‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza

By Yuval Abraham,

Permissive airstrikes on non-military targets and the use of an artificial intelligence system have enabled the Israeli army to carry out its deadliest war on Gaza, a +972 and Local Call investigation reveals.

The Israeli army’s expanded authorization for bombing non-military targets, the loosening of constraints regarding expected civilian casualties, and the use of an artificial intelligence system to generate more potential targets than ever before, appear to have contributed to the destructive nature of the initial stages of Israel’s current war on the Gaza Strip, an investigation by +972 Magazine and Local Call reveals. These factors, as described by current and former Israeli intelligence members, have likely played a role in producing what has been one of the deadliest military campaigns against Palestinians since the Nakba of 1948.

The investigation by +972 and Local Call is based on conversations with seven current and former members of Israel’s intelligence community — including military intelligence and air force personnel who were involved in Israeli operations in the besieged Strip — in addition to Palestinian testimonies, data, and documentation from the Gaza Strip, and official statements by the IDF Spokesperson and other Israeli state institutions.

Compared to previous Israeli assaults on Gaza, the current war — which Israel has named “Operation Iron Swords,” and which began in the wake of the Hamas-led assault on southern Israel on October 7 — has seen the army significantly expand its bombing of targets that are not distinctly military in nature. These include private residences as well as public buildings, infrastructure, and high-rise blocks, which sources say the army defines as “power targets” (“matarot otzem”).

The bombing of power targets, according to intelligence sources who had first-hand experience with its application in Gaza in the past, is mainly intended to harm Palestinian civil society: to “create a shock” that, among other things, will reverberate powerfully and “lead civilians to put pressure on Hamas,” as one source put it.

Several of the sources, who spoke to +972 and Local Call on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the Israeli army has files on the vast majority of potential targets in Gaza — including homes — which stipulate the number of civilians who are likely to be killed in an attack on a particular target. This number is calculated and known in advance to the army’s intelligence units, who also know shortly before carrying out an attack roughly how many civilians are certain to be killed.

Palestinians react to the devastation caused by an Israeli airstrike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 11, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Palestinians react to the devastation caused by an Israeli airstrike in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 11, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

In one case discussed by the sources, the Israeli military command knowingly approved the killing of hundreds of Palestinian civilians in an attempt to assassinate a single top Hamas military commander. “The numbers increased from dozens of civilian deaths [permitted] as collateral damage as part of an attack on a senior official in previous operations, to hundreds of civilian deaths as collateral damage,” said one source.

“Nothing happens by accident,” said another source. “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

According to the investigation, another reason for the large number of targets, and the extensive harm to civilian life in Gaza, is the widespread use of a system called “Habsora” (“The Gospel”), which is largely built on artificial intelligence and can “generate” targets almost automatically at a rate that far exceeds what was previously possible. This AI system, as described by a former intelligence officer, essentially facilitates a “mass assassination factory.”

According to the sources, the increasing use of AI-based systems like Habsora allows the army to carry out strikes on residential homes where a single Hamas member lives on a massive scale, even those who are junior Hamas operatives. Yet testimonies of Palestinians in Gaza suggest that since October 7, the army has also attacked many private residences where there was no known or apparent member of Hamas or any other militant group residing. Such strikes, sources confirmed to +972 and Local Call, can knowingly kill entire families in the process.

In the majority of cases, the sources added, military activity is not conducted from these targeted homes. “I remember thinking that it was like if [Palestinian militants] would bomb all the private residences of our families when [Israeli soldiers] go back to sleep at home on the weekend,” one source, who was critical of this practice, recalled.

Palestinians at the rubble of a building destroyed by Israeli airstrikes in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 11, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Palestinians at the rubble of a building destroyed by Israeli airstrikes in Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 11, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Another source said that a senior intelligence officer told his officers after October 7 that the goal was to “kill as many Hamas operatives as possible,” for which the criteria around harming Palestinian civilians were significantly relaxed. As such, there are “cases in which we shell based on a wide cellular pinpointing of where the target is, killing civilians. This is often done to save time, instead of doing a little more work to get a more accurate pinpointing,” said the source.

The result of these policies is the staggering loss of human life in Gaza since October 7. Over 300 families have lost 10 or more family members in Israeli bombings in the past two months — a number that is 15 times higher than the figure from what was previously Israel’s deadliest war on Gaza, in 2014. At the time of writing, around 15,000 Palestinians have been reported killed in the war, and counting.

“All of this is happening contrary to the protocol used by the IDF in the past,” a source explained. “There is a feeling that senior officials in the army are aware of their failure on October 7, and are busy with the question of how to provide the Israeli public with an image [of victory] that will salvage their reputation.”

‘An excuse to cause destruction’

Israel launched its assault on Gaza in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas-led offensive on southern Israel. During that attack, under a hail of rocket fire, Palestinian militants massacred more than 840 civilians and killed 350 soldiers and security personnel, kidnapped around 240 people — civilians and soldiers — to Gaza, and committed widespread sexual violence, including rape, according to a report by the NGO Physicians for Human Rights Israel.

From the first moment after the October 7 attack, decisionmakers in Israel openly declared that the response would be of a completely different magnitude to previous military operations in Gaza, with the stated aim of totally eradicating Hamas. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” said IDF Spokesperson Daniel Hagari on Oct. 9. The army swiftly translated those declarations into actions.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Minister without Portfolio Benny Gantz hold a joint press conference at the Defense Ministry, Tel Aviv, November 11, 2023. (Marc Israel Sellem/POOL)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Minister without Portfolio Benny Gantz hold a joint press conference at the Defense Ministry, Tel Aviv, November 11, 2023. (Marc Israel Sellem/POOL)

According to the sources who spoke to +972 and Local Call, the targets in Gaza that have been struck by Israeli aircraft can be divided roughly into four categories. The first is “tactical targets,” which include standard military targets such as armed militant cells, weapon warehouses, rocket launchers, anti-tank missile launchers, launch pits, mortar bombs, military headquarters, observation posts, and so on.

The second is “underground targets” — mainly tunnels that Hamas has dug under Gaza’s neighborhoods, including under civilian homes. Aerial strikes on these targets could lead to the collapse of the homes above or near the tunnels.

The third is “power targets,” which includes high-rises and residential towers in the heart of cities, and public buildings such as universities, banks, and government offices. The idea behind hitting such targets, say three intelligence sources who were involved in planning or conducting strikes on power targets in the past, is that a deliberate attack on Palestinian society will exert “civil pressure” on Hamas.

The final category consists of “family homes” or “operatives’ homes.” The stated purpose of these attacks is to destroy private residences in order to assassinate a single resident suspected of being a Hamas or Islamic Jihad operative. However, in the current war, Palestinian testimonies assert that some of the families that were killed did not include any operatives from these organizations.

In the early stages of the current war, the Israeli army appears to have given particular attention to the third and fourth categories of targets. According to statements on Oct. 11 by the IDF Spokesperson, during the first five days of fighting, half of the targets bombed — 1,329 out of a total 2,687 — were deemed power targets.

Palestinians walk next to the rubble of buildings destroyed by Israeli airstrikes in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, November 28, 2023. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

Palestinians walk next to the rubble of buildings destroyed by Israeli airstrikes in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, November 28, 2023. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

“We are asked to look for high-rise buildings with half a floor that can be attributed to Hamas,” said one source who took part in previous Israeli offensives in Gaza. “Sometimes it is a militant group’s spokesperson’s office, or a point where operatives meet. I understood that the floor is an excuse that allows the army to cause a lot of destruction in Gaza. That is what they told us.

“If they would tell the whole world that the [Islamic Jihad] offices on the 10th floor are not important as a target, but that its existence is a justification to bring down the entire high-rise with the aim of pressuring civilian families who live in it in order to put pressure on terrorist organizations, this would itself be seen as terrorism. So they do not say it,” the source added.

Various sources who served in IDF intelligence units said that at least until the current war, army protocols allowed for attacking power targets only when the buildings were empty of residents at the time of the strike. However, testimonies and videos from Gaza suggest that since October 7, some of these targets have been attacked without prior notice being given to their occupants, killing entire families as a result.

The wide-scale targeting of residential homes can be derived from public and official data. According to the Government Media Office in Gaza — which has been providing death tolls since the Gaza Health Ministry stopped doing so on Nov. 11 due to the collapse of health services in the Strip — by the time the temporary ceasefire took hold on Nov. 23, Israel had killed 14,800 Palestinians in Gaza; approximately 6,000 of them were children and 4,000 were women, who together constitute more than 67 percent of the total. The figures provided by the Health Ministry and the Government Media Office — both of which fall under the auspices of the Hamas government — do not deviate significantly from Israeli estimates.

The Gaza Health Ministry, furthermore, does not specify how many of the dead belonged to the military wings of Hamas or Islamic Jihad. The Israeli army estimates that it has killed between 1,000 and 3,000 armed Palestinian militants. According to media reports in Israel, some of the dead militants are buried under the rubble or inside Hamas’ underground tunnel system, and therefore were not tallied in official counts.

Palestinians try to put out a fire after an Israeli airstrike on a house in the Shaboura refugee camp in the city of Rafah, southern of the Gaza Strip, on November 17, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Palestinians try to put out a fire after an Israeli airstrike on a house in the Shaboura refugee camp in the city of Rafah, southern of the Gaza Strip, on November 17, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

UN data for the period up until Nov. 11, by which time Israel had killed 11,078 Palestinians in Gaza, states that at least 312 families have lost 10 or more people in the current Israeli attack; for the sake of comparison, during “Operation Protective Edge” in 2014, 20 families in Gaza lost 10 or more people. At least 189 families have lost between six and nine people according to the UN data, while 549 families have lost between two and five people. No updated breakdowns have yet been given for the casualty figures published since Nov. 11.

The massive attacks on power targets and private residences came at the same time as the Israeli army, on Oct. 13, called on the 1.1 million residents of the northern Gaza Strip — most of them residing in Gaza City — to leave their homes and move to the south of the Strip. By that date, a record number of power targets had already been bombed, and more than 1,000 Palestinians had already been killed, including hundreds of children.

In total, according to the UN, 1.7 million Palestinians, the vast majority of the Strip’s population, have been displaced within Gaza since October 7. The army claimed that the demand to evacuate the Strip’s north was intended to protect civilian lives. Palestinians, however, see this mass displacement as part of a “new Nakba” — an attempt to ethnically cleanse part or all of the territory.

‘They knocked down a high-rise for the sake of it’

According to the Israeli army, during the first five days of fighting it dropped 6,000 bombs on the Strip, with a total weight of about 4,000 tons. Media outlets reported that the army had wiped out entire neighborhoods; according to the Gaza-based Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, these attacks led to “the complete destruction of residential neighborhoods, the destruction of infrastructure, and the mass killing of residents.”

As documented by Al Mezan and numerous images coming out of Gaza, Israel bombed the Islamic University of Gaza, the Palestinian Bar Association, a UN building for an educational program for outstanding students, a building belonging to the Palestine Telecommunications Company, the Ministry of National Economy, the Ministry of Culture, roads, and dozens of high-rise buildings and homes — especially in Gaza’s northern neighborhoods.

The ruins of Al-Amin Muhammad Mosque which was destroyed in an Israeli airstrike on October 20, Khan Younis refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip, October 31, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

The ruins of Al-Amin Muhammad Mosque which was destroyed in an Israeli airstrike on October 20, Khan Younis refugee camp, southern Gaza Strip, October 31, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

On the fifth day of fighting, the IDF Spokesperson distributed to military reporters in Israel “before and after” satellite images of neighborhoods in the northern Strip, such as Shuja’iyya and Al-Furqan (nicknamed after a mosque in the area) in Gaza City, which showed dozens of destroyed homes and buildings. The Israeli army said that it had struck 182 power targets in Shuja’iyya and 312 power targets in Al-Furqan.

