After the Lockdown: A Global Coronavirus Vaccination Program…

Can we trust the World Health Organization (WHO) and the powerful economic interest groups behind it. The answer is obvious.

March 28, 2020
(Prof Michel Chossudovsky - Global Research) - The tendency is towards a Worldwide lockdown spearheaded by fear and media disinformation. Currently, hundreds of millions of people Worldwide are under lockdown. 


What is the next step in the evolution of the COV-19 Crisis?
  
A coronavirus vaccine program was announced at Davos at the World Economic Forum (21-24 January) barely 2 weeks after the cornonavirus was identified by the Chinese authorities on January 7.  
The lead entity for the novel coronavirus vaccine initiative is the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) an organization sponsored and financed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. 
Note the chronology: The development of the 2019 nCoV vaccine was announced at the Davos World Economic Forum (WEF) a week prior to the official launching by the WHO of  a Worldwide Public Health Emergency (January 30) at a time when the number of “confirmed cases” Worldwide (outside China) was 150 (including 6 in the US). 
CEPI is seeking a “monopoly” role in the vaccination business the objective of which is a “global vaccine project”, in partnership with a large number of “candidates”. It announced funding for its existing partnership with Inovio and The University of Queensland (Australia). In addition, CEPI confirmed (January 23) its contract with Moderna, Inc. and the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, who has been instrumental in waging the fear and panic campaign across America: “Ten Times Worse than Seasonal Flu”.

According to a report of the WHO pertaining to China’s epidemic (which has currently been resolved):
The most commonly reported symptoms [of COVID-19] included fever, dry cough, and shortness of breath, and most patients (80%) experienced mild illness. Approximately 14% experienced severe disease and 5% were critically ill. Early reports suggest that illness severity is associated with age (>60 years old) and co-morbid disease. (largely basing on WHO’s assessment of COVID-19 in China)
Screenshot The Hill, March 19, 2020
The Central Role of CEPI
CEPI is dealing simultaneously with several pharmaceutical companies. The Moderna- NIAID in all likelihood is slated to implement the COV-19 vaccine in the US.
On January 31st, the day following the WHO’s official launching of the global public health emergency and Trump’s decision to curtail air travel with China, CEPI announced its partnership with CureVac AG, a German-based  biopharmaceutical company. A few days later, in early February, CEPI “announced that major vaccine manufacturer GSK would allow its proprietary adjuvants— compounds that boost the effectiveness of vaccines — to be used in the response”. (The pandemic was officially launched on March 11)

Covid-19 Hysteria Vs. Your Actual (Very Low) Chance of Dying

March 28, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - How likely are you to die from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19)? Based on the hysteria spreading across the globe, it would seem like the chances are fairly high.



But Statnews.com would report on the actual projected death rate of those who contract Covid-19 based on US Center for Disease Control (CDC) data, noting:
...the death rate in Covid-19 patients ages 80 and over was 10.4%, compared to 5.35% in 70-somethings, 1.51% in patients 60 to 69, 0.37% in 50-somethings. Even lower rates were seen in younger people, dropping to zero in those 29 and younger.
The article also noted that the worst cases involved not only people who were much older, but involved people who were also already unhealthy and vulnerable.

Others have noted that many will likely get Covid-19, think they have an ordinary cold, get better and never even be tested, thus never making it into the statistics meaning the actual death rates are likely even lower than being reported.

In other words, Covid-19 may be slightly more dangerous than the common flu, but not by much. Those who fall into a vulnerable category should obviously be more careful, but the hysteria being spread by governments and ordinary people alike is posing a bigger threat to human wellbeing than the actual virus itself.

Hysteria Will Cause More Harm Than the Virus Itself 

The economic damage alone this hysteria is creating will negatively impact the lives of many more ordinary people than the virus ever could and for a much longer period of time than Covid-19 takes to run its course within the typical human body or across various populations.

For nations like the US who are already in terminal economic, social and political decline, replicating its crumbling economy, society and political system in other nations, even if temporarily by spreading Covid-19 hysteria, may seem like a viable option when all other options, from soft-power to overt military force, have failed to keep the planet in line and within Washington's unipolar "international order."

Nations that have been reluctant to take extreme measures are being pressured to do so by a spreading wave of hysteria, deliberate or not, forcing them to close borders, shut businesses and disrupt the lives of millions, the vast majority of which are in no danger at all from the virus.

