicated to its awarenessOctober is breast cancer awareness month, which it politely shares with liver cancer awareness in the United States.

As we get older, cancer is something we think about more and our doctors push us to get tests and screenings to make sure cancer cells haven’t been seeded in our bodies.

Breast Cancer

Breast cancer deeply frightens many women (and yes, men can get it too). If you happen to be considered high-risk, screenings may start as early as your twenties. In the United States, mammograms are considered the gold standard of testing for breast cancer and there are now both 2D and 3D varieties for women to choose from.

Mammograms use x-rays (a form of ionizing radiation) to take pictures of the breast. A machine is used where a woman places her breast between two plates or paddles where it is then compressed and x-ray images are captured.

In a 2D mammogram, two images are taken, one from the top and one from the side, creating a 2D picture.

3D, or tomosynthesis, is largely the same process, using slightly more radiation and capturing additional images, creating a three-dimensional picture of the breast.

Radiologists use the images to look for abnormalities, with breast cancer usually appearing as a white mass. If abnormalities are found, the patient is asked to come back for more tests, often an MRI, or to have a biopsy. Mammograms do not diagnose breast cancer. They look for abnormalities in the breast and can give the patient more information about their breast tissue, if masses are present, and if further investigation is needed. The only way to diagnose breast cancer after an abnormality is seen is to do a biopsy.

Mammography: What You Should Know

Mammography does, however, have risks that all women should be aware of. The two main concerns of mammography are radiation exposure and overdiagnosis.

Because mammography uses a type of ionizing radiation, it comes with inherent risk. We are all exposed to radiation every day. Some of that radiation, like the ultraviolet and infrared rays of the sun, is essential to our health (in appropriate doses). But we are well adapted to these natural, low levels of radiation. The same is not true of man-made radiation.

The ionizing radiation used in mammograms is much stronger than natural sources.  At high levels, ionizing radiation can harm our tissues, organs, and lead to cancer. According to the American Cancer Society (ACS) the dose of radiation people receive from a mammogram is about the same amount of radiation people get from their natural surroundings in a three-month period.

This is of concern because there are parts of the body that are particularly sensitive to radiation, and we should limit our exposure whenever possible. In fact, Cornell University’s Program on Breast Cancer Environmental Risk Factors states that “The female breast is known to be highly susceptible to the cancer-causing effects of radiation when exposure occurs before menopause.” A mammogram is also directing this radiation not only at the breast, but at the other organs inside the chest, like the heart and lungs.

A cohort study published in the British Journal of Cancer in 2012 followed more than 500,000 women from 1973 until 2009. The study found that women who had received radiation treatment for breast cancer (high energy x-rays) had a significant increase in heart disease and lung cancer in the decades after their treatment.

The study clearly demonstrates a progressive increase in both risk and mortality from radiation-related heart disease and lung cancer with time (into the third decade) after exposure to radiation.

The study is one of many to raise questions about routine mammograms for women at low risk of breast cancer.

Overdiagnosis

The other issue with mammography is overdiagnosis. Overdiagnosis is a concern because mammograms can detect abnormalities that may not be cancer, or cancers that would have regressed on their own but are treated once they are discovered. That means many women are exposed to chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery that may not have been not needed.

An article published in Public Health Research and Practice entitled What Is Overdiagnosis and Why Should We Take It Seriously? offers a very good explanation of what overdiagnosis is and why it is a problem, defining overdiagnosis this way:

“In cancer screening, overdiagnosed cancers are those that did not need to be found because they would not have produced symptoms or led to premature death.”

“Overdiagnosis in cancer screening arises largely from the paradoxical problem that screening is most likely to find the slow-growing or dormant cancers that are least likely to harm us, and less likely to find the aggressive, fast-growing cancers that cause cancer mortality. This central paradox has become clearer over recent decades. The more overdiagnosis is produced by a screening program, the less likely the program is to serve its ultimate goal of reducing illness and premature death from cancer.”

An article published in The Lancet in 2013 argued that two 30- to 35- year old randomized studies underestimated when they concluded that there was a 19 percent rate of overdiagnosis when screening with mammography.

The author, Per-Henrik Zahl, a researcher with the Norwegian Institute of Public Health who has looked at breast cancer overdiagnosis, argues that detection rates and the level of overdiagnosis have increased 100 percent or more as the sensitivity of mammograms has improved.