The Chief of Staff of the Israeli Air Force, Omer Tishler, told military reporters that all of these attacks had a legitimate military target, but also that entire neighborhoods were attacked “on a large scale and not in a surgical manner.” Noting that half of the military targets up until Oct. 11 were power targets, the IDF Spokesperson said that “neighborhoods that serve as terror nests for Hamas” were attacked and that damage was caused to “operational headquarters,” “operational assets,” and “assets used by terrorist organizations inside residential buildings.” On Oct. 12, the Israeli army announced it had killed three “senior Hamas members” — two of whom were part of the group’s political wing.

Yet despite the unbridled Israeli bombardment, the damage to Hamas’ military infrastructure in northern Gaza during the first days of the war appears to have been very minimal. Indeed, intelligence sources told +972 and Local Call that military targets that were part of power targets have previously been used many times as a fig leaf for harming the civilian population. “Hamas is everywhere in Gaza; there is no building that does not have something of Hamas in it, so if you want to find a way to turn a high-rise into a target, you will be able to do so,” said one former intelligence official.

“They will never just hit a high-rise that does not have something we can define as a military target,” said another intelligence source, who carried out previous strikes against power targets. “There will always be a floor in the high-rise [associated with Hamas]. But for the most part, when it comes to power targets, it is clear that the target doesn’t have military value that justifies an attack that would bring down the entire empty building in the middle of a city, with the help of six planes and bombs weighing several tons.”

Indeed, according to sources who were involved in the compiling of power targets in previous wars, although the target file usually contains some kind of alleged association with Hamas or other militant groups, striking the target functions primarily as a “means that allows damage to civil society.” The sources understood, some explicitly and some implicitly, that damage to civilians is the real purpose of these attacks.

Palestinians survivors are brought out of the rubble of houses destroyed in an Israeli airstrike in the city of Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 20, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Palestinians survivors are brought out of the rubble of houses destroyed in an Israeli airstrike in the city of Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 20, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

In May 2021, for example, Israel was heavily criticized for bombing the Al-Jalaa Tower, which housed prominent international media outlets such as Al Jazeera, AP, and AFP. The army claimed that the building was a Hamas military target; sources have told +972 and Local Call that it was in fact a power target.

“The perception is that it really hurts Hamas when high-rise buildings are taken down, because it creates a public reaction in the Gaza Strip and scares the population,” said one of the sources. “They wanted to give the citizens of Gaza the feeling that Hamas is not in control of the situation. Sometimes they toppled buildings and sometimes postal service and government buildings.”

Although it is unprecedented for the Israeli army to attack more than 1,000 power targets in five days, the idea of causing mass devastation to civilian areas for strategic purposes was formulated in previous military operations in Gaza, honed by the so-called “Dahiya Doctrine” from the Second Lebanon War of 2006.

According to the doctrine — developed by former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot, who is now a Knesset member and part of the current war cabinet — in a war against guerrilla groups such as Hamas or Hezbollah, Israel must use disproportionate and overwhelming force while targeting civilian and government infrastructure in order to establish deterrence and force the civilian population to pressure the groups to end their attacks. The concept of “power targets” seems to have emanated from this same logic.

The first time the Israeli army publicly defined power targets in Gaza was at the end of Operation Protective Edge in 2014. The army bombed four buildings during the last four days of the war — three residential multi-story buildings in Gaza City, and a high-rise in Rafah. The security establishment explained at the time that the attacks were intended to convey to the Palestinians of Gaza that “nothing is immune anymore,” and to put pressure on Hamas to agree to a ceasefire. “The evidence we collected shows that the massive destruction [of the buildings] was carried out deliberately, and without any military justification,” stated an Amnesty report in late 2014.

Smoke rises after an Israeli airstrike hits Al-Jalaa tower, which houses apartments and several media outlets including the Associated Press and Al Jazeera, Gaza City, May 15, 2021. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

Smoke rises after an Israeli airstrike hits Al-Jalaa tower, which houses apartments and several media outlets including the Associated Press and Al Jazeera, Gaza City, May 15, 2021. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

In another violent escalation that began in November 2018, the army once again attacked power targets. That time, Israel bombed high-rises, shopping centers, and the building of the Hamas-affiliated Al-Aqsa TV station. “Attacking power targets produces a very significant effect on the other side,” one Air Force officer stated at the time. “We did it without killing anyone and we made sure that the building and its surroundings were evacuated.”

Previous operations have also shown how striking these targets is meant not only to harm Palestinian morale, but also to raise the morale inside Israel. Haaretz revealed that during Operation Guardian of the Walls in 2021, the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit conducted a psy-op against Israeli citizens in order to boost awareness of the IDF’s operations in Gaza and the damage they caused to Palestinians. Soldiers, who used fake social media accounts to conceal the campaign’s origin, uploaded images and clips of the army’s strikes in Gaza to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok in order to demonstrate the army’s prowess to the Israeli public.

During the 2021 assault, Israel struck nine targets that were defined as power targets — all of them high-rise buildings. “The goal was to collapse the high-rises in order to put pressure on Hamas, and also so that the [Israeli] public would see a victory image,” one security source told +972 and Local Call.

However, the source continued, “it didn’t work. As someone who has followed Hamas, I heard firsthand how much they did not care about the civilians and the buildings that were taken down. Sometimes the army found something in a high-rise building that was related to Hamas, but it was also possible to hit that specific target with more accurate weaponry. The bottom line is that they knocked down a high-rise for the sake of knocking down a high-rise.”

‘Everyone was looking for their children in these piles’

Not only has the current war seen Israel attack an unprecedented number of power targets, it has also seen the army abandon prior policies that aimed at avoiding harm to civilians. Whereas previously the army’s official procedure was that it was possible to attack power targets only after all civilians had been evacuated from them, testimonies from Palestinian residents in Gaza indicate that, since October 7, Israel has attacked high-rises with their residents still inside, or without having taken significant steps to evacuate them, leading to many civilian deaths.

Palestinians at the rubble of a destroyed building after an Israeli airstrike in the central Gaza Strip, November 5, 2023. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

Palestinians at the rubble of a destroyed building after an Israeli airstrike in the central Gaza Strip, November 5, 2023. (Atia Mohammed/Flash90)

Such attacks very often result in the killing of entire families, as experienced in previous offensives; according to an investigation by AP conducted after the 2014 war, about 89 percent of those killed in the aerial bombings of family homes were unarmed residents, and most of them were children and women.

Tishler, the air force chief of staff, confirmed a shift in policy, telling reporters that the army’s “roof knocking” policy — whereby it would fire a small initial strike on the roof of a building to warn residents that it is about to be struck — is no longer in use “where there is an enemy.” Roof knocking, Tishler said, is “a term that is relevant to rounds [of fighting] and not to war.”

The sources who have previously worked on power targets said that the brazen strategy of the current war could be a dangerous development, explaining that attacking power targets was originally intended to “shock” Gaza but not necessarily to kill large numbers of civilians. “The targets were designed with the assumption that high-rises would be evacuated of people, so when we were working on [compiling the targets], there was no concern whatsoever regarding how many civilians would be harmed; the assumption was that the number would always be zero,” said one source with deep knowledge of the tactic.

“This would mean there would be a total evacuation [of the targeted buildings], which takes two to three hours, during which the residents are called [by phone to evacuate], warning missiles are fired, and we also crosscheck with drone footage that people are indeed leaving the high-rise,” the source added.

However, evidence from Gaza suggests that some high-rises — which we assume to have been power targets — were toppled without prior warning. +972 and Local Call located at least two cases during the current war in which entire residential high-rises were bombed and collapsed without warning, and one case in which, according to the evidence, a high-rise building collapsed on civilians who were inside.

Devastation is seen in the area of Al-Rimal at the heart of Gaza City after Israeli bombing, October 23, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

Devastation is seen in the area of Al-Rimal at the heart of Gaza City after Israeli bombing, October 23, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

On Oct. 10, Israel bombed the Babel Building in Gaza, according to the testimony of Bilal Abu Hatzira, who rescued bodies from the ruins that night. Ten people were killed in the attack on the building, including three journalists.

On Oct. 25, the 12-story Al-Taj residential building in Gaza City was bombed to the ground, killing the families living inside it without warning. About 120 people were buried under the ruins of their apartments, according to the testimonies of residents. Yousef Amar Sharaf, a resident of Al-Taj, wrote on X that 37 of his family members who lived in the building were killed in the attack: “My dear father and mother, my beloved wife, my sons, and most of my brothers and their families.” Residents stated that a lot of bombs were dropped, damaging and destroying apartments in nearby buildings too.

Six days later, on Oct. 31, the eight-story Al-Mohandseen residential building was bombed without warning. Between 30 and 45 bodies were reportedly recovered from the ruins on the first day. One baby was found alive, without his parents. Journalists estimated that over 150 people were killed in the attack, as many remained buried under the rubble.

The building used to stand in Nuseirat Refugee Camp, south of Wadi Gaza — in the supposed “safe zone” to which Israel directed the Palestinians who fled their homes in northern and central Gaza — and therefore served as temporary shelter for the displaced, according to testimonies.

According to an investigation by Amnesty International, on Oct. 9, Israel shelled at least three multi-story buildings, as well as an open flea market on a crowded street in the Jabaliya Refugee Camp, killing at least 69 people. “The bodies were burned … I didn’t want to look, I was scared of looking at Imad’s face,” said the father of a child who was killed. “The bodies were scattered on the floor. Everyone was looking for their children in these piles. I recognized my son only by his trousers. I wanted to bury him immediately, so I carried my son and got him out.”

An Israeli tank is seen inside Al-Shati refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, November 16, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

An Israeli tank is seen inside Al-Shati refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, November 16, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

According to Amnesty’s investigation, the army said that the attack on the market area was aimed at a mosque “where there were Hamas operatives.” However, according to the same investigation, satellite images do not show a mosque in the vicinity.

The IDF Spokesperson did not address +972’s and Local Call’s queries about specific attacks, but stated more generally that “the IDF provided warnings before attacks in various ways, and when the circumstances allowed it, also delivered individual warnings through phone calls to people who were at or near the targets (there were more from 25,000 live conversations during the war, alongside millions of recorded conversations, text messages and leaflets dropped from the air for the purpose of warning the population). In general, the IDF works to reduce harm to civilians as part of the attacks as much as possible, despite the challenge of fighting a terrorist organization that uses the citizens of Gaza as human shields.”

‘The machine produced 100 targets in one day’

According to the IDF Spokesperson, by Nov. 10, during the first 35 days of fighting, Israel attacked a total of 15,000 targets in Gaza. Based on multiple sources, this is a very high figure compared to the four previous major operations in the Strip. During Guardian of the Walls in 2021, Israel attacked 1,500 targets in 11 days. In Protective Edge in 2014, which lasted 51 days, Israel struck between 5,266 and 6,231 targets. During Pillar of Defense in 2012, about 1,500 targets were attacked over eight days. In Cast Lead” in 2008, Israel struck 3,400 targets in 22 days.

Intelligence sources who served in the previous operations also told +972 and Local Call that, for 10 days in 2021 and three weeks in 2014, an attack rate of 100 to 200 targets per day led to a situation in which the Israeli Air Force had no targets of military value left. Why, then, after nearly two months, has the Israeli army not yet run out of targets in the current war?

The answer may lie in a statement from the IDF Spokesperson on Nov. 2, according to which it is using the AI system Habsora (“The Gospel”), which the spokesperson says “enables the use of automatic tools to produce targets at a fast pace, and works by improving accurate and high-quality intelligence material according to [operational] needs.”

Israeli artillery stationed near the Gaza fence, southern Israel, November 2, 2023. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

Israeli artillery stationed near the Gaza fence, southern Israel, November 2, 2023. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

In the statement, a senior intelligence official is quoted as saying that thanks to Habsora, targets are created for precision strikes “while causing great damage to the enemy and minimal damage to non-combatants. Hamas operatives are not immune — no matter where they hide.”

