The COVID-19 Chronicles: Western Europe

June 4, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - Western Europe (we'll define as France, Germany, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, and Austria) shows how regions of the world with existing socioeconomic problems have seen Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) simply amplify them while in other regions where fundamentals have been stronger (China and ASEAN), have simply been temporarily setback.

Even within nations, this is also the case, where sectors and industries performing well have merely been set back while others already struggling long before COVID-19 showed up have been dealt a severe blow.

Health Impact 

Just looking at the reported number of cases and the reported number of deaths tells us that even deep in the heart of the European Union there is some disparity, whether it is via how testing is done, statistics are gathered and reported, the state of healthcare in each respective nation or some sort of demographic factor being responsible.

Germany and France, for example, had nearly the same number of reported COVID-19 cases, yet France had many, many more reported deaths.

France: 182,942 cases, 28,432 deaths
Germany: 180,789 cases, 8,428 deaths
Spain: 282,480 cases, 26,837 deaths
Belgium: 57,342 cases, 9,312 deaths
Portugal: 30,788 cases, 1,330 deaths
Austria: 16,539 cases, 641 deaths

Fears of overburdened healthcare infrastructure stemmed from predictions and models of a pathogen that would spread faster and have a greater impact on public health than COVID-19 actually did.

As testing continues to expand, the number of infected appears to have been vastly larger than previously reported meaning that the mortality rate of COVID-19 is thus much lower.

The COVID-19 Chronicles: Eastern Europe

Author's note: This is part of The Covid-19 Chronicles Series covering how nations and regions are responding to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) crisis. 

May 28, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - Like much of Asia, Eastern Europe appears to have weathered the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) crisis relatively well, at least in terms of overcoming a health crisis. 

Total reported infections and deaths have been much lower across these nations, and the Western media has taken turns wondering just how this is possible.

Health Impact

Statistics indicate that Covid-19 has impacted Eastern European nations in about the same manner as the annual flu or common cold. Nations like Belarus have in fact been hit harder by the annual flu than by the recent Covid-19 outbreak. 

While headlines claimed nations would be scrambling for critical medical equipment including ventilators, Eastern Europe has since had no widespread or widely reported shortages nor reports of overcrowded or overwhelmed healthcare facilities. 

The table below gives a quick look at the impact of Covid-19 nearly half a year into the supposed "pandemic" and is easily comparable to annual flu burden in each respective nation. 

Belarus: 27,730 infections, 156 deaths
Bulgaria: 2,174 infections, 105 deaths
Czechia: 8,406 infections, 295 deaths
Hungary: 3,473 infections, 448 deaths
Poland: 18,016 infections, 907 deaths
Moldova: 5,745 infections, 202 deaths
Romania: 16,437 infections, 1,070 deaths 
Russia: 262,843 infections, 2,418 deaths
Slovakia: 1,480  infections, 27 deaths 
Ukraine: 17,858 infections, 497 deaths

The health impact has been minimal with Eastern European nations imposing measures that ranged from the extreme to, in Belarus' case, very minimum in the face of global panic over the virus.

Measures 

Eastern European nations did indeed put measures in place including the closure of public venues, issuing guidelines regarding social distancing and the use of facemasks. Poland had closed public venues and businesses, restricted public activities including gatherings and instituted the use of face masks, but has since begun easing such measures. 

In other instances, measures have been so lax that it incurred complaints from neighboring nations. 

Belarus, for example, has been accused by Lithuania of hiding the impact of Covid-19 on its population and responding inadequately. 

US State Department propaganda Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in an article titled, "COVID-19: WHO Urges Belarus To Implement Distancing Measures; Georgia To Extend State Of Emergency," would complain about Belarus' insistence on not caving in to what Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka called "mass psychosis."

The COVID-19 Chronicles: ASEAN

Author's note: This is part of The Covid-19 Chronicles Series covering how nations and regions are responding to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) crisis. 

May 20, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - The ten Southeast Asian states of ASEAN with a collective population of 622 million people has weathered the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) relatively well. 

A combination of quick reactions, a hesitation to overreact and strong preexisting economic fundamentals, the region looks well on its way to returning to normal, that is, if it is able to resist the "new normal" the West seeks to impose globally. 

Health Impact

In stark contrast to reports out of the West regarding infections and deaths related to Covid-19, Southeast Asia has seen relatively fewer confirmed infections and fewer deaths. The table below illustrates just how few deaths there have been (a total of just 2,079) for a region with nearly twice the population of the United States. 