Zahl notes that when screening was introduced in Sweden and Norway there was a 50 percent increase in invasive breast cancer. The total increase in diagnosis in Norway was 75 percent. He concluded that almost all of the increase in cancer detection through screening was due to lesions that normally go into spontaneous regression.

comparative study published in the journal BMC Women’s Health in 2009 set out to quantify overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening program. Denmark is unique as only 20 percent of the population has been offered mammography over an extended period. Incidence rates of carcinoma in situ (stage 0 breast cancer) and invasive breast cancer were collected in areas with and without screening over thirteen years, and twenty years before its introduction. The study found that in the screened women, the overdiagnosis rate was 33 percent.

systematic review published in the British Medical Journal in 2009 tracked the incidence of breast cancer before and after the introduction of mammography screening in specific areas—the United Kingdom; Manitoba, Canada; New South Wales, Australia; Sweden and parts of Norway—both seven years before and seven years after public breast cancer screening programs were implemented. The review found that overdiagnosis was estimated at 52 percent and concluded that one in three breast cancers detected in a population offered screening was overdiagnosed.

As evidence of overdiagnosis has accumulated, it is now recognized as the most serious downside of population-wide breast screening.

What Women Think

One of the main concerns with mammograms is that women may not be warned about the potential risks and all the factors involved in breast cancer screening. A cross-sectional survey of 479 women in the United States, aged 18-97 published in the British Journal of Medicine set out to understand women’s attitudes to and knowledge of false-positive mammography results as well as the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (a type of stage 0 breast cancer) after screening mammography.

Ductal carcinoma in situ is defined as the presence of abnormal cells inside the milk duct in the breast. DCIS is considered an early form of breast cancer. DCIS is non-invasive, meaning it is still isolated and has not spread out of the milk duct and has a low risk of becoming invasive.

The survey concluded that women were aware of false positives, seeming to view them as an acceptable consequence of screening mammography. In contrast, most women were unaware that screening can detect cancers that may never progress (ductal carcinoma in situ) and felt that that information was relevant.

The study also found that only 8 percent of women thought mammography could harm a woman without breast cancer and 94 percent did not realize (doubted) that mammograms could detect cancers that might not progress. Few of the women in the study knew about ductal carcinoma in situ, but 60 percent of the women wanted to take into account the possibility that any cancer detected may not progress.

Another study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2013 looked at overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer, and what physicians were telling patients about the risks of screening, specifically the possibility of overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

Less than 10 percent said they were told about the risks of mammograms by their physicians. Little more than half (51 percent) said they would not agree to screening if it resulted in one overtreated person per one life saved. These numbers imply that millions of Americans might not choose to be screened if they knew the whole story, but unfortunately, 90 percent are not getting that information.

The Cancer Industry Recommendations

In the United States, mammograms are the standard screening used to detect breast cancer, and doctors usually begin speaking to their women patients about mammograms at around age forty.

Both The American College of Radiology and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend women begin annual mammograms at age forty. The American Cancer Society recommends annual screenings begin at 45 (then once every other year after 55), and The US Preventative Services Task Force recommends women begin mammograms every other year at age fifty.

Mammograms are approved by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) which regulates the standards for mammography machines and the people who provide them. The FDA has also released several warnings about using thermography instead of mammograms, reminding the public that mammography is still the most effective primary breast cancer screening test.

Do Regular Mammograms Lead to Better Outcomes?

The question becomes, do regular mammograms lead to better outcomes? Well, it would depend on how you define better outcomes. If we are talking about detecting breast cancer, it seems the answer is most certainly yes. Mammograms seem an excellent tool for detecting breast cancer. But, if we define better outcomes as fewer women dying of breast cancer, then we seem to have entered a different territory.

An article, “Mammograms and Mortality: How Has the Evidence Evolved?” published in 2021 noted that a previous meta-analysis of mammogram studies revealed that mammograms have led to no significant reduction in all-cause mortality (death from any cause) for women of any age group. The article, by Amanda Kowalski, a health economist and the Gail Wilensky Professor of Applied Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan Department of Economics, also notes that some trials even show imprecise increases in all-cause mortality across all age groups or within an age group. These findings were based on eight large randomized controlled trials that combined included over 600,000 women.

A very large Canadian randomized screening trial published in the British Medical Journal followed nearly 90,000 women aged 40-59 over 25 years, who were considered at average risk for breast cancer. One group of women received routine mammograms, and the other did not. The somewhat surprising results were that mortality rates in both groups were almost identical. The overall conclusion of the study was that annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer any better than a physical examination. The study also noted that they found the overdiagnosis rate among the mammography participants was 22 percent.

An analysis published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine in 2015 concluded that mammograms have been promoted to the public with three promises that all seem to be wrong. The first is that they save lives, the second is that they save breasts, and the third is that they catch cancer early. The author, Peter C Gøtzsche, formerly with the Nordic Cochrane Center and co-founder of the influential Cochrane Collaboration, states that mammogram screenings do not help women live longer, increase mastectomies, and many cancers are still caught at a very late stage.