A similar trend was seen during the opening years of the US-led so-called "War on Terror" which other nations were forced into backing, including nations like Russia who knew full well the US itself was the chief state sponsor of the very terrorists Washington was supposedly fighting, but were reluctant to take issue with it in the face of perceived public fear over extremism following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Considering just how badly the US exploited and abused that fear, it is hardly a surprise that people today are skeptical of handing large amounts of power over to the same sort of people in the face of another supposed threat.

Governments probably should take certain measures during such outbreaks, but ensuring the line between commonsense steps and the abuse of power is not crossed should be a primary public concern.

Regarding Covid-19, common sense should still be exercised. Avoiding large crowds, staying healthy, eating well, exercising and overall taking care of your body so that your body's immune system can take care of you is the best measure and means of staving of Covid-19 or any other infectious disease, during a pandemic or not.

If you are part of a vulnerable demographic, obviously exercise more caution.


Two Hundred and Thirty Years of Rights and Liberties Shredded: Why I Oppose The Lockdown

Brandon Turbeville aptly compares the creation and leveraging of the so-called "War on Terror" in 2001 with the current Covid-19-mania sweeping the US. 

March 27, 2020 (Brandon Turbeville) - Although it was nearly twenty years ago, I can remember 9/11 like it was yesterday. I remember the shock of hearing about the planes crashing into towers, at first believing it was a tragic accident and quickly learning it to be otherwise. I remember being told that 19 hijackers, part of a fundamentalist plot to destroy America, were behind the attacks and that the mastermind was a man in a cave in Afghanistan named Osama bin Laden.


As all of America was glued to their television screens, many rushed out to give blood in an effort to at least do something to help one another. George W. Bush's answer for Americans was to go to work and then go out and shop. Americans dutifully complied. But the government's answer, in tandem with mainstream media, was also to be afraid. Very afraid. Americans also complied with this request, perhaps more than any other.

In the days and weeks after the initial shock, a college professor informed me about a bill called the PATRIOT ACT that would essentially eviscerate much of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. After class, I questioned him further about the bill, which he explained, and suggested that if I really wanted to understand what was happening, I should read 1984 by George Orwell. I went home and did just that and was surprised to learn that not only was he right, but that I was watching what I was reading happen in front of me in real life.

I watched as the fear of speaking your mind and saying certain words became known as freedom. I watched as Americans came to assume that their communications were listened to, frightened of what they said, but justifying it as they praised their country for being unlike the totalitarian governments of the past. Peace became war. Any suggestion that invading Afghanistan was wrong was unpatriotic. In fact, any criticism of the government was considered unpatriotic and anyone who valued freedom over temporary security was borderline a traitor.

I watched as the United States became The Homeland and I watched as my friends had their window busted out of their car because they did not have one of those ridiculous window flags.

Still, shortly after the event itself, I began speaking out against the erosion of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I questioned the official story of 9/11 and fought against the passage of the PATRIOT ACT. In those days, anyone who did either of these things was considered either woefully ignorant and naive or a traitor who was giving morale support to the enemy.

I spoke out after 9/11 and was largely alone with a few notable exceptions. I was forced to watch the majority of my fellow Americans give away the most precious thing they had, the things which no other country could lay claim to, and the thing that they claimed they were supporting war to protect. America gave away a huge chunk of its rights in the wake of 9/11 and, though they were promised the measures were only temporary, twenty years on we have never received them back.


US Media Defends Al Qaeda in Syria

March 26, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - When is a terrorist group not a terrorist group? Apparently when US foreign policy requires it not to be. This is precisely the case regarding Al Qaeda's Syrian branch - Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) - the most recent rebrand of Jabhat Al Nusra - which currently occupies the northern Syrian governorate of Idlib. 


The US corporate media has recently attempted to generate public sympathy for HTS - as well as animosity toward Syrian, Russian, and Iranian forces seeking to liberate the supposedly one million people trapped under the terrorist organization's rule. 

Another factor behind US media support for HTS is the necessity to explain why NATO member Turkey is providing direct military and material support for a US-designated terrorist organization, and why the US itself is in turn providing Turkey support to do so. 

Articles have appeared in Newsweek - for example - framing Russian opposition to negotiations with HTS as negative - and echoing US State Department efforts to support the terrorist organization despite it appearing on Washington's official Foreign Terrorist Organization designation list. 