Brunei: 141 cases, 1 death
Cambodia: 122 cases, no reported deaths
Indonesia: 16,496 cases, 1,076 deaths
Laos: 19 cases, no reported deaths
Malaysia: 6,855 cases, 112 deaths
Myanmar: 181 cases, 6 deaths
Philippines: 12,091 cases, 806 deaths
Singapore: 26,891 cases, 21 deaths
Thailand: 3,025 cases, 56 deaths
Vietnam: 312 cases, no reported deaths

There have been few if any reports of overcrowded hospitals or shortages of critical medical equipment. Virtually all of the deaths reported were associated with chronic preexisting health conditions, with some cases calling into question whether Covid-19 really was the cause of death rather than merely a contributing factor, if even.

While everything from ASEAN's warmer climate to quick measures put into place cited by commentators and analysts, it is much more likely that Covid-19 simply is not as dangerous as the Western mass media has claimed and that the governments in ASEAN simply did not respond to nor feed into the wave of panic triggered by sensationalist Western headlines and overreactions in Western capitals.

Despite this, measures were put into place and these measures, more than the pathogen itself, are responsible for the impact Covid-19 is having on the region.

Measures 

While the actual impact of the pathogen was minimal, the international "peer pressure" to close borders, lockdown populations and otherwise grind national economies to a halt triggered a series of measures across ASEAN.

Restricted travel between ASEAN states and between China and ASEAN had been imposed but since, incrementally rolled back.

"Stay at home" measures have been put in place as well as "social distancing" measures monkeying those put in place across the West. Mandatory use of masks has been imposed both by private businesses and by both national and regional governments. Schools had been closed and many "non-essential" businesses had also been closed, but also are now incrementally being reopened.

The Warp Speed Push for Coronavirus Vaccines

A convergence of corrupt special interests are rushing to push untested and incredibly dangerous vaccines on the public before anyone has time to realize what is really happening or stop it. 

May 19, 2020 (F. William Engdahl - NEO) - The US White House has appointed a coronavirus “Vaccine Czar” from Big Pharma to oversee something dubbed Operation Warp Speed. The goal is to create and produce 300 million doses of a new vaccine to supposedly immunize the entire US population by year-end against COVID-19. To be sure that Big Pharma companies give their all to the medical Manhattan Project, they have been fully indemnified by the US government against liabilities should vaccine recipients die or develop serious disease as a result of the rushed vaccine. The FDA and NIH have waived standard pre-testing on animals in the situation. The US military, according to recent remarks by the US President, is being trained to administer the yet-to-be unveiled vaccine in record time. Surely nothing could go wrong here?

Warp speed is a term out of the sci-fi Star Trek media, defined as a speed faster than the speed of light. In recent weeks billions of dollars have been pledged from governments, from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and others to fast-track a vaccine as well as test medical treatments to combat the VODIV19 illness said to originate from a novel coronavirus first discovered late 2019 in Wuhan China. This rush to create a “miracle” vaccine is ominous and suggests some hidden agenda.

The Conflicted Czar

Washington’s Operation Warp Speed is reportedly the brainchild of Presidential Adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. It is being formally run by the Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and Defense Secretary Mark Esper who will work with a new Vaccine Czar. The Vaccine Czar selected for Kushner’s Operation Warp Speed is former GlaxoSmithKline Chairman of its Vaccines Division, Morrocan-born US citizen, Dr. Moncef Slaoui. From 2006 through 2017 Slaoui was Chairman of Global R&D and Vaccines at GlaxoSmithKline and sat on the company’s Executive team and Board of Directors.

While at GSK Slaoui headed the development of Cervarix. Its Cervarix HPV cervical cancer vaccine was reported tied to multiple deaths or severe crippling effects in many recipients. A 2017 WHO monitoring report revealed that serious adverse effects from Moncef Slaoui’s HPV vaccine included complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) that “exceeds any other vaccine.” That is not reassuring in terms of the new Czar of a rushed coronavirus vaccine.

In 2015 the Indian Supreme Court investigated charges that young Indian village girls died after being given Cervarix from Slaoui’s GSK. It was done in illegal vaccine “human guinea pig” tests of the HPV vaccine where neither the girls nor their parents were told what it was. The study was reportedly funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

In 2012 while Slaoui headed GSK global R&D and vaccine development, and sat on the GSK board, the company was fined $3 billion by the US Department of Justice, the largest ever fine against a pharmaceutical company. Among the charges was that GlaxoSmithKline deliberately withheld alarming safety data for its major-selling diabetes drug, Advandia, from the US FDA. After Advandia quietly vanished from the product list of GSK.

Slaoui also has ties to the projects of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He sat on the board of the Gates-funded International AIDS Vaccine Initiative. The IAVI was initiated in 1994 at a Rockefeller Foundation conference and is backed among others by the Gates Foundation, by the US Department of Defense and by Tony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The COVID-19 Chronicles: China

Author's note: This is part of The Covid-19 Chronicles Series covering how nations and regions are responding to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) crisis. 