It’s a sentiment other researchers have also expressed.

“The time has come to reassess whether universal mammographic screening should be recommended for any age group because the declines in breast cancer mortality can be ascribed mainly to improved treatments and breast cancer awareness; currently, we see that screening has only a minor effect on mortality (if any),” researchers from Nordic Cochrane Centre wrote in the journal Radiology in 2011.

In 2013, the Swiss Medical Board—an independent health technology assessment initiative—was asked to prepare a review of mammography screening. After a panel reviewed the available evidence—and contemplated its implications in detail—they were extremely concerned. The Swiss Medical Board’s report was released on Feb. 2, 2014, and acknowledged that systematic mammography screening might prevent about one death from breast cancer for every one thousand women screened, even though there was no evidence that overall mortality was affected. It also emphasized the harm caused by mammography, specifically false-positive test results and the risk of overdiagnosis. The report cites the following statistics, from a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association:

“For every breast-cancer death prevented in U.S. women over a 10-year course of annual screening beginning at 50 years of age, 490 to 670 women are likely to have a false positive mammogram with repeat examination; 70 to 100, an unnecessary biopsy; and 3 to 14, an overdiagnosed breast cancer that would never have become clinically apparent.”

Based on their findings, the board recommended that no new systematic mammography screening programs be introduced in Switzerland and that a time limit be placed on existing programs in the country, phasing them out entirely.

(On the New England Journal of Medicine’s website you can listen to an interview the journal conducted with Dr. Mette Kalager on the Swiss Board’s recommendation and learn more about why they recommended phasing out routine mammography screening.)

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, thought to be one of the world’s best and least biased research institutions, conducted a systematic review to assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity. The trials they looked at included 600,000 women aged 39-74 years. The conclusions, published in 2013, are as follows:

“If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15 percent and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30 percent, it means that for every 2,000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings.”

The study’s authors, Peter C Gøtzsche and Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, state that women should be fully informed of both the benefits and harms. They went so far as to write an evidence-based leaflet in several languages to help women understand the risks.

The Mammography Industry-Projected Earnings

What might perhaps be interesting to know is that mammography is a multi-billion dollar industry.

In September 2022, Vantage Market Research released a report that projected earnings for the mammography market would be from US $1.8 billion in 2021 to $3.2 billion by 2028.

Growing markets in Asia will provide most of that expansion. The report attributes the huge growth in the region to the existence of a significant number of mammography companies, and the high adoption rate due to government measures that stimulate the industry and increasing collaborations between the mammography industry and governments in the region.

Final Thoughts

Success when it comes to breast cancer really depends on the outcome we are trying to achieve. If it is early detection, then we seem to be doing a stellar job. But if our goal is lowering mortality rates, we seem to be in a gray zone and possibly moving backwards. With the present technology—and its increasing sensitivity—we seem to have created many more cancer patients, perhaps unnecessarily, and are keeping women in the dark about the dangers.

Michael Baum, a Professor Emeritus of Surgery and a visiting Professor of Medical Humanities at University College London (UCL), is a British surgical oncologist specializing in breast cancer treatment and one of the architects of Britain’s national breast screening program.

Baum went from being one of the most determined supporters of breast cancer screening to one of its most vocal opponents.

In his book, “The History and Mystery of Breast Cancer,” he explains why.

“The largest threat posed by American medicine is that more and more of us are being drawn into the system not because of an epidemic of disease, but because of an epidemic of diagnoses. The real problem with the epidemic of diagnoses is that it leads to an epidemic of treatments. Not all treatments have important benefits, but almost all can have harms.”

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.

Emma Suttie

Emma Suttie D.AC, AP  is an acupuncture physician and founder of Chinese Medicine Living—a website dedicated to sharing how to use traditional wisdom to live a healthy lifestyle in the modern world. She is a lover of the natural world, martial arts, and a good cup of tea.


Meditation is a natural relaxation state of the mind and is considered to be most important mental exercise to practice during our lifetime. Meditation is actually our natural state and our connection to the Divine.

Mindfulness can be practice all the time by simply focusing on the current moment, not yesterday or tomorrow but the present moment.

The proper way to meditate is just start. You will develop a practice over time but start with what works for you. Sitting in a chair or floor with good posture, close your eyes, take 5–10 slow deep breaths, following your breath. Your relaxing your mind so try not to think of anything. Just focus on a point in the front of eyes. You will find your thoughts drifting to problems just bring the focus back to the point in front of the eyes. The time you meditate is up to you.