The article titled, "Russia Warns Against Any U.S. Talks with Militant Group It's Bombing in Syria," is actually referring to Al Qaeda's HTS front when it refers to the "militant group" Russia is bombing in Syria. 

Newsweek places Russian statements regarding the US designation of HTS as a terrorist organization in quotes as if to question the veracity of the claim. 

However, a visit to the US State Department's own website reveals a 2018 statement titled, "Amendments to the Terrorist Designations of al-Nusrah Front," which openly admits:
The Department of State has amended the designation of al-Nusrah Front – an al-Qa’ida affiliate in Syria – to include Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and other aliases. These aliases have been added to al-Nusrah Front’s designations as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) under Executive Order 13224.

In January 2017, al-Nusrah Front launched the creation of HTS as a vehicle to advance its position in the Syrian uprising and to further its own goals as an al-Qa’ida affiliate. Since January 2017, the group has continued to operate through HTS in pursuit of these objectives.
Thus - according to all sides of the Syrian conflict including Washington - HTS is without doubt - unequivocally a terrorist organization.  

And eventually - 5 paragraphs in - Newsweek also admits HTS is a US-designated terrorist organization - and even includes quotes from US military leaders admitting that Idlib is overrun by extremists. Yet the US-based publication still attempts to frame Syrian and Russian efforts to liberate Idlib from these extremists negatively.   

Newsweek is just one example of the US corporate media obliquely defending terrorism. The New York Times would provide a much more robust defense.  


Covid-19: The Panic is Worse Than the Pathogen

March 26, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - The Corona Virus Disease 2019 or "Covid-19" is a coronavirus similar to the virus that causes the common cold. Just like the common cold or the flu, Covid-19 is a danger to at-risk groups including the elderly and the chronically ill. 


If you are not elderly and if you are in good health you have virtually no chance of dying from it. 

For the vast majority of the population, Covid-19 is no more dangerous than the common cold. This is backed up by statistics already being reported across Western publications and based on information derived from China's outbreak where the virus first appeared.

Compared to cancer, heart disease, substance abuse, or car accidents - Covid-19 is relatively harmless. But it has been put in the spotlight by deliberately dishonest, selective reporting that focuses on generating hysteria by presenting out-of-context information to an ignorant and easily panicked public.

If there is no global concern or massive mobilization over cancer and heart disease - conditions that claim far more lives than any virus - why the sudden hysteria and "concern" over what is essentially a cold? 

Context is King 

According to StatNews.com in their article, "Lower death rate estimates for coronavirus, especially for non-elderly, provide glimmer of hope:"
The chance of someone with symptomatic Covid-19 dying varied by age, confirming other studies. For those aged 15 to 44, the fatality rate was 0.5%, though it might have been as low as 0.1% or as high as 1.3%. For people 45 to 64, the fatality rate was also 0.5%, with a possible low of 0.2% and a possible high of 1.1%. For those over 64, it was 2.7%, with a low and high estimate of 1.5% and 4.7%.
The chance of serious illness from coronavirus infection in younger people was so low, the scientists estimate a fatality rate of zero.
Healthline.com would report in their article, "Here’s How COVID-19 Compares to Past Outbreaks," that the most affected groups are:
...adults over 65 with underlying health conditions; children seem to be spared and are experiencing milder symptoms (in China, children account for just 2.4 percent of cases)
If that isn't convincing enough, simply scrutinize content you're already reading - especially regarding Covid-19 deaths - and see how old and in what health those are in reportedly dying from Covid-19. Many paragraphs down - far from the hysteria-generating headlines - you will find that those dying are already chronically ill, advanced in age, and/or already at risk whether it was Covid-19 or the common cold.

When deaths are reported without context they easily create panic.

When the number of Covid-19 deaths are put into perspective in relation to past outbreaks - or even side-by-side with the annual common cold or flu - we see just how unwarranted the current wave of hysteria is and how overreactions from governments are aimed more at saving face and assuaging public panic than preserving public health.

In Thailand where up to four deaths have been reported at the time of writing this article - the first case involved a man who already had Dengue fever - a serious, life-threatening tropical illness spread by mosquitoes.

The other 3 cases involved a 70 year old with pre-existing tuberculosis, a 79 year old with multiple pre-existing chronic illnesses, and a 45 year old suffering from obesity and chronic diabetes.