May 14, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - With the US spiraling downward, a downward trajectory merely steepened by the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak, we'd expect other nations to suffer likewise. 

But China, where we are told the virus first appeared, has already bounced back. While it has significant damage to repair socioeconomically, it has not only overcome the initial outbreak, but has put into place more resilient measures and means to weather future outbreaks. 

Health Impact

China, with a population of nearly 1.4 billion, allegedly suffered between 4,000 and 5,000 deaths from Covid-19. 

Just how China, with a population as large as the US plus an extra billion, has so many fewer deaths can be explained several ways.

Some cite quick action taken by the Chinese government to contain the spread of Covid-19. But since Covid-19 clearly spread globally and likely all across China as well, another explanation is much more likely.

A Global Times article titled, "Data methods show gap between US, Chinese flu-related deaths," would note the differences between US and Chinese methods of attributing deaths to the common flu, stating: 

"The US flu mortality rate includes cases where flu causes other illnesses to worsen and lead to death, while China only counts people who die directly from flu," an observer who prefers to be anonymous told the Global Times.

A similar approach was most likely used to tally Covid-19 deaths.

Clearly, for those who took the time to look into the underlying health issues many who succumbed to Covid-19 had in the US, they would have found a wide variety of preexisting conditions ranging from morbid obesity, diabetes, heart disease, advanced age and even cancer that Covid-19 simply helped push over the edge.

Counting any and all deaths where Covid-19 was simply present as a "Covid-19 death" is inaccurate and borders on dishonest. As previously reported, many millions more in the US appear to have been infected by Covid-19 than is officially admitted with most people easily overcoming the pathogen.

China appears to have only counted cases where Covid-19 was a primary factor in death, rather than simply contributing to a cocktail of preexisting, chronic health conditions. Because of China's more moderate approach to defining Covid-19's deadliness, it was able to apply more moderate measures to respond.

Measures

Yes, China did initially crackdown heavily on cities where Covid-19 was present, locking down populations and paralyzing travel. Factories were shuttered and supply chains around the globe were impacted.

But it appears that as quick as these lockdowns were implemented, they were lifted and populations across China allowed back to work.

While US car manufacturer Tesla wages a legal and public battle against the government of California to reopen its car plant in Alameda County, Tesla's factory in Shanghai has been reopened for months now.

China is moving forward with caution, but not to the extent of paralyzing society or seizing up economic progress. The largest hurdle China's government will need to overcome is convincing other nations it does business with to return to work and reopen their borders.

Socioeconomic Impact

Because China depends on international trade as well as internal socioeconomic stability to sustain itself, no matter how quickly China itself bounced back from the Covid-19 crisis, the fact that the rest of the world (constituting China's export markets) is lagging behind with some nations like the United States seemingly collapsing before our eyes, means that China itself will suffer to some extent as well.

The Covid-19 Chronicles: USA

Author's note: This is part of The Covid-19 Chronicles Series covering how nations and regions are responding to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) crisis. 

May 13, 2020 (Gunnar Ulson - NEO) - The US is claimed to be hardest hit by Covid-19 with, at the time of writing, over 80,000 deaths attributed to the virus. The nation is also suffering from socioeconomic disaster as lockdowns have driven millions of Americans into not only unemployment, but predictable poverty and hunger as a result.

The crisis has been pounced upon by special interests to help propel various sociopolitical and economic agendas rather than confront and overcome the crisis, leading many to suspect the crisis itself has been deliberately overblown.

Health Impact

At face value the US would seem to be hit by an unprecedented health crisis. Hysteria spread by the mass media focusing on the numbers of infected and dead are provided to a panicked public without context.

Indeed, over 80,000 people have so far died with infections at nearly 1.5 million (confirmed).

Yet a quick look at basic statistics provided by the US government's own Center for Disease Control (CDC) shows that Covid-19's impact on human health including total deaths has not even surpassed recent flu season burdens. For example, according to the CDC's website, the 2017-2018 flu season (running from December 2017 to March 2018) left anywhere between 46,000 to 95,000 dead.

Deaths attributed to Covid-19 have been recorded for 2 full months longer with questionable methods used to attribute Covid-19 as the cause for death.

Holding Healthcare Hostage: The Making of a Ventilator Crisis

How big-business stopped cheap ventilators from making it to market, leaving nations vulnerable for over a decade to crisis shortages. 

May 12, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - When coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) began dominating headlines, it was accompanied by fears of potential shortages of critical medical equipment including personal protective equipment (PPE) and ventilators.

Nations like Russia had large stockpiles of affordable ventilators on hand - so many that they were able to send them overseas to nations at risk of shortages.

One of those nations included the United States.