Make meditation part of your life and you will see the world anew.

J6 Political Prisoner; And We Know; Save The Children; The Higher View

Coming up on this episode of Alison at Large: A one-on-one with J6 political prisoner Jake Lang. We will remember the infamous day and discuss the new book he has released behind bars. Plus a shocking ruling out of new Zealand… Regarding pedophilia. And “to censor or not to censor”… That is the question… And Elon Musk’s latest maneuver may shock you. And B.M.W. introduces you to a car with a ‘digital soul.’

Jake Lang J6 Political Prisoner, “To censor or not to censor” and Cars with “Souls”

Why hasn’t Ray Ebbs Been Arrested?


And We Know

1.7.23: Trump in CONTROL, DS losing their grip, Huge WIN, Art of the DEAL playing out. PRAY!

Save The Children

The Higher View

The Higher View is a brand-new show using The View as a format. If you are a fan or not a fan of The View which has been on for 25 years. We have taken the show format to a Higher Consciousness perspective. Our first show aired live yesterday. Please check it out and share. It is time that Humanity moves to a Higher Consciousness together. Awake 2 Oneness Radio: https://www.awake2onenessradio.org/


Truth On MSM

The Media is not covering the Twitter Files; Interview with Whitney Webb; Huge Supreme Court Case; Police in the UK Arrest a Woman for Silently Praying  

 

TURLEY: The Media is not covering the Twitter Files and the reason why is because they’re heavily invested in this scandal, they’re heavily invested in Hunter Biden — many of these news outlets only recently just acknowledged the laptop is authentic — 2 years later!

“What’s disturbing is what’s on the [Hunter Biden] laptop – hundreds of emails detailing an influence peddling scheme that is breathtaking. Influence peddling is common in D.C. but I’ve been in this town for 3 decades, and I’ve never seen anything come close to what the Biden’s did.”

Interview  with Whitney Webb,  professional writer, researcher and journalist since 2016 regarding the Clintons and more.

 

Prepare to have your mind blown

Huge Supreme Court Case

This is how you take down the wall.  United we stand Divided we fall

Police in the UK arrest a woman for silently praying:
“Are you praying?” “I might be praying in my head.”

Money, Hospitals and Murder; List of Controlled Puppets

Image

Ex-Nazis in the service of Uncle Sam

12 Dec, 2022 11:41

Ex-Nazis in the service of Uncle Sam: How the US took control of Germany’s main intelligence service

The history of the BND, its founder Reinhard Gehlen, and its loyal service to Washington
Ex-Nazis in the service of Uncle Sam: How the US took control of Germany’s main intelligence service

“The United States still essentially occupies Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and other countries. At the same time, it cynically calls them equal allies… What kind of cooperation is that?”. This question was posed by Russian President Vladimir Putin during his speech in the Kremlin on September 30, 2022, when agreements on the entry of the new regions into the Russian Federation were signed.

The Russian president did not go into further detail, but it’s hard to argue against his words. Western Europe’s strongest country, Germany, increasingly acts against its national interests. Berlin coordinates its foreign policy course with Washington not only at regular NATO and G7 summits, but also through more private channels. One of these is Germany’s foreign intelligence service, officially called the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND).

This department was created in the post-WWII years by former Nazis and SS officers as a private intelligence organization. Control over the service was entirely in the hands of the United States, and major intelligence operations were carried out in the US interest. Numerous journalistic investigations allow us to conclude that the situation has not changed much to this day.

America’s Neo-Nazi bedfellows in Ukraine are latest in long line of odious allies Washington has used against Russia

 America’s Neo-Nazi bedfellows in Ukraine are latest in long line of odious allies Washington has used against Russia. Read more

 

 

RT recalls the history of German intelligence as one of the most loyal tools in the hands of the United States.

Officer, spy, Nazi

The history of “German intelligence” is inextricably linked with its founder Reinhard Gehlen. He was born on April 3, 1902, in Erfurt, Prussia, part of the German Empire, in the family of retired Oberleutnant Walter Gehlen. The family came from the Flemish aristocracy, where men traditionally served in the army.

Young Gehlen had every chance to break with family tradition – after the First World War, under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany was restricted from having military educational institutions.

Everything changed when Adolf Hitler came to power. Under his rule, Germany renewed its course toward militarization. One of the first steps was the restoration of military educational institutions, including the General Staff College. The future head of the BND was one of its first graduates.

In 1936, Gehlen was appointed an officer of the operational department of the German army’s “South” group, under the leadership of one of the top WWII generals, Erich von Manstein. This served as a springboard for his further military career. During the Second World War, Reinhard rose to the rank of Lieutenant General and became chief of military intelligence of the Supreme Command of the German Army’s Abteilung Fremde Heere Ost (FHO). In the war years, this structure collected large amounts of data on the technical, military, strategic and political intelligence of the Soviet Union.