According to intelligence sources, Habsora generates, among other things, automatic recommendations for attacking private residences where people suspected of being Hamas or Islamic Jihad operatives live. Israel then carries out large-scale assassination operations through the heavy shelling of these residential homes.

Habsora, explained one of the sources, processes enormous amounts of data that “tens of thousands of intelligence officers could not process,” and recommends bombing sites in real time. Because most senior Hamas officials head into underground tunnels with the start of any military operation, the sources say, the use of a system like Habsora makes it possible to locate and attack the homes of relatively junior operatives.

One former intelligence officer explained that the Habsora system enables the army to run a “mass assassination factory,” in which the “emphasis is on quantity and not on quality.” A human eye “will go over the targets before each attack, but it need not spend a lot of time on them.” Since Israel estimates that there are approximately 30,000 Hamas members in Gaza, and they are all marked for death, the number of potential targets is enormous.

In 2019, the Israeli army created a new center aimed at using AI to accelerate target generation. “The Targets Administrative Division is a unit that includes hundreds of officers and soldiers, and is based on AI capabilities,” said former IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi in an in-depth interview with Ynet earlier this year.

Palestinians search for the wounded after an Israeli airstrike on a house in the Shaboura refugee camp in the city of Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 17, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

Palestinians search for the wounded after an Israeli airstrike on a house in the Shaboura refugee camp in the city of Rafah, southern Gaza Strip, November 17, 2023. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

“This is a machine that, with the help of AI, processes a lot of data better and faster than any human, and translates it into targets for attack,” Kochavi went on. “The result was that in Operation Guardian of the Walls [in 2021], from the moment this machine was activated, it generated 100 new targets every day. You see, in the past there were times in Gaza when we would create 50 targets per year. And here the machine produced 100 targets in one day.”

“We prepare the targets automatically and work according to a checklist,” one of the sources who worked in the new Targets Administrative Division told +972 and Local Call. “It really is like a factory. We work quickly and there is no time to delve deep into the target. The view is that we are judged according to how many targets we manage to generate.”

A senior military official in charge of the target bank told the Jerusalem Post earlier this year that, thanks to the army’s AI systems, for the first time the military can generate new targets at a faster rate than it attacks. Another source said the drive to automatically generate large numbers of targets is a realization of the Dahiya Doctrine.

Automated systems like Habsora have thus greatly facilitated the work of Israeli intelligence officers in making decisions during military operations, including calculating potential casualties. Five different sources confirmed that the number of civilians who may be killed in attacks on private residences is known in advance to Israeli intelligence, and appears clearly in the target file under the category of “collateral damage.”

According to these sources, there are degrees of collateral damage, according to which the army determines whether it is possible to attack a target inside a private residence. “When the general directive becomes ‘Collateral Damage 5,’ that means we are authorized to strike all targets that will kill five or less civilians — we can act on all target files that are five or less,” said one of the sources.

Palestinians gather around the remains of a tower building housing offices which witnesses said was destroyed by an Israeli air strike in Gaza City, August 26, 2014. (Emad Nassar/Flash90)

Palestinians gather around the remains of a tower building housing offices which witnesses said was destroyed by an Israeli air strike in Gaza City, August 26, 2014. (Emad Nassar/Flash90)

“In the past, we did not regularly mark the homes of junior Hamas members for bombing,” said a security official who participated in attacking targets during previous operations. “In my time, if the house I was working on was marked Collateral Damage 5, it would not always be approved [for attack].” Such approval, he said, would only be received if a senior Hamas commander was known to be living in the home.

“To my understanding, today they can mark all the houses of [any Hamas military operative regardless of rank],” the source continued. “That is a lot of houses. Hamas members who don’t really matter for anything live in homes across Gaza. So they mark the home and bomb the house and kill everyone there.”

A concerted policy to bomb family homes

On Oct. 22, the Israeli Air Force bombed the home of the Palestinian journalist Ahmed Alnaouq in the city of Deir al-Balah. Ahmed is a close friend and colleague of mine; four years ago, we founded a Hebrew Facebook page called “Across the Wall,” with the aim of bringing Palestinian voices from Gaza to the Israeli public.

The strike on Oct. 22 collapsed blocks of concrete onto Ahmed’s entire family, killing his father, brothers, sisters, and all of their children, including babies. Only his 12-year-old niece, Malak, survived and remained in a critical condition, her body covered in burns. A few days later, Malak died.

Twenty-one members of Ahmed’s family were killed in total, buried under their home. None of them were militants. The youngest was 2 years old; the oldest, his father, was 75. Ahmed, who is currently living in the UK, is now alone out of his entire family.

Al-Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis overflows with the bodies of Palestinians killed and wounded overnight in Israeli airstrikes, Gaza Strip, October 25, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

Al-Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis overflows with the bodies of Palestinians killed and wounded overnight in Israeli airstrikes, Gaza Strip, October 25, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun/Activestills)

Ahmed’s family WhatsApp group is titled “Better Together.” The last message that appears there was sent by him, a little after midnight on the night he lost his family. “Someone let me know that everything is fine,” he wrote. No one answered. He fell asleep, but woke up in a panic at 4 a.m. Drenched in sweat, he checked his phone again. Silence. Then he received a message from a friend with the terrible news.

Ahmed’s case is common in Gaza these days. In interviews to the press, heads of Gaza hospitals have been echoing the same description: families enter hospitals as a succession of corpses, a child followed by his father followed by his grandfather. The bodies are all covered in dirt and blood.

According to former Israeli intelligence officers, in many cases in which a private residence is bombed, the goal is the “assassination of Hamas or Jihad operatives,” and such targets are attacked when the operative enters the home. Intelligence researchers know if the operative’s family members or neighbors may also die in an attack, and they know how to calculate how many of them may die. Each of the sources said that these are private homes, where in the majority of cases, no military activity is carried out.

+972 and Local Call do not have data regarding the number of military operatives who were indeed killed or wounded by aerial strikes on private residences in the current war, but there is ample evidence that, in many cases, none were military or political operatives belonging to Hamas or Islamic Jihad.

On Oct. 10, the Israeli Air Force bombed an apartment building in Gaza’s Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, killing 40 people, most of them women and children. In one of the shocking videos taken following the attack, people are seen screaming, holding what appears to be a doll pulled from the ruins of the house, and passing it from hand to hand. When the camera zooms in, one can see that it is not a doll, but the body of a baby.

Palestinian rescue services remove the bodies of members of the Shaaban family, all six of whom were killed in an Israeli airstrike on the Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, western Gaza, October 9, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun)

Palestinian rescue services remove the bodies of members of the Shaaban family, all six of whom were killed in an Israeli airstrike on the Sheikh Radwan neighborhood, western Gaza, October 9, 2023. (Mohammed Zaanoun)

One of the residents said that 19 members of his family were killed in the strike. Another survivor wrote on Facebook that he only found his son’s shoulder in the rubble. Amnesty investigated the attack and discovered that a Hamas member lived on one of the upper floors of the building, but was not present at the time of the attack.

The bombing of family homes where Hamas or Islamic Jihad operatives supposedly live likely became a more concerted IDF policy during Operation Protective Edge in 2014. Back then, 606 Palestinians — about a quarter of the civilian deaths during the 51 days of fighting — were members of families whose homes were bombed. A UN report defined it in 2015 as both a potential war crime and “a new pattern” of action that “led to the death of entire families.”

In 2014, 93 babies were killed as a result of Israeli bombings of family homes, of which 13 were under 1 year old. A month ago, 286 babies aged 1 or under were already identified as having been killed in Gaza, according to a detailed ID list with the ages of victims published by the Gaza Health Ministry on Oct. 26. The number has since likely doubled or tripled.

However, in many cases, and especially during the current attacks on Gaza, the Israeli army has carried out attacks that struck private residences even when there is no known or clear military target. For example, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, by Nov. 29, Israel had killed 50 Palestinian journalists in Gaza, some of them in their homes with their families.

Roshdi Sarraj, 31, a journalist from Gaza who was born in Britain, founded a media outlet in Gaza called “Ain Media.” On Oct. 22, an Israeli bomb struck his parents’ home where he was sleeping, killing him. The journalist Salam Mema similarly died under the ruins of her home after it was bombed; of her three young children, Hadi, 7, died, while Sham, 3, has not yet been found under the rubble. Two other journalists, Duaa Sharaf and Salma Makhaimer, were killed together with their children in their homes.

An Israeli warplane is seen flying above the Gaza Strip, November 13, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

An Israeli warplane is seen flying above the Gaza Strip, November 13, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Israeli analysts have admitted that the military effectiveness of these kinds of disproportionate aerial attacks is limited. Two weeks after the start of the bombings in Gaza (and before the ground invasion) — after the bodies of 1,903 children, approximately 1,000 women, and 187 elderly men were counted in the Gaza Strip — Israeli commentator Avi Issacharoff tweeted: “As hard as it is to hear, on the 14th day of fighting, it does not appear that the military arm of Hamas has been significantly harmed. The most significant damage to the military leadership is the assassination of [Hamas commander] Ayman Nofal.”

‘Fighting human animals’

Hamas militants regularly operate out of an intricate network of tunnels built under large stretches of the Gaza Strip. These tunnels, as confirmed by the former Israeli intelligence officers we spoke to, also pass under homes and roads. Therefore, Israeli attempts to destroy them with aerial strikes are in many cases likely to lead to the killing of civilians. This may be another reason for the high number of Palestinian families wiped out in the current offensive.

The intelligence officers interviewed for this article said that the way Hamas designed the tunnel network in Gaza knowingly exploits the civilian population and infrastructure above ground. These claims were also the basis of the media campaign that Israel conducted vis-a-vis the attacks and raids on Al-Shifa Hospital and the tunnels that were discovered under it.

Israel has also attacked a large number of military targets: armed Hamas operatives, rocket launcher sites, snipers, anti-tank squads, military headquarters, bases, observation posts, and more. From the beginning of the ground invasion, aerial bombardment and heavy artillery fire have been used to provide backup to Israeli troops on the ground. Experts in international law say these targets are legitimate, as long as the strikes comply with the principle of proportionality.

In response to an enquiry from +972 and Local Call for this article, the IDF Spokesperson stated: “The IDF is committed to international law and acts according to it, and in doing so attacks military targets and does not attack civilians. The terrorist organization Hamas places its operatives and military assets in the heart of the civilian population. Hamas systematically uses the civilian population as a human shield, and conducts combat from civilian buildings, including sensitive sites such as hospitals, mosques, schools, and UN facilities.”

Intelligence sources who spoke to +972 and Local Call similarly claimed that in many cases Hamas “deliberately endangers the civilian population in Gaza and tries to forcefully prevent civilians from evacuating.” Two sources said that Hamas leaders “understand that Israeli harm to civilians gives them legitimacy in fighting.”

Destruction caused by Israeli bombings is seen inside Al-Shati refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, November 16, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Destruction caused by Israeli bombings is seen inside Al-Shati refugee camp, northern Gaza Strip, November 16, 2023. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

At the same time, while it’s hard to imagine now, the idea of dropping a one-ton bomb aimed at killing a Hamas operative yet ending up killing an entire family as “collateral damage” was not always so readily accepted by large swathes of Israeli society. In 2002, for example, the Israeli Air Force bombed the home of Salah Mustafa Muhammad Shehade, then the head of the Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ military wing. The bomb killed him, his wife Eman, his 14-year-old daughter Laila, and 14 other civilians, including 11 children. The killing caused a public uproar in both Israel and the world, and Israel was accused of committing war crimes.

That criticism led to a decision by the Israeli army in 2003 to drop a smaller, quarter-ton bomb on a meeting of top Hamas officials — including the elusive leader of Al-Qassam Brigades, Mohammed Deif — taking place in a residential building in Gaza, despite the fear that it would not be powerful enough to kill them. In his book “To Know Hamas,” veteran Israeli journalist Shlomi Eldar wrote that the decision to use a relatively small bomb was due to the Shehade precedent, and the fear that a one-ton bomb would kill the civilians in the building as well. The attack failed, and the senior military wing officers fled the scene.