Reuters in an article titled, "Russian plane with coronavirus medical gear lands in U.S. after Trump-Putin call," would admit (emphasis added):

The State Department said that following the call between the two leaders, the United States “has agreed to purchase” needed medical supplies, including ventilators and personal protection equipment, from Russia and that they were handed over to the Federal Emergency Management Agency on Wednesday in New York City.

As generous and impressive as Russia's response was - the real question was - why was it necessary in the first place?

America's Ventilator Shortage: Known for Over a Decade  

While many may believe America's ventilator shortage was a result of being blindsided by the speed Covid-19 spread, the truth is America's shortage was know for at least a decade.

A 2010 MIT student project would set out to design a cheap, easily manufactured, and portable ventilator to address the shortage. The project paper titled, "Design and Prototyping of a Low-cost Portable Mechanical Ventilator" (.pdf)), would note: 

While there are enough ventilators for regular use, there is a lack of preparedness for cases of mass casualty such as influenza pandemics, natural disasters and massive toxic chemical releases. The costs of stockpiling and deployment of state-of-the-art mechanical ventilators for mass casualty settings in developed countries are prohibitive. According to the national preparedness plan issued by President Bush in November 2005, the United States would need as many as 742,500 ventilators in a worst-case pandemic. When compared to the 100,000 presently in use, it is clear that the system is lacking.

The New York Times would also note just how long the shortage of ventilators in the US loomed in an article titled, "The U.S. Tried to Build a New Fleet of Ventilators. The Mission Failed," which reported: 

Thirteen years ago, a group of U.S. public health officials came up with a plan to address what they regarded as one of the medical system’s crucial vulnerabilities: a shortage of ventilators.

The breathing-assistance machines tended to be bulky, expensive and limited in number. The plan was to build a large fleet of inexpensive portable devices to deploy in a flu pandemic or another crisis.

The NYT article explains that the plan fell apart - specifically because the company that was eventually contracted to build the fleet of inexpensive, portable ventilators was bought out by a multi-billion dollar medical device manufacturer.

It is only 30 paragraphs into the NYT article that the company is named - Covidien. After the buy out, Covidien not only demanded more money to develop the ventilator, but also demanded a higher price for them once developed. They also reassigned staff working on the project, essentially shelving the effort. The motivation was simple - the company already sold much more expensive ventilators whose market position would be threatened by the development and deployment of cheaper alternatives.

Criminal Big-Pharma Put in Charge of Covid-19 "Vaccine"

Big-Pharma - guilty of lying, cheating, stealing, bribery, and a history of exposing the public to dangerous and even deadly drugs - is being given billions to develop a Covid-19 "vaccine." Would you trust your health to these criminals? 

May 1, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Coronavirus Disease 2019 or "Covid-19" hysteria is sweeping the globe - with mass media-induced public panic paralyzing entire nations, gutting economies of billions as workplaces are shutdown and the public shuttered indoors all while exposed to 24 hour news cycles deliberately fanning the flames of fear. 

The West's healthcare industry is already profiting both monetarily and in terms of artificial credibility as a panicked public turn to it for answers and safety.

Waiting to cash in on offering "cures" and "vaccines" for a virus that is essentially a bad cold - is the immensely corrupt Western pharmaceutical industry in particular - notorious corporations like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Novartis, Bayer, Merck, Johnson and Johnson, Pfizer, Lilly, and Gilead.

All corporations - without exception - pursuing government-funded vaccines and therapies for Covid-19 are corporations guilty and repeatedly convicted in courts of law around the globe of crimes including falsifying research, safety, and efficacy studies, bribing researchers, doctors, regulators, and even law enforcement officials, and marketing drugs that were either entirely ineffective or even dangerous. 

Government funding from taxpayers across the Western World are being funneled into supposedly non-profit organizations like the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation (CEPI) which are in actuality fronts created and chaired by big-pharma to avoid investing their own money into costly research and development and simply profit from whatever emerges from state-funded research.

CEPI - for example - is receiving billions in government funds from various nations that will be used for R&D that results in products sold by and profited from big-pharma. 

Novartis - Plumbing the Depths of the Despicable 

A particularly shocking and appalling example comes from Swiss pharmaceutical giant Novartis - who is currently attempting to ram through approval of its drug Jakafi as a therapy for severe Covid-19 patients.

A University of Pennsylvania team headed by Dr. Carl June and funded entirely by charity had developed a gene therapy that fully and permanently cured leukemia patients who had otherwise failed to respond to more traditional treatments like bone marrow transplants. During early trials in 2010-2012, one patient - a 6 year old named Emily Whitehead - was literally on her death bed before receiving the revolutionary gene therapy.

Today she is alive and well, in permanent remission. 

What is more astounding about the therapy is that it is administered only one time. That is because after administration the patient's cells are rewired permanently to fight off cancer. Old cells pass the cancer-fighting information off to new cells as they divide and multiply. 