RT

In fact, Gehlen owed his brilliant military career entirely to Hitler’s Nazis.

In 1944, however, he was already aware of the regime’s dwindling prospects. As an ardent anti-communist, he decided to join one of the Western allies willing to pay good money for his services. The head of intelligence gave orders for numerous intelligence documents to be copied and hidden in waterproof barrels. These were then buried in various locations in the Austrian Alps.

The volunteer super-spy: How a German businessman stole the newest US missile for Moscow

 The volunteer super-spy: How a German businessman stole the newest US missile for Moscow. Read more

It didn’t take long to find a buyer. In July 1943, the military department of the US Department of Defense formed the Department of Special Projects. This organization began developing a secret program for retraining German prisoners of war.

On April 5, 1945, a month before the surrender of Germany, the Lieutenant General along with his helpers, Gerhard Wessel and Hermann Bown, surrendered to the Americans, taking along Soviet-related intelligence collected during the war, and the best pro-American personnel.

Shortly before that, the Chief of Staff of the US Army, George Catlett Marshall Jr., agreed to study the archives of the Wehrmacht military formations on the Eastern front. Also in April 1945, an agreement was concluded between the intelligence services of Great Britain and the United States to study the experience of conducting military operations against the USSR. Gehlen, with his data and experience, had great timing.

Upon arrival in the United States, he was given the pseudonym Hans Holbein and issued a service certificate to conceal the fact that the US army was cooperating with SS members.

As a result of Gehlen’s agreement with the American government, starting in mid-September 1945, prisoners of war in a camp with the postal address P.O Box 1142, Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA began research work under his guidance. The project was code-named “B” (Bolero).

Operation Uranus: The day Hitler’s Nazis were smashed and the Soviet Union began to take the upper hand in WW2

 Operation Uranus: The day Hitler’s Nazis were smashed and the Soviet Union began to take the upper hand in WW2  Read more

The Nazi theme club

According to information obtained from CIA archives, about 200 officers took part in the scheme from October 1945 to April 1946. The result of their work was a document numbering 3,657 pages, prepared for the governments of the United Kingdom, the US, and Canada.

In July 1946, Gehlen’s Bolero group was merged with another intelligence unit composed of former Nazis. This was Keystone, a service monitoring radio transmission on USSR-controlled European territory. It was headed by Herman Baun and located in Oberursel, Germany. The joint operation of these two groups was code-named Rusty, and their main task was to collect intelligence about the state of the USSR’s armed forces on European territories under its control.

A few months later, Gehlen and the US government agreed to create a full-fledged spy agency called The Gehlen Organization. He himself headed the organization, remaining its permanent leader until its abolition.

Some of the first people Gehlen recruited were SS and Gestapo officers who were issued false names and forged documents.

The CIA’s declassified archives have a dossier on one of the staff members, Heina Paul Johannes, who served in SS units and joined the organization under the name Karl Schuetz.

Among the first to join were SS-Obersturmfuhrers Frans Goring and Hans Sommer, and SS-Sturmfuhrer Herbert Stein.

RT

Gehlen also took in Lieutenant General Friedrich Wilhelm von Mellenthin, former commander of the 4th Panzer Army; Major General Nichtke, who commanded divisions in Poland and Russia; Major General Rudolf Kleinkamp, who headed the personnel service of the Wehrmacht High Command; Lieutenant Colonel Heinz Gudernan; Colonel von Kretschmer, former military attaché in Tokyo; and other Wehrmacht soldiers.

The leading positions at the head of the groups were occupied by former SS officers whom Gehlen knew personally. Colonel Heinz Heer became the chief analyst; Colonel Ulrich Noack headed the research group on the USSR economy; Captain Blossfeldt led the interrogations.

The agents providing information to the organization consisted entirely of pro-Hitler citizens who participated in active hostilities during World War II on the side of Nazi Germany.

‘All the real skinheads went to Ukraine’: An American Neo-Nazi outlines the crimes of his Ukrainian ‘colleagues’

 ‘All the real skinheads went to Ukraine’: An American Neo-Nazi outlines the crimes of his Ukrainian ‘colleagues’ Read more

New activities of the former Nazis

Official registration data for The Gehlen Organization is missing for obvious reasons. We only know that it operated under different names: from 1949 to 1950 under the code name “Offspring”, from 1950 to 1951 as “Odeum”, and from 1951 to 1956 as “Zipper”.