In December 2008, in the first major war that Israel waged against Hamas after it seized power in Gaza, Yoav Gallant, who at the time headed the IDF Southern Command, said that for the first time Israel was “hitting the family homes” of senior Hamas officials with the aim of destroying them, but not harming their families. Gallant emphasized that the homes were attacked after the families were warned by a “knock on the roof,” as well as by phone call, after it was clear that Hamas military activity was taking place inside the house.

After 2014’s Protective Edge, during which Israel began to systematically strike family homes from the air, human rights groups like B’Tselem collected testimonies from Palestinians who survived these attacks. The survivors said the homes collapsed in on themselves, glass shards cut the bodies of those inside, the debris “smells of blood,” and people were buried alive.

This deadly policy continues today — thanks in part to the use of destructive weaponry and sophisticated technology like Habsora, but also to a political and security establishment that has loosened the reins on Israel’s military machinery. Fifteen years after insisting that the army was taking pains to minimize civilian harm, Gallant, now Defense Minister, has clearly changed his tune. “We are fighting human animals and we act accordingly,” he said after October 7.

 

Source: https://www.972mag.com

Public International Declaration and Claim: The Siphon 101

 By Anna Von Reitz

Please notice that this entire discussion is about the administration of “these” United States, meaning the British Territorial United States, dba the United States of America, Incorporated.  
It is not about The United States, our country, nor does it concern our States of the Union, nor our international government doing business as The United States of America, an unincorporated Federation of States. 
This is entirely, 100%, about the mismanagement of our British Territorial Subcontractors and their States of States organizations representing their own citizenry and their own District Banks which were set up in May of 1865 and operated as “National” Bank Associations— with the “nations” represented being all the British Territorial Persons/Residents identified as U.S. Citizens in each State of the Union.  
Congressman Louis T. McFadden was sitting in the British Territorial United States Congress when he gave the speeches and made the remarks being examined here. 
Now, as to how the gross mechanism of national identity theft and the siphon used to create national level embezzlement works, please hear the words of Congressman Louis T. McFadden as spoken on the floor of the House of Representatives and as recorded in the Congressional Record:
  “In 1912 the National Monetary Association, under the chairmanship of the late Senator Nelson W. Aldrich, made a report and presented a vicious bill called the National Reserve Association bill. This bill is usually spoken of as the Aldrich bill. Senator Aldrich did not write the Aldrich bill. He was the tool, if not the accomplice, of the European bankers who for nearly twenty years had been scheming to set up a central bank in this Country and who in 1912 has spent and were continuing to spend vast sums of money to accomplish their purpose.”

The Aldrich Bills of 1907-1911 urged the creation of an “emergency currency” under the private centralized control of unaccountable private bankers, none of whom were elected by the public and none subject to any public oversight. 
That “emergency currency” was the Federal Reserve Note. 
The “emergency” was the 1906-07 bankruptcy of the Scottish Interloper, The United States of America, Incorporated, set up and incorporated by the British Territorial Government in 1868.  
None of this has anything to do with this actual country, and is not anything that the British Territorial Government was authorized to do “for” us. This is entirely about their mismanagement of their corporations, their corporate bankruptcies, and their monetary policies including their need for an “emergency currency” backed by private banks. 
McFadden continues: 

“We were opposed to the Aldrich plan for a central bank. The men who rule the Democratic Party then promised the people that if they were returned to power there would be no central bank established here while they held the reins of government. Thirteen months later that promise was broken, and the Wilson administration, under the tutelage of those sinister Wall Street figures who stood behind Colonel House, established here in our free Country the worm-eaten monarchical institution of the “King’s Bank” to control us from the top downward, and from the cradle to the grave.

The worm-eaten institution of the “King’s Bank” McFadden referenced is the same [King’s] Equity Court [Bank] established in association with the [King’s] Equity Law established in the 1750’s by Lord Mansfield. 

We have explained this pollution of the English Common Law with Admiralty Law elsewhere, and the evils resulting from impersonating people as Persons, i.e., Corporations, belonging to the King.

The end result of Equity Law is that the entire “Equity” in individual private estates belongs to the King; the Court “salvages” the King’s interest in the “vessels entered on the docket” and, after taking a percentage for its own efforts (the CRIS Account in this country), returns the rest to the Bank of England, which takes its cut, and submits the rest to the Royal Treasury.  

None of this, not the courts, not the law, and not the court/bank have anything to do with Americans.  

This is all about the “Residents” — the foreign British Territorial Residents allowed to be here under the Residence Act to provide us with “essential government services”. 

The “emergency currency” known as the Federal Reserve Note was needed by these Residents because they had exhausted the investors in the private “Green Back” currency initiated by Abraham Lincoln– an earlier swindle in which investors paid in gold and were repaid with paper. 

Aldrich was proposing, without so many words, to replace the failing Greenbacks which had been funded by “1040 Bonds” purchased by private investors, with a private military (Admiralty) scrip backed by “associations” of private mostly international investment banks.

This new “emergency currency”, the Federal Reserve Note, would naturally be a debt note issued by these private investment banks against the value of the King’s interest in the Residents’ labor and earthly estate, administered under Equity Law.

All that was left to do to create The Siphon was a means to mischaracterize all the Americans as Residents in their own country — that is, U.S. Citizens. That part was accomplished via various Territorial Congress Maternity Act attempts ending with the Sheppard-Towner Act of 1921.

These private, unknown, unelected, unaccountable and deceitfully named “Federal” Reserve Banks now had — theoretically, complete access to all assets public and private in this country to use as collateral backing their issuance of “Federal Reserve Notes”. 

They were enabled by the practice of  fractional reserve banking to issue seven to ten times more credit than the value of the asset backing the credit. 

What began with enslavement of their own U.S. Citizen (Residents) was spread to the general American public via the undisclosed “Birth Registrations”, and it was so profitable, that they extended the same criminal system to the Commonwealth and the seventeen western European countries and Japan which were occupied in the wake of World War II. 

To pay off the debt owed to the original Greenback investors in Lincoln’s “1040 Bonds”  the Perpetrators introduced “Federal Income Taxes” and “1040 Forms”, by which they taxed their Employees and their Dependents for the privilege of Federal Employment and the use of Federal Reserve Notes. 

They hired the private foreign Inquisition Service known as the Internal Revenue Service to collect this tax as a war reparations collection, and brought the Internal Revenue Service ashore in this country as a Delaware Corporation registered in 1925. 

For each American mischaracterized as a Resident (and U.S. Citizen) via the undisclosed Birth Registration process, the Territorial United States Department of Commerce additionally created a Municipal Corporation in the victim’s NAME, to act as a “citizen of the United States” defined as a “United States citizen” under the Diversity Clause of Title 28, for the purposes of war debt collection under their defunct Scottish Corporation’s Fourteenth Amendment. 

This CITIZEN was taxed on all Federal Income, and as the only currency the Perpetrators allowed in this country was their very own Federal Reserve Note, the circle was now complete. 

They did have to allow Americans to endorse checks and denominate them as “lawful money” and claim exemptions under Federal Title 12, which the Vermin didn’t honor, but, for the main, their objectives — unlimited access to our credit and coercive means to illegally confiscate or control our assets — was attained. 

Once created by the Territorial Department of Commerce, the brand new Municipal CORPORATIONS operated in the victim’s NAMES as “United States citizens” were shipped off to Puerto Rico for administration under the Spanish Law of the Inquisition. Puerto Rico remains a British Commonwealth nation and retained the Spanish Law of the Inquisition from its original land jurisdiction government. 

Thus, by Equity Law in Maritime Commerce and by Spanish Law of the Inquisition on the land, the Perpetrators sought to place themselves in an impenetrable legal cocoon by first impersonating their victims and then subjecting them under foreign law systems given to abject despotism. 

Quoting McFadden again:

“The Federal Reserve Bank destroyed our old and characteristic way of doing business. It discriminated against our 1-name commercial paper, the finest in the world, and it set up the antiquated 2-name paper, which is the present curse of this Country and which wrecked every country which has ever given it scope; it fastened down upon the Country the very tyranny from which the framers of the Constitution sought to save us.

McFadden was greatly respected as the senior member on the House Banking and Currency Committee for more than ten years.  

Here, by his testimony, we see that prior to the Federal Reserve System, only one authority appeared as the Issuer of Credit and that authority was singularly responsible for it and in control of it. 

Most importantly, the American Federal Republic Office of The Secretary of the Treasury was a Public Office — appointed, but still accountable to the Public.  The Territorial office of the Secretary of the Treasury — meaning their private corporation’s  “treasury” — is not. 

Under the Federal Reserve System two private, unknown, unelected, unaccountable corporation employees acting under deceptive job titles issued the Federal Reserve Note.

These characters calling themselves the “Secretary of the Treasury” and “Secretary of the United States” respectively were the Officers of a District of Columbia Municipal Corporation calling itself the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and another foreign Municipal Corporation residing in the District of Columbia calling itself the “FEDERAL RESERVE”. 

These are the names of the corporations displayed on each and every Federal Reserve Note, and they are basically claiming that each of these CORPORATIONS are standing good for the debt notes being issued; however, as we’ve seen, the credit is based on the labor and assets of all the presumed British Territorial Residents, aka, U.S. Citizens, which are claimed under Equity Law as assets belonging to the King and then claimed again under Spanish Law of the Inquisition as “United States citizens” — assets belonging to the Pope. 

Put bluntly, the British Monarch and the Popes have been skinning us all blind for 160 years, first by one fraud scheme (1040 Bonds) and then by another (Federal Reserve Notes).  

They have done this while sanctimoniously pretending to act as our Custodians and Trustees, and also pretending that this had nothing to do with Americans — only people who volunteered to act as U.S. Citizens and as citizens of the United States. 

Vast numbers of Americans have been illegally and immorally registered as U.S. Citizens under conditions of secrecy — not mere non-disclosure. The Unconscionable Birth Registration contracts were not disclosed to our parents and were constructed while we were babies in our cradles, when we were unable to know anything about these contracts or the unlawful conversion of our natural political status they allowed. 

We, rank and file Americans, were never meant to know or understand a thing about any of this. 

When we inquired, we were rebuffed and placed under “suspicion” and hounded by corporation officials and private agency security personnel disguised as our own peacekeeping forces. 

When we attempted to claim our exemptions and our right to denominate bank deposits as lawful money, we were attacked by the IRS and our accounts were closed. 

You might think that the actual Employees of these corporations would have known that they were committing crimes, but for the most part, that is not the case.  You might also think that they legitimately owed Federal Income Taxes as a condition of employment, but as this and other nasty conditions of such employment were never fully disclosed to them, none of their employment contracts are legitimate.  

All of this, absolutely all of it, falls under the umbrella of Gross Breach of Trust and Violation of Commercial Service Contracts per our Final Judgment issued in April of 2014 — which has been published and distributed and recorded worldwide. 

It is also reflected throughout our unrebutted Public Lien Process and J’Accuse Affidavit published in 2015 — similarly published and distributed worldwide.

All these mechanizations were accomplished via unlawful conversion, and need to be reversed by the process of lawful conversion, returning these banks, corporations, and all assets and credit to the living people and Lawful Governments they are heir to, subject to the Public Law and Law of the Land each country is heir to.  

This is why we require the world accounts to be turned upside down, with the impersonated and misrepresented Debtors appearing in their right guise as the Creditors, and all their purloined assets and credits returned to them, not limited to all the off-ledger and historical and legacy trust assets and assets of the offending corporations responsible for this repugnant and unconscionable swindle. 

All the “Federal Income Tax” and “Property Tax” and “Social Security Tax” and other taxes incorrectly assessed against Americans as a result of the unconscionable Birth Registrations and undisclosed enrollments in Federal Pension Programs (later redefined as welfare programs) such as Social Security, together with reasonable and customary interest, must be returned to the victims. 