The therapy developed by Dr. June's team is not only a one-time therapy, it is also incredibly cost effective. Under experimental conditions the procedure cost under 20,000 USD. Dr. June at a 2013 talk at The Society for Translational Oncology would state: 

So the cost of goods, it's interesting. The major cost here is gamma globulin. So the t-cells themselves, with us, for our in-house costs of an apheresis and so on is 15,000 dollars to manufacture the t-cells. 

The charity that funded Dr. June's team - Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS) - would see its work sold off to Novartis, approved by the FDA in 2017 and marketed as Kymriah. What was noted by Dr. June himself as costing 15,000 USD to produce under experimental conditions was marked up by Novartis to an astronomical half-million dollars. The New York Times article that reported the drug's cost never mentions the actual cost of the drug and instead defers to Novartis' own explanation as to why the drug was so expensive. 

The NYT had previously reported on the therapy's progress before its acquisition by Novartis, yet NYT writers failed to hold Novartis accountable or inform readers of the actual cost of the therapy and expose price gouging by Novartis. This helps illustrate the mass media's role in enabling and covering up for big-pharma's corruption.  

‘Similar to Flu’ – Dr. Ioannidis Explains Why COVID-19 isn’t as Deadly as Previously Thought

April 25, 2020 (21st Century Wire) - In this follow-up interview with Stanford University’s Dr John Ioannidis, he explains the findings from three preliminary studies, (including his latest, which shows a drastically reduced infection fatality rate); the negative health and economic effects of draconian ‘lockdown’ policies, as well as Sweden’s non-lockdown approach, Italian data, the pros and cons of testing and finally the feasibility of much touted ‘contact tracing’, and much more.

Interview by John Kirby from Press and The Public Project with Dr. Ioannidis. Watch:

According to their new findings, the infection fatality rate for COVID-19 is significantly lower than previously assumed. “If you take these new numbers into account, they suggest that the fatality rate for this new coronavirus is likely to be “in same the ballpark of seasonal influenza,” says Dr Ioannidis.

Dr John P.A. Ioannidis is a professor of medicine and professor of epidemiology and population health, as well as professor by courtesy of biomedical data science at Stanford University School of Medicine, professor by courtesy of statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) at Stanford University.

The Massive Covid-19 Hoax

April 19, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - By all accounts and from the very beginning it was clear that Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) was at the very most a bad cold - little more dangerous than the annual flu - but being deliberately hyped to stampede the public into a tangled web of bad policies.



As early as last month cooler-headed experts warned that hyped death rates spread by politicians, the Western corporate media, other various panic-mongers, and even World Health Organization (WHO) officials would give way to much, much lower death rates as more people were tested, found to have had the virus, and showed little to no symptoms.

The numbers of infections versus deaths in Iceland where testing has been the most widespread shows a death rate of about 0.5%, though only 5% of the population has been tested. 50% of those tested showed no symptoms at all meaning that many, many more Icelanders likely had the virus, overcame it with ease, and never visited a doctor or hospital to avail themselves for testing or to make into national Covid-19 statistics.

Another study conducted in the United States by Stanford University found the infection rate was likely 50-85 times higher than reported - meaning the death rate was astronomically lower than reported at around 0.2% to as low as 0.12% - not the 3-4% claimed by the World Health Organization.

In other words - Covid-19 is no more dangerous or deadly than the annual flu. But it has been hyped as such by Western politicians, the Western corporate media, and even international institutions like WHO - a deliberate deception accompanied by coordinated theater including government briefings with reporters comically spaced out in "fear" of contracting Covid-19.

Other props used to panic the public into imprisoning themselves at home and accepting the immense socioeconomic damage "lockdowns" are causing included showing the expotential graphs of infections seemingly rising straight up with no end in sight.

If responsible journalists put these graphs in context - say, perhaps next to annual flu infection curves - the public would notice they are identical and simply represent the way the flu, colds, and Covid-19 which is related to both - work their way through populations.

The same goes for total deaths. Should the media present Covid-19 deaths in the context of and in comparison to annual deaths from the flu, Americans - for example - would see that versus the 2019 flu season, Covid-19 is actually 30,000-40,000 deaths short of just matching the common flu - saying nothing of living up to the hype and hysteria the government and media have deliberately created around Covid-19 to justify lockdowns.

So why have governments around the globe crippled their economies, put millions out of work, and placed draconian measures in place to, in essence, imprison their populations at home?

Those with power and money seek to keep what they have and to take what little is left in the hands of others. During the manufactured "War on Terror," similar hysteria was deliberately spread across society to justify draconian police powers at home and endless wars abroad - pouring ultimately trillions into the accounts of defense contractors and the financial institutions invested in them.