The main activity of the organization was to obtain intelligence in the countries of Eastern Europe and the USSR.

On April 1, 1946, the new organization’s trial operations began and subsequently received a positive assessment from US representatives.

However, The Gehlen Organization’s first major operation was launched in 1947 and code-named “Aktion Hermes.” Its goal was to systematically interrogate hundreds of thousands of former German prisoners of war, who were beginning to return from Soviet camps where they were forced to participate in rebuilding the country.

The organization’s agents held permanent positions in the repatriation camps of Western zones, and then in Germany. Almost every repatriate – both soldier and civilian – was contacted by agents who asked him about where they were held and the factories where they worked. The agents were primarily interested in spies from the other side.

The main topics were the Soviet industry, armaments, telecommunications, and the population’s attitude toward the government.

RT

 

When Gehlen’s agents discovered a marked increase in the production of tanks and military aircraft in the Soviet Union after 1945, the news troubled the US military, which received all the reports.

In May 1949, British intelligence also led “Operation Jungle”, the purpose of which was to prepare and dispatch sabotage detachments operating under the guise of national liberation movements into the Baltic republics and socialist Poland.

In the late 1940s, MI6 set up a special center in Chelsea, London, to train agents to be sent to the Baltic States. The operation was led by Henry Carr, director of the North European Department of MI6, and the head of the Baltic Branch, Alexander McKibbin.

'We lived in dread of war, they told us we'd be dead in less than 30 minutes': How the world survived the Cuban Missile Crisis

 ‘We lived in dread of war, they told us we’d be dead in less than 30 minutes’: How the world survived the Cuban Missile Crisis Read more

 

The Gehlen Organization was tasked with selecting agents for the operation from among former Nazis.

Agents were transported to the Baltic States by sea under the cover of fictitious maritime transport company British Baltic Fishery Protection Service, which operated on a wartime high-speed military boat.

Officially, the company was engaged in protecting West German fishermen from “Soviet arbitrariness” at sea. The boats were modified (with weights reduced to increase speed).

To hide the British government’s involvement in case the boat was seized by the Soviet Navy, and the Gehlen Organization provided it with a German crew.

However, the USSR’s Ministry of State Security (MGB) was notified of the operation through its agents in Britain, and almost all of the 42 “Jungle” agents were arrested.

A celebration at whose expense?

In his memoirs, Gehlen wrote: “Until 1956, we did not have the opportunity to cover employees with state insurance, since formally, the employer did not exist.”

At the initial stage of The Gehlen Organization, Washington used it as a cell of its own army. It was the US army that took on the task of equipping the group of Nazi intelligence officers with technical tools ranging from typewriters to the necessary radio equipment.

The newly created institution was funded exclusively from the US budget, and the number of funds allocated, according to reports from various sources, ranged from $1.5 million to $3.4 million per year for 50 employees.

RT

 

Additionally, the US Army supplied the organization with cash as well as consumer goods from its warehouses, which were exchanged on the black market for money, as barter goods, or used as payment.

In September 1946, the company received 160,000 cigarettes, 43,300 liters of gasoline, and approximately $50,000 from the US Army.

In the period from July to October 1948, 82,153 chocolate bars, 67,150 packs of cigarettes, 4,500 razor blades, and 1,815 pairs of wool socks intended for The Gehlen Organization were produced.

The death of a US mercenary exposes the bleak reality of service with Ukraine’s 'International Legion'

 The death of a US mercenary exposes the bleak reality of service with Ukraine’s ‘International Legion’ Read more

 

American journalist Mary Ellen Rees, in her book “General Reinhard Gehlen: The CIA Connection”, wrote:

“Gehlen’s quickly expanding organization was constantly in need of money. What the US army provided was not enough, and the “black market” became its main source of income. The system was equally effective and shameless. The army provided the organization with money for supplies, which the organization’s special teams sold on the “black market”. Following the deals, the Criminal Affairs Division of the US Army confiscated the goods on the grounds that they had illegally entered the “black market”, and again took them into its property, which then again ended up on the “black market”. After the currency reform in June 1948, when the new German mark was introduced, this profitable cycle became a question of survival. According to Gehlen, its purchasing power then decreased by 70 percent.”

In 1949, The Gehlen Organization became subordinate to the CIA and remained under its control until Germany established its own government, for which the organization proceeded to work.

Among the documents found in CIA archives was the organization’s payroll. At the time, the salary of each employee ranged from 500 to 900 US dollars.

From the early 1950s, the German economy financed the institution through an agency code-named the “Industrial Research Institute”.

RT

In 1951, the organization received 600,000 Deutsche marks from partner companies Standart Elektrik AG, Rodenstock and Messerschmitt.