All four individuals would be considered "at-risk" and should have been isolated from those potentially carrying not only Covid-19 - but any communicable disease at all including the common cold or flu.

Do these deaths warrant paralyzing an entire nation of 70 million people? Or closing entire businesses and costing billions in commerce? The damage measures made in reaction to hysteria will cause more damage to many more people and for a much longer duration than Covid-19 ever could on its own. 

Common Sense Measures 

Measures should be put into place and resources invested into educating the public on how to isolate and protect at-risk individuals - efforts should be made to help those at risk isolate themselves and provisions - including investments in critical care equipment such as ventilators - made to handle the influx of at-risk patients who end up with Covid-19 regardless.

What should not be done - is the spread of panic, hysteria, and the imposition of draconian measures simply to assuage panic and hysteria - measures that will also gut the economy, impact millions of workers, and disrupt the lives of millions more who depend on the day-to-day functioning of society and who face little or no health risk upon contracting the virus.

These measures - ironically - are in turn fueling additional panic including hording and social tensions that are only compounding the damage "Covid-19 hysteria" is already having on society.

Who is Fueling Hysteria and Why? 

There is the vastly corrupt mass media who depends on public panic and hysteria at times like this to boost clicks and sell newspapers. They also seek to advance their agenda and that of their wealthy sponsors and enhance their grip over the public's attention. The media is determined to spread hysteria to keep people fixated on their reportage, completely indifferent to the damage they are causing.

There are also political groups - partnered with the media - attempting to leverage and amplify the appearance of Covid-19 into an unprecedented crisis despite a lack of evidence to justify doing so. Their interest is not in ensuring the safety of the public or maintaining oversight of government efforts - but instead leveraging the resulting hysteria to chip away at ruling governments they seek to destabilize and replace.

Aiding them are US and European-funded fronts posing as "human rights" advocates and "independent media" outlets. Groups like "Human Rights Watch" have attacked governments for not taking decisive enough action - then complained when decisive action was taken as being too draconian and violating "human rights."

These are interest groups that are never satisfied with the government's response to Covid-19 because they are interest groups completely unconcerned with Covid-19 itself and its impact on public health - and instead - concerned only with how they can generate and leverage public hysteria to advance their entirely unrelated and self-serving political agenda. Again, this is done with complete indifference to the damage being done to society by doing so.

What has resulted is governments around the globe taking measures in reaction to public panic - not to fight the actual pathogen. While draconian efforts to isolate the entire population may work in slowing the spread of Covid-19 - is it worth paralyzing entire economies, costing billions in economic damage, disrupting the lives of hundreds of millions of people who - if contracting Covid-19 - will have what is essentially a cold for a week?

The answer should be an obvious "no."

Now and in the Future 

The answer also isn't "doing nothing."

Again, at-risk groups can and should be protected. State resources should be mobilized to protect and isolate them from the general population and treat them in the worst case scenario should they contract the virus anyway. Public information campaigns should be mounted to encourage basic hygiene especially for those who may come in contact with at-risk individuals - something that should be done year-round and regardless of whatever strain of the cold or flu is prevalent at the time.

And just in case a genuinely deadly pathogen appears on the horizon, nations should invest in economic infrastructure that can thrive regardless - just in case nationwide containment ever truly is necessary. This includes investing in online commerce, delivery services, decentralized manufacturing, and localized food, water, and energy security measures - all measures that would make for a more resilient society regardless of the threats that may or may not appear in the future.

Panic has proven a greater enemy than the Covid-19 pathogen. That society can be crippled by politicians, political groups, and a corrupt mass media over what is essentially a slightly more virulent form of the common cold, says a lot about how the world currently works and what needs dire attention to fix.

From those driving needless hysteria to those caving into it at the cost of economic stability and the disruption of millions of ordinary lives - it's clear that we face a precedent being set - one that will ensure virtually any excuse in the future can be used to cripple civilization on a global scale. It seems obvious this cannot be allowed to stand, but what is less clear is what can be done to ensure it does not.

It can be hoped that governments around the globe pressured by hysteria this time around will set up measures in the future to avoid caving in again.

For the average individual - knowing that virtually everything you read in the media is likely promoting an agenda and thus being misrepresented - gives you the ability to look for context and truth yourself and applying critical thinking skills - reducing your suseptibility to panic and hysteria - and innoculating us all against the real virus infecting society - a political and social virus.