COVID-19 LOCKDOWN: What You Need to Know & Not Being Told

April 19, 2020 (21st Century Wire - YouTube) - This episode was originally Streamed live on Apr 17, 2020. WE INVESTIGATE: Do COVID-19 'Lockdown' policies in the West really make sense? Are they based on actual science, or on imaginative guesswork? We're told by governments that the draconian measures are all "necessary to save lives." But are they really? Co-hosts Mike Robinson and Patrick Henningsen bringing you the latest Coronavirus updates.

SEE PART 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXIY8... SEE PART 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ziW...

MIT Tech Review Smears Study Proving Covid-19 Was Overhyped

Stanford study proves many more people are infected - between 50-85 times more - than reported and thus the "death rate" is astronomically lower than we were told. 

April 18, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - MIT Tech Review's hyped coverage of the Covid-19 outbreak is led by the tag-line, "Navigating a world reshaped by Covid-19."

Their articles reflect an eager embracement of the public hysteria prompted by Covid-19's spread, the socioeconomic paralysis it has created, and the many profitable solutions - particularly those involving technology - proposed to "shape" the world post-Covid-19.

It should come as no surprise that a corporate-influenced outlet hiding behind academia and technology would take issue with anyone casting doubt on just how warranted all of this hysteria really is or isn't - going as far as labeling them "pandemic skeptics."

This is particularly the case when MIT Tech Review covered the work of researchers at Stanford University who found a much larger number of people are infected with Covid-19 than reported - meaning that the death rate is much, much lower than we've been told.

In fact, MIT Tech Review had to admit that the actual death rate is likely under 0.2%, which means its is about as "dangerous" as the common flu. If the common flu isn't "reshaping the world," Covid-19 certainly isn't - at least not the pathogen itself.

An Oblique Smear 

Instead of acknowledging the work of Stanford University as an important advancement in our understanding of Covid-19 and a check against public hysteria - MIT Tech Review peppered their article with oblique smears against the team who carried out the study.

The headline includes the subtitle (emphasis added), "A study from a noted pandemic skeptic suggests the virus is more widespread but less deadly than people think."

We know that the suffix "-skeptic" is added to undermine the credibility of people who call into question widely promoted narratives. The article also uses the term "data skeptic" to describe John Ioannidis who helped carry out the study.

MIT Tech Review continued by adding:

Ioannidis, a Stanford medical statistician and a coauthor of the new report, made waves in March by suggesting the virus could be less deadly than people think, and that destroying the economy in the effort to fight it could be a “fiasco.”

Ioannidis' statement regarding Covid-19 - even without the results of this study - is already self-evident even if looking only at available and limited statistics regarding Covid-19 infections versus deaths and the demographics hit hardest.

But Stanford's findings not only bolster Ioannidis' statement - the findings were predictable.

Reactions to the Corona Virus Hint of a Wider Agenda

April 15, 2020 (James O'Neill - NEO) - The western world has gone into a phase of unprecedented lockdown. Major airlines have ceased international operations. It is an open question is to whether or not they will be able to resume operations when and if the current draconian restrictions are lifted. In Australia, the Federal government has ceased to sit and the government has announced that this parliamentary closure will extend until at least August.

Quite why such a lockdown is necessary is unclear. No convincing explanation has been offered by the government and it is an extreme step that comparable nations in North America, the United Kingdom and all of Europe have found unnecessary. One of the most alarming consequences of this fundamental attack on the notion of Parliamentary accountability is that the decision was met with acceptance by the official Opposition and muted negative comment, if at all, by the major mainstream media.

Media coverage of the pandemic has been extraordinary. At least half of the nightly main television news bulletins have been devoted to coverage of the pandemic, although whether it actually adds to our degree of knowledge is at best debatable.

The statistics as to those affected, dying and recovery are presented each night like some grizzly football score. How accurate or complete those statistics are is a very open question. They are presented however as some form of immutable truth with nary a question as to their accuracy or reliability.

There are serious questions being asked as to the real origins of the current pandemic. We are constantly told by the mainstream media that it originated in China, and that “fact” is presented as something beyond question. The more we learn however, the less reliable that complacent assertion appears to be.

Searching for Truth in What We are being Told About Covid-19

April 14, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO) - Following the news regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) we'd be led to believe humanity faces an unprecedented crisis - and judging by the socioeconomic damage being done - it is not that difficult to believe some sort of unprecedented crisis is indeed unfolding.



Yet the sense of urgency imposed upon the general public - prompting lockdowns around the globe and unprecedented measures being put in place - all centered around fighting a supposedly dangerous pathogen and avoiding overburdening global healthcare infrastructure - is entirely artificial. 

If Covid-19 was truly a pandemic worthy of such hysteria - a pandemic the West has claimed over the years was all but inevitable - why has the current international order dominated by the West failed so utterly in dealing with Covid-19? 