From 1954, monthly funding was provided by Bonn in the amount of 30,000 Deutsche marks. The money also came from the Federal Chancellor’s Reptilienfonds.

Dead Hand’s nuclear revenge: What would happen if the West launched an attack on Russia?

 Dead Hand’s nuclear revenge: What would happen if the West launched an attack on Russia? Read more

The birth of the German intelligence service

In June 1950, Gehlen expressed his views in favor of creating a West German foreign intelligence service to Hans Globke, the Secretary of State in the office of the Federal Chancellor, and in September of the same year, he spoke to the Federal Chancellor Konrad Adenauer himself.

His views eventually found support due to the changing situation in international politics.

In June 1950, the Korean War began, which made it clear that the “Cold War” could turn into real combat at any moment.

In divided Germany, two opposing social systems – communism and capitalism – stood literally opposite each other. The new war in Asia emphasized the vital need to collect information about the enemy and determined the course of intelligence priorities.

The conjuncture was on the side of military espionage – primarily against troops in Eastern Germany (“short-range intelligence”), as well as in Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other Eastern Bloc countries, including Yugoslavia and Albania (“deep intelligence”) and in the Soviet Union itself (“long-range intelligence”).

RT

Intensive efforts to include The Gehlen Organization in the structure of the Federal Government and thus ensure its budgetary financing were crowned with success five years later, when on July 11, 1955, the Cabinet of Ministers finally decided to take control of the organization and subordinate it to the Office of the Federal Chancellor.

Less than a year later, on April 1, 1956, The Gehlen Organization was finally transformed into the BND, but its structure had not changed in any way. Gehlen himself remained the permanent head of intelligence for another 12 years.

How the Nobel Peace Prize Committee has managed to unite Belarusian, Russian, and Ukrainian elites in collective anger

 How the Nobel Peace Prize Committee has managed to unite Belarusian, Russian, and Ukrainian elites in collective anger Read more

There are no official figures or scientifically based independent data on how the number of BND employees changed since 1956. According to opinion generally accepted in the GDR, the number of employees doubled from 1,245 people in 1956 to 2,500 in 1963, then doubled again to five thousand in 1968, and in 1977 the BND employed 6,500 officials, employees, workers, and officers sent from the Bundeswehr.

Old habits under a new status

Although the BND formally became the sovereign intelligence service of a formally sovereign state, it continued to carry out tasks in the interests of the US government.

This is confirmed by an investigation of The Washington Post and the German channel ZDF.

The investigation references the documents of the CIA and the BND and states that for half a century from the 1950s onwards, the CIA in conjunction with the BND read the secret correspondence of the governments of 120 countries, receiving multimillion-dollar financial profits out of it. This was carried out through the Swiss firm Crypto AG, which produces encryption equipment.

There is much to suggest that the German intelligence agency continues to carry out its activities in the interests of the United States to this day.

For example, in 2015, the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag, referencing an electronic statement of the BND, reported that, by order of the US National Security Agency (NSA), the German intelligence organization collected information about Austria, using keywords such as bundesamt (federal agency), gov (government), diplo (diplomatic institutions, Foreign Ministry).

The publication had previously reported that the BND helped the National Security Agency to carry out espionage against members of the French government and the European Commission.

The intelligence service of any country is a sign of its sovereignty and a tool for solving state tasks subordinated to national interests.

Proceeding from the above, as well as from the history of such a strategically important agency as the BND, it may be reasonable to conclude that Germany is not fully sovereign at the moment.

Out of Shadows Documentary

Home of Out of Shadows Official Documentary

93 Canadian Physicians Have Now Succumbed to Sudden Death; Doctor Cole Discusses Blood Clots; Died Suddenly Documentary

 

Canadian doctor William Makis reported heavy-hearted news while speaking to Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson.

It’s not just doctors who are dying suddenly or unexpectedly. Of course, doctors are the most vaccinated young people. Most of them have had four shots, even five shots. They have to be fully vaccinated to be able to work. But it’s other professions that are seeing sudden deaths as well. We’re seeing it in nurses. We’re seeing it in paramedics, police, firefighters — but now we’re even seeing it in teachers.

I’ve recently been contacted by an Alberta teacher who wishes to remain anonymous, but this individual told me that they’ve just lost a grade 2 student in their school. They’ve just lost suddenly — sudden death. They’ve also lost a teacher in their 30s — also sudden death, sudden cardiac death. And they are panicking.