Absent direct, knowing, and fully consensual agreement on the part of individuals, all people now living in this country, and any other country affected by this vast crime, must be released from all and any legal presumptions created by unconscionable, implied, unilateral, secret or undisclosed contracting and registration processes. 

Average Americans, Australians, Canadians, Japanese, Germans, et. alia who have been impacted by these crimes must be considered civilians living in their own country under peacetime conditions.  

The assets and credit belonging to the living people and their lawful governments must be returned to them and restitution must be made. Taxes collected under False Pretenses and interest charged on non-existent debts must be returned to the victims or their heirs as pre-paid credit. 

Any courts left operating must operate according to the Public Law and the Law of the Land, or, they must demonstrate verified and fully disclosed Maritime or Admiralty contracts and subject matter in order to operate in those venues. 

All Maritime Commerce Banks, Equity Banks, Probate Banks, Reserve Banks, etc., and their Associations and Accounts, are subject to lawful conversion in expiation of their crimes and omissions. All these banks must henceforth operate as land jurisdiction banks and be restructured as Bilateral Banks operating under the Public Law and Law of the Land. 

All debt being held against the victims of this farce must be reversed and ledgered as credit not subject to taxation or usury of any kind.  

In the event that a nation’s lawful government has been destroyed or rendered inoperable by this fraud, the people will stand under the protection of the unincorporated Federation of States and our Public Law until such time as they can declare their proper political status, organize their lawful government, and regain their normal state of independence.  Their assets will be returned to them and to their control. The credit owed to them will be issued as prepaid credit, free and clear of any taxation or usury.  

Any bank resisting lawful conversion and offering to dispute these findings, cured claims, and court proceedings –and wishing to continue these criminal abuses of our identities, assets, and credit– will be liquidated and their Boards of Directors and Officers will be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of International and Public Law.

Thanks to Congressman McFadden and thousands of other Americans who have preserved our country’s identity and revealed the misdeeds of Municipal and Territorial Government Officials, our American Government is still present and accounted for and our claims against these Miscreants are cured. 

“A good man leaves an inheritance for his children, but the wealth of the wicked is stored up for the just.” –Proverbs 13:22. 

Issued by: Anna Maria Riezinger, Fiduciary

                  The United States of America

                  In care of: Box 520994

                  Big Lake, Alaska 99652

December 1st 2023

—————————-

See this article and over 4500 others on Anna’s website here: www.annavonreitz.com

To support this work look for the Donate button on this website. 

How do we use your donations?  Find out here.

Geneva: The Head of the Snake

  • Pascal Najadi, son of World Economic Forum (WEF) cofounder Hussain Najadi, is calling on the Swiss authorities to arrest the leaders of the World Economic Forum, the World Health Organization and GAVI, all of which are headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, as well as Big Tech and Big Pharma executives, for injecting a bioweapon into 5.7 billion people

  • In 2022, Najadi filed criminal charges against Swiss president Alain Berset for misleading the Swiss people about the COVID shots

  • Najadi has also filed a civil case against Pfizer at the New York Supreme Court for harm done to him by the Pfizer COVID injection

  • GAVI, founded by Bill Gates, has diplomatic immunity in Switzerland, and its immunity clauses go beyond even that of diplomats. GAVI’s immunity covers all aspects of engagement, including criminal business dealings. They can do whatever they want without repercussions. GAVI is also completely tax exempt

  • Another Gates-founded and funded organization headquartered in Geneva — the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria — also has diplomatic immunity

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

“Everything evil in the world, related to democide … comes from Geneva.” That’s a quote from Pascal Najadi, a former banker and son of World Economic Forum (WEF) cofounder Hussain Najadi, who claims his father left the WEF “out of disgust” in the early ‘80s.1 Hussain, founder of AmBank, one of the largest banks in Malaysia, was assassinated in Ceylon in 2013.2 3

According to Najadi, “evil” organizations engaged in democide — the murder of people by government — include the World Health Organization, the Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunization (GAVI) and the WEF, all of which are headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland.

This is why he calls Geneva “the head of the snake.” Najadi is now calling on the Swiss authorities to arrest the leaders of these organizations, along with Big Tech and Big Pharma executives, because:

“… the WEF, WHO, GAVI, Big Pharma, Big Tech [and] Bill Gates all advocated for a global humanity injection [with] a bioweapon — injecting nanolipids [which are classified as toxic4] into 5.7 billion people. And we Swiss are hosting them? That’s terrible. We cannot tolerate any entity that promotes poison to be injected into humanity.”

One of the reasons Najadi is so adamant about holding these organizations accountable is because he trusted the information given, got three doses of Pfizer’s mRNA shot in 2021, and is now dying from the effects. “It’s a democide, and you’ll be judged,” he says. “It will be corrected in the name of humanity.”

In December 2022, Najadi filed criminal charges against Swiss President Alain Berset (formerly the Swiss minister of health) for misleading the Swiss people about the COVID shots.5

Among the false statements highlighted by Najadi was Berset’s claim that vaccinated people were not contagious and could not spread the virus6 — a claim he must have known was untrue at the time he said it, October 27, 2021.

First of all, Pfizer never conducted any tests to determine transmissibility among the jabbed, so they had no data. Moreover, three months earlier, August 3, 2021, the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) had announced findings showing “Vaccinated people can spread the coronavirus just as frequently as unvaccinated people.”7

Criminal charges include assault, bodily harm and abuse of office. The charges are reportedly still under investigation. He discusses this case with Rebel News in the video above.

In March 2023, he also filed a civil case against Pfizer and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration at the New York Supreme Court in Manhattan for harm done to him by the Pfizer COVID shot.8 9 10 That case is discussed in the video below. Charges were also filed against the two doctors who “injected him with a toxic substance.”11

According to her bio,12 13 Astrid Stuckelberger “is an internationally recognized expert on issues related to evaluating scientific research for policymakers, in particular in health and innovation assessment, pandemic and emergency management training and in optimizing individual and population health and well-being.”

She’s also a published author, with a dozen books to her credit, as well as more than 180 scientific articles, policy papers and governmental and international reports.

Between 2010 and 2020, Stuckelberger was also a professor at the Universities of Applied Science in Switzerland, and a senior lecturer at the University of Lausanne. When she started speaking out against the COVID-19 narrative, her university positions were canceled.

Stuckelberger refers to what she calls “the Geneva syndrome.” What she means is that most of the people who work in these Geneva-based organizations do not understand what they’re working toward, and those who do understand are too afraid to speak out because the power wielded by these entities is so great.

Instead, they speak in code or try to wake people up to the reality of what’s planned in indirect ways. What’s planned, of course, is a one world government ruled by an unelected cadre of technocrats.

The agenda that has become apparent over the past three years has been in the works for decades, but there was always some semblance of law and order, some checks and balances. What we’re seeing now is that the individuals involved have become so emboldened they don’t even care that people can see them flouting the rules and changing them to fit their own aims.

The WHO, for example, does not have the authority to dictate orders to the world, yet that’s what they did. Now, they’re simply trying to “legalize” and make permanent their power grab through the implementation of a new pandemic treaty, amendments to the international health regulations and One Health — none of which can be voted on by the public.

Stuckelberger was the first to publicly point out that GAVI, the vaccine alliance founded by Bill Gates, has diplomatic immunity in Switzerland.14 15 More specifically, GAVI has “qualified diplomatic immunity,” which is odd, considering the organization has no political power that would warrant it.

Odder still is that GAVI’s immunity clauses go beyond even that of diplomats. GAVI’s immunity covers all aspects of engagement, including criminal business dealings.

“GAVI is a nongovernmental organization that is allowed to operate without paying any taxes, while also having total immunity for anything they do wrong.”

They can do whatever they want, without repercussions. Equally strange, GAVI is completely tax exempt. So, to summarize, GAVI is a nongovernmental organization (NGO) that is allowed to operate in Switzerland without paying any taxes, while also having total immunity for anything they do wrong, willfully or otherwise.

Another Gates-founded and funded organization headquartered in Geneva — the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria — also has diplomatic immunity.16 17 Like that of GAVI, the agreement between the Swiss Federal Council and the Global Fund includes articles specifying the “inviolability” of their premises and archives.

No agent of the Swiss public authority can enter or search them without express consent of the executive director of the organization. Their archives may not be searched, regardless of their location, and “in the conduct of its business,” the organizations “enjoy immunity from every form of legal process and enforcement.”

The only person who can waive this immunity is the executive director himself, or an authorized representative. But if you’re engaged in criminal activity, would you waive your immunity to search, seizure and prosecution?

The inclusion of that article alone reveals volumes. It’s what you’d want if you knew that what you were doing could get you in legal trouble, sooner or later. One of the few exceptions to the ironclad immunity clause is the civil liability for damages caused by a vehicle belonging to the operation.

In her 2021 testimony to the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee, Stuckelberger also detailed the highly unusual agreement between the WHO, Gates and Swissmedic (the Food and Drug Administration of Switzerland).

According to Stuckelberger, Gates requested to be part of the WHO’s executive board in 2017, ostensibly because he’s one of its largest funders. Essentially, he, as an individual, sought to gain the status of a member state. There’s no evidence that Gates was ever granted this status, but he may still have more power over the WHO than his funding already grants him.

Essentially, it appears that when he did not get voted in as a one-man nation state, Gates created three-party contracts with member states and the WHO instead, essentially placing himself on par with the WHO. According to Stuckelberger, on one of those three-way contracts is between Gates, the WHO and Swissmedic.

This arrangement is yet another piece of evidence that private-public partnerships have been hijacked by private interests, which also happen to enjoy the same or even greater liability protections than nation states!

Najadi insists that Switzerland must return to its neutral roots. “Swiss neutrality has to be restored,” he says, and once restored, the country must never again allow institutions like the WEF, WHO and GAVI to gain foothold.

“The snake head is in Geneva,” Najadi says. “I call it a direct, clear and present danger to the Swiss population. But I can tell you, it is being cut off. If you have a house of cards … of a criminal [entity]… one card pulled by justice and the whole card house collapses.

But from hope alone it is not done. Everybody must now change the spirit. All the vaccinated, the injected, knowing that they are poisoned — we are the masses. We are billions of people. Let’s just stand up and say ‘Stop. We will not comply.’ Because we are the guardians of humanity and our light obliterates the darkness of evil.”

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

Why Do so Many People Hate VAERS?

By: A Midwestern Doctor

  • Because of the government’s commitment to the vaccination program, there have been numerous incidents where the FDA ignored the warnings of its own scientists in order push a dangerous (and often “emergency”) vaccine onto the market

  • When the National Vaccine Injury Act was passed in 1986, one of the primary concerns of the parents who fought for it was that no one would let them report vaccine injuries. This mattered because the lack of injuries being reported was used to argue the injuries did not exist

  • VAERS in turn was created so the public had a way to both report vaccine injuries and see what injuries were actually being reported

  • The government never wanted a public database which could expose the harms of it’s vaccines to exist, so ever since VAERS was created, it has done everything it could to undermine and discredit VAERS. In this article, we will review the evidence showing how that behavior has continued to the present day

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

Since vaccines were first invented, governments and the medical profession have had a compulsive need to defend the products, regardless of how much they hurt people, how much they fail to work, or how unnecessary they are (e.g. because the disease in question is unlikely to ever harm people or a safe and effective treatment for it already exists).

My best guess to explain this phenomenon is that the vaccination meme is extremely appealing to the ruling class because it provides a simple solution (injecting everyone) for a complex problem (ensuring the health of the nation), and is relatively easy to implement since all it requires is a leader doubling down using the force of the state against anyone who does not comply (which leaders often default to doing for a variety of problems).