Trillions for Endless War, Nothing for Pandemic Preparations? 

Literally trillions of dollars have been dumped into the US-led war in Afghanistan alone - saying nothing of the trillions more spent on occupying Iraq, waging war in Libya and Syria, aiding Saudi Arabia in the destruction of Yemen, and the myriad of "soft-power" interventions unfolding across the rest of the globe. 

These are trillions of dollars that could have instead filled hospitals with top-of-the-line ventilators as well as filled warehouses with much cheaper and portable ventilators that could be deployed when and where needed. 

And it wasn't as if the need for ventilators was just suddenly realized amid the Covid-19 outbreak. An MIT paper written in 2010 titled, "Design and Prototyping of a Low-cost Portable Mechanical

Ventilator" (.pdf)), - a full decade ago - would note: 

While there are enough ventilators for regular use, there is a lack of preparedness for cases of mass casualty such as influenza pandemics, natural disasters and massive toxic chemical releases. The costs of stockpiling and deployment of state-of-the-art mechanical ventilators for mass casualty settings in developed countries are prohibitive. According to the national preparedness plan issued by President Bush in November 2005, the United States would need as many as 742,500 ventilators in a worst-case pandemic. When compared to the 100,000 presently in use, it is clear that the system is lacking.

And in a full decade's time, nothing was done to address this shortage leading to hysteria across the West amid the Covid-19 outbreak where governments claim to be pressing private business into making ventilators on production lines usually used for producing automobiles and appliances.

If the problem was well known a full decade ago and those in power - particularly in the US from US President George Bush to President Barack Obama to current US President Donald Trump - did nothing about it electing instead to spend US tax dollars on wars and banker bailouts - should the public trust American or Western leadership during this supposed crisis?

Covid-19 Hysteria Continues

April 13, 2020 (NEO - YouTube) - While Covid-19 poses a serious risk to vulnerable demographics, it is essentially a bad cold. Many nations are putting measures in place not to address the pathogen, but rather to address public panic, political concerns, or to extract profits from the resulting hysteria.

New Eastern Outlook contributors take a look at the actual threat Covid-19 presents and the impact lockdowns and flagrant corruption are having on the public at large.

1. Covid-19 Hysteria Vs. Your Actual (Very Low) Chance of Dying 2. Can We Trust the WHO? 3. COVID and the Terror of Uncertainty Read more articles and stay up to date with the latest in geopolitical analysis from New Eastern Outlook at https://journal-neo.org/ .

Covid-19: Have "Real Journalists" Forgotten the H1N1 Scandal They Reported On?

Overreaction and big-pharma profiteering from Covid-19 is a repeat of the 2009 H1N1 "Swine Flu" scandal. Why has the corporate media that would eventually expose the 2009 scandal failed to inform readers today that the same corrupt interests are leading the Covid-19 response?  

April 4, 2020 (Tony Cartalucci - LD) - Amid Covid-19 hysteria - "real journalists" across the Western corporate media are shamelessly and eagerly fanning the flames of hysteria, panicking the public and ensuring both the government and corporate special interests that influence their policy remain firmly in control.

This includes the stockpiling at the taxpayers' expense of drugs produced by big-pharma to allegedly fight Covid-19.

This story may sound familiar to some readers because the exact same scenario - albeit on a smaller scale - unfolded 10 years ago during the 2009 H1N1 "swine flu" outbreak.

In hindsight, the declaration by the World Health Organization (WHO) of a "pandemic" was revealed to be the work of financial ties between the pharmaceutical industry and WHO "experts" whose advice paved the way for the "pandemic" designation and the hysteria-justified policies that followed.

Among the big-pharma corporations involved was Roche - who not only provided H1N1 test kits, but also its Tamiflu" drug to government stockpiles.

Ten years ago - "real journalists" at media platforms like Reuters would even report that Tamiflu was later found to be ineffective and that the stockpiles where a waste of money. A 2009 Reuters article written by Kate Kelland titled, "Stockpiles of Roche Tamiflu drug are waste of money, review finds," would note:

Researchers who have fought for years to get full data on Roche’s flu medicine Tamiflu said on Thursday that governments who stockpile it are wasting billions of dollars on a drug whose effectiveness is in doubt.

The article also notes:

Tamiflu sales hit almost $3 billion in 2009 - mostly due to its use in the H1N1 flu pandemic - but they have since declined. 

Reuters writer Kate Kelland falls short of mentioning Roche's financial ties to WHO experts who designated the appearance of H1N1 as a "pandemic" helping pave the way for both public hysteria as well as Roche's profits from it selling what was essentially a useless drug to government stockpiles.

The BBC - however - in their article, "WHO swine flu experts 'linked' with drug companies," would report:

Key scientists behind World Health Organization advice on stockpiling of pandemic flu drugs had financial ties with companies which stood to profit, an investigation has found. 