For them, this is unprecedented. And they’ve reached out to me, and they said they’ve been silent. They’ve been silent up to now, but they’re seeing sudden deaths. They’re seeing injuries, kids are getting immune reactions — asthma. They’re having all kinds of reactions; they can’t concentrate in class. Kids can’t concentrate in class after the vaccination. So this is really, really worrying. And teachers are now starting to reach out to me and tell me what they’re seeing in the classrooms.Article: https://nzdsos.com/2022/11/18/more-dead-doctors-in-canada/

The Faces Of The Vaccine Injured | Real, Not Rare (realnotrare.com)

World Premiere: Died Suddenly (rumble.com)

No One Will Steal My Nation

 

May be an image of text that says 'MONEY BUYS EVERYTHING MEDIA POLITICIANS DOCTORS SCIENTISTS CILLUMINATI SOLDIERS EXCEPT LOVE, PERSONALITY, FREEDOM, IMMORTALITY, SILENCE, PEACE.'

 

May be an image of text that says 'COUNT HIM BRAVE WHO @MANOFWARR OVERCOMES HIS DESIRES THAN HIM WHO CONQUERS HIS ENEMIES; ENEMIES;FOR FOR THE HARDEST VICTORY IS OVER VICTOR SELF." ARISTOTLE'

 

May be an image of 1 person and text that says 'Spirituality does not come from religion. It comes from our soul. We must stop confusing religion and spirituality. Religion is a set of rules, regulations, and rituals created by humans, which were supposed to help people spiritually. Due to human imperfection religion has become corrupt, political, divisive and a tool for power struggle Spirituality is not theology or ideology Û a way flife, pure and original as givemby the Most High. Spirituality is a network linking us to the Most High, the universe, and each other.'

Democrats Receives Thousands for Midterm Campaigns From China; Dr Peter McCullough fighting the Corrupt Medical Board

Huawei Lobbyist Gives Thousands to Democrats’ Midterm Campaigns

By Andrew Thornebrooke
November 3, 2022 Updated: November 4, 2022

A lobbyist for a Chinese company deemed a national security threat has donated thousands of dollars to at least eight Democratic congressional campaigns.

Thomas Green, senior counsel at multinational law firm Sidley Austin and top lobbyist for Chinese telecom giant Huawei, personally contributed more than $10,000 across eight Democratic campaigns in the last month, according to data from OpenSecrets, a nonprofit group that tracks political spending.

The contributions were made primarily to Democratic campaigns in battleground states or where the Democratic contender was otherwise struggling.

The contributions included payments of $2,000 to Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.); $2,000 to Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.); $1,000 to North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justice Cheri Beasley, who is running for a Senate seat; $1,000 to Wisconsin Lieutenant Governor Mandela Barnes, who is running for the Senate; $1,500 to Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), $500 to Glenn Ivey, who is running to represent Maryland in the House; $1,500 to Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, who is running for a Senate seat; and $1,000 to Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.).

Green has helped to lead Huawei’s lobbying team since 2019, when the company hired Sidley Austin to lobby for its interests in matters of export controls, trade, sanctions, and national security.

At that time, the Trump administration had restricted the company’s ability to do business with the U.S. government due to the company’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and apparent efforts to undermine U.S. foreign policy efforts.

Huawei was then charged in 2020 for conspiring to steal trade secrets from numerous U.S. technology firms and was ultimately declared a national security threat by the Federal Communications Commission in 2020.

The Biden administration launched another investigation into Huawei earlier this year, following reports that the company illegally used cell phone towers to collect information about U.S. military facilities in order to transmit that data to the CCP.

Additionally, the Justice Department announced several new cases last month alleging that CCP intelligence officers attempted to interfere with the case against Huawei on behalf of the Chinese regime and for the benefit of the company.

According to court documents (pdf), the Chinese agents attempted to illegally torpedo the case against Huawei by bribing a U.S. government employee to steal top secret documents including witness lists, details on employees associated with the case, and prosecutors’ notes, which, according to court documents, were “expected to cause serious damage to the national security of the United States.”

Green also defended former Trump aide Rick Gates, who pleaded guilty in 2019 to evading taxes and violating federal lobbying laws by concealing millions of dollars from business dealings in Ukraine.

The news is just the latest in a growing list of accusations against prominent Democrats with alleged ties to the CCP.

Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) was forced to fire a congressional aide last month after an investigation found the employee had attempted to set up meetings with members of Congress at the request of the Chinese embassy in Washington.

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, meanwhile, was accused last month of delivering $715 million in taxpayer monies to the U.S. subsidiary of a Chinese company with deep links to the CCP. Whitmer defended the move as “economic development.”

The Epoch Times has requested comment from Green and all Democratic campaigns that received the funds.


Dr Peter McCullough fighting the Corrupt medical board who wants to suspend his license for speaking out against the Vaccine
And We Know