Unfortunately, since life is not that simple, this approach always falls short and requires leaders and governments who commit to it to then cut a lot of corners as problems inevitably arise. As a result, some of the recurring themes you see in the forgotten vaccine disasters include:

  • Creating an “emergency” situation which is used to justify cutting corners on vaccine.

  • Assuming rather than verifying that the vaccine actually works before giving it to the population.

  • Burying data or test results that show the current vaccine should not be given to human beings and gagging government scientists who raised concerns about the product.

  • Allowing a dangerous and unsafe process be used to mass produce the vaccines. This commonly occurs when switching from the clinical trials (which requires a much smaller amount of the vaccine to be produced) to the general market.

  • Choosing a cheaper (and hence more profitable) production process rather than a safer (but more expensive and thus less profitable) vaccine production process.

  • Having everyone repeat the mantra that “the vaccines is safe and effective” and that there is no evidence to the contrary — to the point medical professionals come to believe this is so even when they see the injuries with their own eyes.

Note: Since there is so much money in vaccination (and the government’s stamp of approval means most of the country will buy each new vaccine), a robust apparatus (discussed here) now exists to bribe politicians and the mass media to push those products and bury any red flags that emerge along the way.

One of the best explanations I’ve seen to explain why the government will never reconsider the more dangerous vaccines can be found within this 2011 WHO statement:

“The public health benefits of vaccination are clear. The World Health Organization estimates that, in 2008, more than 2.5 million deaths were prevented by vaccination.

Immunization programs have led to the eradication of smallpox, the elimination of measles and poliomyelitis in many regions, and substantial reductions in morbidity and mortality from Haemophilus influenzae type b, diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus [note: while these beliefs are widely held, much of the previous is in fact false].

However vaccines are not without risks and it is commonly accepted that, regardless of proper design, manufacture and delivery, adverse events occur following vaccination although serious adverse events are rare.

At a population level, it is considered that these small risks are balanced by the benefits of widespread population immunization. However this means that an individual occasionally bears a significant burden for the benefit provided to the rest of the population.

Although these vaccine-related adverse events occur occasionally due to negligence, more often there is no clearly attributable fault [which is deliberate, as if there was, the people putting dangerous vaccines on the market would be forced to stop doing that].”

In short, because such a strong faith exists in the merits of vaccines, that means:

  • Evidence showing they are unsafe or ineffective will always be buried regardless of how strong the evidence is.

  • When injuries nonetheless occur that no one can deny were linked to a vaccine, they are viewed as acceptable collateral damage for the greater good of vaccination — even if in reality there is no “greater good” to begin with.

In the first part and second part of this series, I attempted to compile forgotten news reports on many other vaccine disasters.

I feel these reports are extremely important for people to learn about because they show how all the unbelievable malfeasance we witnessed throughout COVID-19 (a clearly unsafe and ineffective experimental vaccine being mandated upon America in conjunction with ruthless censorship of the tsunami of vaccine injuries that were caused by it) has in fact happened many times in the past.

However, at those times, the national media was still willing to do real journalism and expose what happened to the public. As a result, what many of those reports described is identical to what many of us witnessed over the last two years. The only real difference is that the pharmaceutical industry had not yet bought out the American media, so news reports like that could be made and then go viral across the nation.

For this reason, I would strongly advise reviewing what had happened in the not too distant past. What follows was my attempt to present that chronology in the most concise way possible through Twitter (each image links to the video tweet) and illustrate how those orchestrating those disastrous vaccine programs behaved after they got caught.

Note: The Anthrax vaccine was devastating for the military (e.g., hundreds of thousands of servicemen were injured — with many having their careers ended) and spurred a congressional investigation which made mandating experimental vaccines illegal in the military (until that law was disregarded during COVID-19, leading to our military again being decimated).

Note: Despite Bush doing his best to market it, the 2002 Smallpox vaccine campaign was scrapped because too many were injured, the press was willing to expose it and not enough people were tricked into vaccinating before the injuries piled up.

I firmly believe that if the press had not been in bed with the vaccine manufacturers (due to most of their advertising money coming from the pharmaceutical industry — something which was the result of Clinton’s immensely controversial 1997 decision to legalize that practice), COVID-19 would have never happened as far less dangerous (but still dangerous) vaccines mentioned above were immediately pulled once the media exposed them.

Note: After Tucker Carlson attacked the mass media for selling America out to Big Pharma (by relentlessly pushing the COVID vaccines), he was abruptly fired by Fox News. Given how costly this decision was, many have wondered what prompted Fox to do so.

In all of those stories, you’ll notice a consistent theme — the government did everything it possibly could to cover up the evidence its vaccine was severely harming people, and then used that “absence of evidence” to argue there was no evidence vaccines harmed people.

As you can imagine, this is an immensely frustrating situation for vaccine injured individuals to deal with as regardless of the evidence they bring forward to corroborate their injuries, they are greeted with circular logic that dismisses those injuries and gaslights each victim.

Note: Steve Kirsch has done a remarkable job over the last two years of cataloging this insanity.

Since almost no one is willing to publish scientific literature detailing the harms of vaccination (due to the professional risk anyone who speaks out takes on alongside the institutional risk government takes on by admitting it screwed up — best shown by the NIH burying its study of COVID-19 vaccine neurological injuries), the traditional resources we’d look at to assess the possibility of vaccine harm simply don’t exist.

Instead VAERS (and its European equivalents) have been the only resource that is available for individuals to assess the harms of the COVID vaccines.

Note: Due to just how many people have been severely injured by the vaccines, many other population wide datasets (compiled by Ed Dowd’s team) have also been able to show the harms of the COVID-19 vaccine program.

VAERS in turn occupies a rather peculiar situation. On one hand, anytime a red flag emerges from it, VAERS is continually attacked as anecdotal and invalid resource. Conversely, each time VAERS “proves” a vaccine is safe, it is cited as proof of vaccine safety.

For example, emergency use authorizations (EUAs) were created as a way to get a pharmaceutical onto the market without first completing the necessary safety studies under the logic that those studies take too long and will prevent the drug from making it to market in time for the emergency. So, when Pfizer received their EUA, it was expected that a plan would be in place to monitor for unexpected reactions to the vaccine (termed pharmacovigilance).

I would now like to quote a few passages from section 5.2 (pharmacovigilance) of the FDA’s EUA approval of Pfizer’s vaccine:

“Pfizer submitted a Pharmacovigilance Plan (PVP) to monitor safety concerns that could be associated with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. The Sponsor identified vaccine-associated enhanced disease including vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease as an important potential risk. Use in pregnancy and lactation and vaccine effectiveness are areas the Sponsor identified as missing information.

In addition to the safety concerns specified by the Sponsor, FDA requested that the Sponsor update their PVP to include anaphylaxis (including anaphylactic reactions) as an important potential risk and missing information in pediatric participants less than 16 years of age. Division of Epidemiology recommendations are as follows:


  • Mandatory reporting by the Sponsor [and vaccination providers] of the following events to Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) within 15 days:

    • Vaccine administration errors whether or not associated with an adverse event – Serious adverse events (irrespective of attribution to vaccination)

    • Cases of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in children and adults

    • Cases of COVID-19 that result in hospitalization or death


Active surveillance of vaccine recipients via the v-safe program. V-safe is a new smartphone-based opt-in program that uses text messaging and web surveys from CDC to check in with vaccine recipients for health problems following COVID-19 vaccination. The system also will provide telephone follow-up to anyone who reports medically significant (important) adverse events.

Responses indicating missed work, inability to do normal daily activities, or that the recipient received care from a doctor or other healthcare professional will trigger the VAERS Call Center to reach out to the participant and collect information for a VAERS report, if appropriate.”

Note: V-Safe was designed to address a common criticism of VAERS by providing more accurate data on vaccine reactions but simultaneously was designed so that the majority of severe vaccine reactions could not be reported to it. Nonetheless, V-Safe showed such overwhelming evidence of harm that the CDC buried the data until ICAN forced them to reveal it with a lawsuit, from which it was determined that only 3.89% of those injured were ever contacted by VAERS.

Given that VAERS was supposed to play a pivotal role in the COVID-19 vaccine pharmacovigilance plan, it is quite strange that Pfizer, the CDC and the FDA somehow missed the innumerable red flags outside investigators found in it. This in turn led me to review the Pfizer FDA documents (which ICAN also obtained through a lawsuit).

In those documents, I noted that the VAERS data was repeatedly referenced, but it always was done in a manner which rationalized a way to dismiss any safety concerns with the COVID vaccine — something sadly consistent with the FDA & CDC’s attitudes towards vaccine safety.

Whenever VAERS is mentioned in the mainstream, it is immediately juxtaposed with the assertion VAERS has minimal validity and should thus not be taken seriously. For example, let’s review what the CDC has to say about VAERS on its own webpage.

“Established in 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S.-licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of adverse events (possible side effects) after a person has received a vaccination.

Anyone can report an adverse event to VAERS. Healthcare professionals are required to report certain adverse events and vaccine manufacturers are required to report all adverse events that come to their attention.

VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to send in reports of their experiences to CDC and FDA. VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine.

This way, VAERS can provide CDC and FDA with valuable information that additional work and evaluation is necessary to further assess a possible safety concern.”

I would argue the above language (like the pharmacovigilance process for Pfizer’s EUA) again represents an attempt for the vaccine industry to have their cake and eat it — if VAERS can “prove” the vaccine is safe, VAERS is great, but if it can’t, VAERS should be ignored.

Likewise, VAERS is well-known for being a dysfunctional database (which in turn is another common criticism used to undermine its validity). Given that we depend upon VAERS to monitor vaccine safety, this is quite strange and suggests the reason why it has never been fixed was specifically so that the vaccine dangers being reported to it would not be exposed. The best proof I have ever found for this contention can be found within The Real Anthony Fauci:

A 2010 HHS study of the government’s notoriously dysfunctional VAERS concluded that VAERS detects “fewer than 1 percent of vaccine injuries.” Put another way, VAERS misses OVER 99 percent of vaccine injuries, thereby lending the illusion of safety to even the most deadly inoculations.

In 2010, the federal Agency for Health Care Research Quality (AHRQ) designed and field-tested a state-of-the-art machine-counting (AI) system as an efficient alternative to VAERS. By testing the system for several years on the Harvard Pilgrim HMO, AHRQ proved that it could capture most vaccine injuries.

AHRQ initially planned to roll out the system to all remaining HMOs, but after seeing the AHRQ’s frightening results — vaccines were causing serious injuries in 1 of every 40 recipients — CDC killed the project and stowed the new system on a dusty shelf.

Dr. Fauci left that system safely cached, throughout the pandemic, allowing HHS’s broken voluntary system to continue to conceal vaccine injuries, including any evidence of pathogenic priming.”

Note: In my eyes, the CDC’s behavior here (concealing that vaccines have a 2.6% of injuring you) is no different from how the Federal Government has repeatedly silenced its own scientists who warned them of the dangers of specific vaccines.

The current VAERS situation does not make any sense until you understand why VAERS was created. If we jump back to the widely-seen 1982 NBC Vaccine Roulette part of it a brief segment of it (please watch the clip below) tells a critical part of the VAERS story:

One of the greatest challenges parents faced was unwillingness by their doctors (who often had disabled their children) to report the injuries which occurred and an unwillingness by the government or vaccine manufacturers to receive injury reports — particularly since the lack of those reports was used to argue there was “no evidence” the DPT vaccine was dangerous.

Fortunately, a dedicated team of lawyers stepped up and began filing lawsuits against the DPT manufacturers, causing many of them to leave the industry as the cost of those lawsuits greatly outweighed the profits from it (and based on the timeline I believe helped prompt the NBC investigation).

After the 1982 investigation aired, numerous parents of vaccine injured children contacted NBC to thank them for their work and in turn NBC kindly connected those parents with each other, thereby created the modern vaccine safety movement. In turn, the lawsuits accelerated and by 1984, due to the legal liability (as the industry was not yet willing to develop the safer DTaP shot), only one manufacturer was still producing the toxic DTwP vaccine.