Roche was mentioned by name by the BBC (emphasis added):

The advice prompted many countries around the world into buying up large stocks of Tamiflu, made by Roche, and Relenza manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline.

 A New Decade - A New Scandal  

Today, the same WHO and the same Roche are poised to once again both fuel and leverage public hysteria and once again fill government warehouses and acquisition orders with Roche products ranging from testing kits to vaccines and anti-viral medication.

So where is Kate Kelland of Reuters' article reminding readers of what she reported on 10 years ago about useless Roche medications that somehow found their way in large quantities to government warehouses? Where is her article about medications that were never used and all done at the expense of Western taxpayers?

Nowhere.

Instead, Kelland's recent articles have focused on reinforcing the official narrative surrounding Covid-19 and justifying increasingly drastic measures taken to panic the public and implement emergency spending that will undoubtedly benefit pharmaceutical corporations like Roche all over again.

Did Kate Kelland of Reuters forget what she wrote 10 years ago? Or are we seeing a pattern where a complicit media covers up these facts to ratchet up hysteria, and reports on abuse, corruption, and scandals only after those involved have filled their coffers and removed themselves far from any prospect of accountability?

Either way - a much easier question to answer is - should we trust media platforms like Reuters - platforms that concurrently promote criminal wars and other forms of corporate abuse - to inform us in times like this - or should we assume that responsibility ourselves - researching first and foremost the conflict of interest and motivation that drive corporations, the media, and governments to fuel public panic and benefit from it?

We must look into the science and statistics ourselves - apply critical thinking and draw our own conclusions. Then - invest in individuals, organizations, and institutions whose activities are in line with what is really happening rather than what corporations want us to think is happening and what aligns best with their profits rather than our individual and collective public health.

Can We Trust the WHO?

The World Health Organization (WHO) is poised to repeat its 2009 H1N1 scandal underwritten by corrupt big-pharma, F. William Engdahl explains. 

April 4, 2020 (F. William Engdahl - NEO) - The most influential organization in the world with nominal responsibility for global health and epidemic issues is the United Nations’ World Health Organization, WHO, based in Geneva. What few know is the actual mechanisms of its political control, the shocking conflicts of interest, corruption and lack of transparency that permeate the agency that is supposed to be the impartial guide for getting through the current COVID-19 pandemic. The following is only part of what has come to public light.

Pandemic declaration?

On January 30 Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of the UN World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern or PHIEC. This came two days after Tedros met with China President Xi Jinping in Beijing to discuss the dramatic rise in severe cases of a novel coronavirus in Wuhan and surrounding areas that had reached dramatic proportions. Announcing his emergency PHIEC declaration, Tedros praised the Chinese quarantine measures, measures highly controversial in public health and never before in modern times attempted with entire cities, let alone countries. At the same time Tedros, curiously, criticized other countries who were moving to block flights to China to contain the strange new disease, leading to charges he was unduly defending China.

The first three cases in Wuhan were reported, officially, on December 27, 2019, a full month earlier. The cases were all diagnosed with pneumonia from a “novel” or new form of SARS Coronavirus. Important to note is that the largest movement of people in the year, China’s Lunar New Year and Spring Festival, during which some 400 million citizens move throughout the land to join families went from January 17 through February 8. On January 23, at 2am two days before start of actual New Year festivities, Wuhan authorities declared an unprecedented lockdown of the entire city of 11 million as of 10am that day. By then, hundreds of thousands if not several million residents had fled in panic to avoid the quarantine.

By the time the WHO declared its Public Health Emergency of International Concern on 30 January, precious weeks had been lost to contain the disease. Yet Tedros effusively praised the “unprecedented” Chinese measures and criticized other countries for placing “stigma” on Chinese by cutting travel.

In reference to the Wuhan COVID-19 spread and why WHO did not call it a pandemic, the WHO spokesman, Tarik Jasarevic, stated “There is no official category (for a pandemic)…WHO does not use the old system of 6 phases — that ranged from phase 1 (no reports of animal influenza causing human infections) to phase 6 (a pandemic) — that some people may be familiar with from H1N1 in 2009.”

Then, in an about-face, on March 11, Tedros Adhanom announced for the first time that WHO was calling the novel coronavirus illness, now renamed COVID-19, a “global pandemic.” At that point WHO said there were more than 118,000 cases of COVID-19 in 114 countries, with 4,291 deaths.

2009 WHO Fake Pandemic

Since an earlier WHO fiasco and scandal in 2009 over its declaration of a global pandemic around the “swine flu” or H1N1 as it was termed, the WHO decided to drop using the term pandemic. The reason is indicative of the corruption endemic to the WHO institution.

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.