In parallel, to this litigation, the parents began putting pressure on Congress (which was well aware of the recent 1976 Swine Flu vaccine disaster that had been quite costly to the government) to fix the situation.

Owing both to sympathetic Congressmen (who empathized with how difficult it was to get justice in the courts) and the government recognizing it might soon lose its vaccine program (due to manufacturers being sued out of business), a great deal of political pressure was created to “do something.”

Note: The most comprehensive account of this period I have located can be found within the first section of The Vaccine Court: The Dark Truth of America’s Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Since there were many vested interests who desperately wanted to protect the vaccine program (e.g., the Pediatrician Lobby, vaccine manufacturers, the CDC and the FDA), this required a compromise to be struck. That compromise was a no-fault compensation system that was funded by an extra tax on all vaccines, as this allowed everyone to continue business as usual, but gave some degree of recourse to the parents of injured children.

Note: Many consider the act to be a disaster because by providing manufacturers immunity from vaccine injuries, it incentivized them to produce a slew of unsafe vaccines. Likewise, since the act specified that only “approved” injuries could be compensated (with the list determined by the HHS secretary), this incentivized the HHS to declare that a variety of injuries (e.g., autism) were not linked to the vaccine.

A friend of mine who worked for the vaccine court shared that the court was very fair for “covered injuries” (e.g., Guillain-Barré from a flu shot) but extremely unfair for “non-covered injuries,” which creates a rigged system because the government does everything it can to make sure the injuries it doesn’t want to pay for are never covered.

Kenneth P. Stoller MD, a pediatrician who had worked for decades to help vaccine injured children (until California unjustly took away his license for doing so) provides one of the best explanations for why this is:

Note: His full comment can be viewed here. Additionally, few people know that there was one case where a neurologist (interviewed here on CNN), through great effort, was able to convince the vaccine court a vaccine caused his daughter’s autism.

Sadly, while the vaccine court is quite unfair, it is much better than the existing program for those injured by the COVID-19 vaccines (which due to their EUA are shielded from liability).

Despite extensive legal work to get those injuries covered by the government’s EUA “vaccine court” (CICP), according to a Congressional report published on 2/1/23, of the 11,252 claims alleging injury or death from a COVID countermeasure (most of which were the vaccine), not a single one has received compensation from the CICP.

Recognizing that it was critical for the public to have a way to report vaccine injuries which bypassed this corrupt system, the parents demanded that the vaccine legislation included a provision for such a reporting system.

For this article, I reached out, Barbara Loe Fisher, the founder of the National Vaccine Information Center, who shared the following with me:

“Dissatisfied Parents Together (DPT) was founded in 1982 by DPT vaccine injured children. When we were asked by Congress to participate in legislation to protect the childhood vaccine supply in the U.S. due to threats by vaccine manufacturers that they would stop producing childhood vaccines unless they were given a total liability shield from vaccine injury lawsuits, among the conditions we set for our coming to the table was that the legislation:

1. Had to put equal emphasis on preventing vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths through the institution of vaccine safety provisions, one of which would be a centralized Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) that would be open and accessible to the public for input of vaccine reaction reports, as well as viewing of reports made.

2. That the legislation could not completely shield the vaccine manufacturers from liability or shield negligent doctors from medical malpractice lawsuits.

There was no compromise on either of those two points. When the Act was passed in November 1986, it contained vaccine safety informing recording, reporting and research provisions (including VAERS). Those safety provisions were unique contributions of the co-founders of NVIC (Dissatisfied Parents Together became the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) in the late 1980’s).

When the Act was passed in 1986, the doctors and other vaccine administrators were still liable for medical malpractice and the vaccine manufacturers were still liable for product design defect (failure to make the product safer). The law was gutted after it was passed by congressional amendments, rule making authority by H.H.S. and, in 2011, by the US Supreme Court.

Yes, we insisted that VAERS be open to the public in terms of being able to directly report to the system when doctors refused to make vaccine adverse event reports and we wanted all reports made to VAERS to be transparently accessible and able to be viewed by the public.

VAERS is a unique vaccine reaction reporting system because it is transparent and researchers around the world have used it – including CDC researchers – to publish studies on vaccine adverse events. VAERS, as you know, played a key role in raising public awareness about the reactivity of COVID-19 vaccines.

Dr. Fauci had nothing to do with creation of the 1986 Act [this was in response to one of my questions]. That legislation, which had bipartisan support in Congress from the beginning, was created over a four and a half year period by the legislative staffs of Rep. Henry Waxman, Senator Edward Kennedy and Sen. Orrin Hatch in consultation with the co-founders of Dissatisfied Parents Together and American Academy of Pediatrics.

Environmental law attorney Jeffrey Schwartz, whose daughter was brain injured and then died from a DPT vaccine reaction as an infant, was the first President of NVIC and was the primary negotiator on behalf of NVIC on Capitol Hill during the creation of the Act.”

Note: Because of their work, the Act also had a stipulation requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to create a task force devoted to researching ways to develop safer vaccines and to produce two reports each year for Congress on that work. A 2018 lawsuit from ICAN and the CHD proved that the H.H.S. failed to do this.

That is one an example of how the H.H.S. will often willfully omit doing things it is legally required to do. Another were investigations that showed Fauci and his lackeys over and over would find ways to avoid disclosing to their research subjects that they were making money off those experiments (despite being legally required to and repeatedly requested to).

Because of the 1986 law, a curious situation was created. The government was forced to create VAERS even though it desperately did not want anything to exist that could show the public the dangers of the vaccine program.

As a result, a concerted effort was done to undermine VAERS as much as possible so that it could not “weaken public support of the vaccine program.” Similarly, consider the previously mentioned example of the H.H.S. scrapping a system which showed VAERS was identifying less than 1% of vaccine injuries.

In turn, the VAERS we have today is a dysfunctional mess and a far cry from what had been promised in 1986. Nonetheless, it’s the best we’ve got, and enough data still exists that members of the public have been able to sort through it and discover just how dangerous the vaccine program is.

After it became clear the public VAERS database had serious issues, a group of data scientists got together and produced OpenVAERS, a laborious attempt to clean up VAERS and make it functional enough to be accessible to the general public. Because of this, OpenVAERS in their FAQ provide one of the most poignant pictures of the current state of VAERS. For example, through their research, they learned:

The American Academy of Pediatrics stated “In 2012, [VAERS] reports were received from health care providers (41%), manufacturers (29%), other sources (17%) and vaccinees or families (14%),” while the CDC in 2020 stated “The majority of VAERS reports are sent in by vaccine manufacturers (37%) and health care providers (36%).

The remaining reports are obtained from state immunization programs (10%), vaccine recipients (or their parent/guardians, 7%) and other sources (10%).”

Note: Steve Kirsch has also proven that the management at VAERS is refusing to publicly acknowledge the safety signals the system is designed to detect.

Through their work, OpenVAERS (and others) were able to identify many pieces of evidence suggesting VAERS was deliberately withholding crucial data from the public and refusing to record or document many critical vaccine injuries.

These issues eventually prompted the BMJ (one of the top five medical journals) to investigate what was happening, and in turn formally corroborated what many of us have observed ever since the vaccines hit the market.

“VAERS is supposed to be user friendly, responsive, and transparent. However, investigations by The BMJ have uncovered that it’s not meeting its own standards. Not only have staffing levels failed to keep pace with the unprecedented number of reports since the rollout of covid vaccines but there are signs that the system is overwhelmed, reports aren’t being followed up, and signals are being missed.

The BMJ has spoken to more than a dozen people, including physicians and a state medical examiner, who have filed VAERS reports of a serious nature on behalf of themselves or patients and were never contacted by clinical reviewers or were contacted months later.

Our investigation has also found that, in stark contrast to the US government’s handling of adverse reaction reports on drugs and devices, the publicly accessible VAERS database on vaccines includes only initial reports, while case updates and corrections are kept on a separate, back end system.”

Specifically:

  • VAERS makes it difficult to enter reports into it. To quote the BMJ, “the format is cumbersome and it times you out,” (a story I have also repeatedly heard).

  • VAERS makes it impossible to update an existing report to something more serious (e.g., to note that an injured patient then died).

  • Often it took VAERS months to get back to someone (if they did at all) and frequently VAERS representatives provided conflicting information to the reporters or discouraged them from making a report all together. For example, doctors who reported fatal reactions in their patients were never contacted by VAERS.

  • In a survey by React19 of 126 reported injuries, 22% were never made available on VAERS, while 12% initially could be found on VAERS were then taken down by the CDC. This means one-third of the reports VAERS received are being deliberately hidden from the public.

    
    

    Note: I also directly know of cases where this happened.

  • Prior to COVID, VAERS received 50,000 reports each year, but only had the capacity to process a few thousand serious reports (which suggests VAERS was deliberately understaffed).

  • VAERS has received 1.7 million reports since the rollout of covid vaccines, including 20,000 deaths. Yet the CDC has not linked a single one of those deaths to the vaccine, even though many other countries have.

    
    

    Note: There has been a lot of evidence suggesting the vaccines significantly increase your risk of dying (Ed Dowd has done an excellent job compiling the death data). Recently one of my colleagues was able to obtain a large data set of deaths in the elderly population and vaccination status (something we have been trying to get since the vaccines came out). It showed taking the vaccine roughly doubles your rate of dying for a few months — which is a big deal.

  • Since COVID, almost 20% of the reports VAERS received were serious ones which were “required” to be followed up on.

  • A team of physicians have repeatedly contacted the FDA to air their concerns that no one is following up with them about severe and fatal injuries they reported to VAERS. The FDA has responded by simply insisting that it is doing so — despite significant evidence to the contrary.

  • Pfizer currently has around 1000 full time employees assigned to processing vaccine injuries reported to the company (this number may be as high as 1800). The CDC has declined to state how many it has assigned to VAERS, but the number is quite small as VAERS is a part of a department which only has between 70-80 employees in total.

  • It is very difficult to get physicians to report reactions to VAERS if they have not already been told that the reactions might be associated with the vaccine. So by the FDA and the CDC refusing to raise the possibility other conditions could be linked to the vaccine, they are not appearing in VAERS, which in turn is being used to argue they do not exist.

One of the greatest challenges we have faced with the vaccines is the steadfast refusal to acknowledge they could be harming people, despite the overwhelming degree of evidence we can all see with our own eyes that something very bad is happening.

Since the reliability of VAERS has played such a pivotal part of this discussion, I feel the BMJ’s investigation is critical for the current situation as it provides concrete proof the government is covering up this unprecedented wave of injuries.

In turn I would argue that VAERS’s systemic “failures” instead illustrate it is working exactly as intended — the government is doing everything it can to sabotage it but simultaneously it is still providing a way for the public to access the vaccine safety data Barbara Loe Fisher and her colleagues knew the government would do everything it could to hide from us.

I fully understand how hard it is to believe the government could do something like this. In this series, I hope I have provided an explanation for why such awful behavior is deeply engrained within a bureaucracy which has repeatedly proven it will do whatever it can to cover up the harms of vaccination — regardless of how much harm they cause.

So next time someone “educates” you by pointing out VAERS is not reliable, point out that VAERS is supposed to be our premier system for monitoring vaccine safety and ask them “why is there still nothing better?”

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician in the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate his exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and I’m grateful to share them. I also respect his desire to remain anonymous as he is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

Zantac: Avoid This Brand Name Heartburn Medication

  • Ranitidine heartburn medications, including those commonly known by the brand name Zantac, may contain a cancer-causing chemical called N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)

  • NDMA is a nitrosamine chemical that was formerly used to make rocket fuel and lubricants

  • The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies NDMA as a probable human carcinogen

  • Past research revealed that exposure to NDMA led to abnormal growths called neoplasms and liver abnormalities in rats, even at low doses

  • Ranitidine is an H2 (histamine-2) blocker, which is used to prevent and relieve heartburn by decreasing the amount of acid in your stomach, but more often than not, heartburn is the result of insufficient amounts of acid

  • Eating real food and infusing your gut microbiome with beneficial bacteria from traditionally fermented foods may help resolve heartburn naturally

Visit Mercola Market

Advertisement

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published September 28, 2019.

Some ranitidine heartburn medications, including those commonly known by the brand name Zantac, may contain a cancer-causing chemical called N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA).1 NDMA is a nitrosamine chemical that was formerly used to make rocket fuel and lubricants,2 but it’s now only used for research purposes.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies NDMA as a probable human carcinogen.3 In an alert released by the U.S. FDA, the NDMA in heartburn drugs is said to be at “low levels,” and the agency is evaluating whether this poses a risk to people taking the drugs.4

It’s the latest medication found to contain the carcinogenic impurity, but no recalls have been issued for Zantac. For now, the medication remains on the market.

According to the FDA, “Although NDMA may cause harm in large amounts, the levels the FDA is finding in ranitidine from preliminary tests barely exceed amounts you might expect to find in common foods.”5 However, research from 1991 revealed that exposure to NDMA led to abnormal growths called neoplasms and liver abnormalities in rats, even at low doses. Researchers wrote in the journal Cancer Research:6

“The linear relationship observed at low dose rates (below 1 ppm [part per million]) suggests that under these experimental conditions, among rats allowed to liver their natural life span, a dose of 1 ppm of NDEA or NDMA in the drinking water will cause about 25% to develop a liver neoplasm, a dose of 0.1 ppm will cause about 2.5% to do so, and a dose of 0.01 ppm will cause about 0.25% to do so, etc., with no indication of any “threshold.”

… In addition, even quite low dose rates of the test agents caused a variety of nonneoplastic liver abnormalities (e.g., hyperplastic nodules, or shrinkage of hepatocytes) at a frequency roughly proportional to the dose rate.”

In 2018, the FDA also issued a voluntary recall for the high blood pressure medication valsartan after it was found to contain NDMA (22 other countries had already issued recalls before the FDA took action).7 An expedited assessment of cancer risk associated with exposure to NDMA through contaminated valsartan products was published that year, in which a cohort of 5,150 people was followed for a median of 4.6 years.8

The results did not show a significant increase in short-term cancer risk among people using NDMA-contaminated valsartan, but cancer often takes longer than four or five years to develop. The true extent of the risk may not be known for 10 or 20 years. Even the researchers acknowledged, “uncertainty persists about single cancer outcomes, and studies with longer follow-up are needed to assess long term cancer risk.”9

Zantac is only the latest drug found to contain NDMA. Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARBs), which include valsartan and others, to treat high blood pressure have also been affected, with recalls occurring in 2018 and 2019.

In a statement released in March 2019, the FDA stated, “the nitrosamines found in ARBs may be generated when specific chemicals and reaction conditions are present in the manufacturing process of the drug’s API, and may also result from the reuse of materials, such as solvents.”10

As for the extent of the risks involved for people taking ARBs, FDA scientists estimated that if 8,000 people took the highest daily dose (320 milligrams) of NDMA-contaminated valsartan for four years (which is how long the contaminated medications remained on the market), there may be one additional case of cancer.11 However, in an update released in August 2019, the FDA stated:12

“In reality, the vast majority of patients exposed to NDMA through ARBs received much smaller amounts of the impurity than this worst-case scenario, and, since not all ARBs are affected, it’s very likely that a patient taking an ARB for four years would not have always received one of the affected products.”

As for the NDMA contamination in Zantac, it’s unknown where it’s come from, but in August the FDA sanctioned an Indian manufacturing plant that makes some of the drug’s ingredients. It’s estimated that “80% of ingredients used in U.S. drugs are manufactured abroad, primarily in India and China.”13

While the FDA has not advised patients to stop taking ranitidines like Zantac, they said those taking prescription ranitidine could talk to their health care provider about an alternative, while those taking over-the-counter (OTC) ranitidine could switch to other OTC options.

“There are multiple drugs on the market that are approved for the same or similar uses as ranitidine,” the FDA noted,14 which may reduce your NDMA exposure, provided the alternative drugs aren’t also contaminated with NDMA or something else.

Ranitidine is an H2 (histamine-2) blocker, which is used to prevent and relieve heartburn by decreasing the amount of acid in your stomach. OTC ranitidine is approved to treat heartburn linked to acid indigestion and sour stomach, while the prescription version is prescribed to treat ulcers and gastroesophageal reflux disease.15

More often than not, heartburn is the result of insufficient amounts of acid. Your body is naturally designed to achieve balance and it needs acid to digest food. If you have low stomach acid and your digestion is impaired, you not only will absorb fewer nutrients from your food, but also will open the door for potential bacterial infections.

Hydrochloric acid (and pepsin) are necessary to break down protein in your intestinal tract, which means reducing acid can lead to inadequate protein breakdown, which increases your risk of dysbiosis, an imbalance between harmful and friendly bacteria in your gut microbiome.

As these undigested protein molecules ferment in your intestines, they become food for pathogens such as H. pylori, C. difficile and Candida. An overgrowth of these bacteria may also lead to leaky gut and associated health problems.

In fact, in a study of 564,969 adults, community-dwelling participants taking certain heartburn drugs had a 1.7 to 3.7 times increased risk of developing C. difficile and Campylobacter bacterial infections, likely due to the suppression of stomach-acid production.16

Other common heartburn drugs known as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are also problematic because they inhibit the proton pump in your body that produces hydrochloric acid. Further, long-term use of PPIs may significantly increase your risk of stomach cancer along with a number of other health problems, including bone fracture, C. difficile infection, pneumonia, heart attack and stroke.17

Heartburn, the most common symptom of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), is extremely common with 44% of U.S. adults experiencing it at least once a month. About 14% have heartburn weekly while 7% experience it daily.18 Heartburn, which typically feels like a burning sensation in your chest, occurs when stomach acid backs up into your esophagus.

One risk factor for heartburn is being overweight or obese. Extra pounds can place pressure on your stomach, causing more acid to forcefully move into your esophagus. Overeating or eating a large meal can also cause it, as excessive food in the stomach causes the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) to open, which may allow stomach acid to flow into your esophagus.

Smoking is another risk factor, as the LES relaxes and opens up when you smoke, causing acid to reflux. It may also affect stomach acid production. Certain foods may also trigger acid reflux. Common culprits include:19

  • Spicy foods

  • Onions

  • Citrus

  • Tomato products

  • Fried foods

  • Chocolate

  • Alcohol

  • Coffee or other caffeinated beverages

  • Carbonated beverages

  • Peppermint

If you need to use an ulcer drug the safest to use would be Pepcid (generic is famotidine). It is the safest of all the H2 blockers and far preferred to Zantac discussed earlier. In many cases though you can begin to restore your body’s proper gastric balance and function simply by avoiding processed foods and sugar.

By eating real food and infusing your gut microbiome with beneficial bacteria from traditionally fermented foods or a high-quality probiotic supplement you can rebalance your digestive system and eliminate the need for PPIs and H2 blockers.

Quitting cold turkey isn’t an option for heartburn medications, however, as your body can become dependent on the drugs. If you stop suddenly, it can lead to severe rebound effects known as rebound acid hypersecretion. To avoid it, you must wean yourself off the PPI gradually. Start by lowering the dose you’re taking while simultaneously implementing the recommended lifestyle modifications suggested.

Once you get down to the lowest dose of the PPI, you can start substituting with an OTC H2 blocker similar to Zantac. The FDA has a list of drugs that may be contaminated with NDMA as well as those in which NDMA was not detected; consult this list before choosing an OTC option.20

Then, gradually wean off the H2 blocker over the next several weeks. In one study of 184 people, those who changed their diet to one focused on healthy fats, lean meats, nuts and vegetables reported a similar lessening of reflux symptoms as those who used PPI medications, with the diet group indicating a slightly higher level of improvement.21

For times when you need occasional relief from heartburn symptoms, the 10 remedies that follow can help, reducing the need to rely on drug solutions even further:

  • Aloe juice — The juice of the aloe plant naturally helps reduce inflammation, which may ease symptoms of acid reflux. Drink about one-half cup of aloe juice before meals. To avoid its laxative effect, look for a brand in which the laxative component has been removed.

  • Apple cider vinegar (raw, unfiltered) — Acid reflux typically results from having too little acid in your stomach. You can easily improve the acid content of your stomach by consuming 1 tablespoon of raw unfiltered apple cider vinegar in a large glass of water.

  • Astaxanthin — When compared to a placebo, this potent antioxidant was found to reduce symptoms of acid reflux, especially for individuals with pronounced H. pylori infection.22 Researchers concluded a daily dose of 40 mg of astaxanthin was effective for reflux reduction.

  • Baking soda — One-half to 1 teaspoon of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) in an 8-ounce glass of water will help neutralize your stomach acid and ease the burn of acid reflux. While I do not advise this as an ongoing remedy, it is effective on an “emergency” basis when you are in excruciating pain.

  • Deglycyrrhizinated licorice root — Deglycyrrhizinated licorice (DGL) may also be helpful because it helps block inflammatory prostaglandins. Licorice must be approached cautiously, however, because it contains the active metabolite glycyrrhiza, which at high doses can affect your adrenal glands, cause muscle weakness or numbness and raise your blood pressure.

    
    

    Licorice is contraindicated if you’re on diuretics or stimulant laxatives. Women on hormone therapy, who have estrogen-dependent cancers or reproductive conditions like endometriosis, should also avoid it.

  • Ginger root — Ginger has been found to have a gastroprotective effect by suppressing H. pylori. Add two or three slices of fresh ginger root to 2 cups of hot water and let it steep for several minutes. Drink it about 20 minutes prior to eating a meal.

  • Glutamine — The amino acid glutamine has been shown to address gastrointestinal damage caused by H. pylori. Glutamine is found in many foods, including beef, chicken, dairy products, eggs, fish and selected fruits and vegetables. L-glutamine is widely available as a supplement.

  • Papaya/papain supplement or pineapple/bromelain supplement — Papaya contains papain, an enzyme useful for breaking down both protein and carbohydrates. Bromelain is a proteolytic enzyme found in pineapple and, like papain, helps digest proteins. Bromelain also promotes anti-inflammatory activity and helps you maintain regular bowel movements.

  • Slippery elm — Slippery elm coats and soothes your mouth, throat, stomach and intestines, and contains antioxidants that may help address inflammatory bowel conditions. Because it stimulates nerve endings in your gastrointestinal tract, it is useful for increasing mucus secretion, which has a protective effect against ulcers and excess acidity.

  • Vitamin D — Vitamin D is critically important for your gut health. Once your vitamin D levels are optimized, you will benefit from your body’s production of about 200 antimicrobial peptides that will help eradicate gut infections.

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

Wasabi turned off my account without notice and won’t reactivate it; I have a new bulletproof provider

Discover more from Steve Kirsch’s newsletter

I write about COVID mitigation policies, vaccines, neurological diseases and conditions, corruption, censorship, and early treatments. The data shows that vaccines are ruining the health of Americans and driving the epidemic in neurological conditions.

Over 233,000 subscribers

So I’ve relocated the S3 server to a bulletproof hosting site.

Wasabi claimed they deactivated my account because over 40GB was downloaded from my server so they disabled the account. They said anything over 8 MB would deactivate my account. I’m serious. Most of the files I uploaded are >8MB. So you can post 1GB of data, but only 8 MB can be downloaded. I’m serious:

Or maybe it was because the New Zealand Ministry told them to take down my site as noted in this article even though they have NO EVIDENCE showing I violated the Wasabi AUP. Note: Wasabi never contacts you in doing their investigation.

Email to the CEO of Wasabi about my urgent situation was not returned.

The NZMH will do everything they can to stop this data from getting out because it reveals they are killing people with the vaccine.

For the new location of the data, see this article:

Share