‘This Is Not a Peace Plan, It Is a War Plan’: Trump-Netanyahu Deal Decried as Shameful Attack on Palestinian Rights

“Any attempt to address the Israeli-Palestinian issue that does not begin and end with the full acknowledgment of the Palestinian right to self-determination, freedom, justice, and equality is a non-starter.”

Palestinians watch the televised press conference of U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on January 28, 2020, at the Khan Yunis refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip. (Photo: Said Khatib/AFP via Getty Images)

By Julia Conley,

Human rights advocates condemned U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “annexation plan” for large swaths of Palestinian territory as the two leaders on Tuesday presented what they termed a “peace deal” for Israel and Palestine.

“This is not a peace plan. It is theft. It is erasure.”
—Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
Critics joined Palestinian leaders in rejecting the premise of the so-called “vision for peace,” which was drafted by the White House and Netanyahu without the input of Palestinians.

The resulting plan is “shameful and disingenuous,” tweeted Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).

The plan aims to expand and make official Israeli control of Palestinian territories while assuring Palestine that it will be afforded “a pathway to a future state”—but one that will have no military of its own and in which Israel will maintain security control over some areas.

“This is not a peace plan,” tweeted Yousef Munayyer, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights. “It is a war plan.”‘

“It’s stunning that Donald Trump doesn’t know that this is insulting to Palestinians,” tweeted James Zogby, founder of the Arab American Institute.

“This plan is simply a rubber stamp for the Israeli government’s continuing violations of international law, separate-and-unequal policies, land grabs, and human rights abuses against the Palestinian people,” said the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights in a statement. “Any attempt to address the Israeli-Palestinian issue that does not begin and end with the full acknowledgment of the Palestinian right to self-determination, freedom, justice, and equality is a non-starter.”

Major points within the deal include:

Jerusalem will be established as Israel’s “undivided” capitol, undermining Palestinians’ aim to recognize East Jerusalem as their capitol;
the recognition of the majority of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine;
the recognition of the Jordan Valley, which makes up a third of the occupied West Bank, as part of Israel; and
the refusal by Israel to grant Palestinians the “right to return” to their homes lost in the Six-Day War and other conflicts.
Palestinians in occupied territories held protests on Tuesday ahead of the deal’s announcement. Larger demonstrations are planned for Wednesday.

“I am not against peace, but what is being talked about is not peace,” Ahmed Shafiq, a student in Gaza, told The Guardian. “Peace is not imposed on people.”

The so-called “peace deal” amounts to “an endorsement of Israel’s aggression, allowing it to take over whatever Palestinian lands it wants and punishing the victims for daring to object to having their homeland stolen,” said Omar Baddar, deputy director of the Arab American Institute, in a short video the group released.

A map released showing Trump and Netanyahu’s vision for the future of Palestine resembled “a Native American reservation” more than a sovereign state, said entrepreneur Shahed Amanullah.

“This is not a peace plan,” tweeted Omar. “It is theft. It is erasure.”

Munayyer of the U.S. Campaign for Palestinian Rights called on Americans and the international community to reject Trump’s attempt to “whitewash the apartheid reality alongside his Israeli partners-in-war-crimes.”

“The only suitable response from people of conscience is to reject this effort and demand immediate accountability for Israel’s denial of Palestinian rights,” Munayyer said. “The separate-and-unequal reality the Israeli government has imposed on Palestinians, with the support of the U.S., flies in the face of the values Americans claim to uphold. Freedom, justice, and equality for Palestinians is the only way forward.”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), whose parents immigrated to the U.S. from occupied Palestine, slammed Trump and Netanyahu for releasing the plan as both are facing re-election campaigns and legal battles.

“It’s fitting that the Trump-Netanyahu plan was released by a forever impeached president on the same day that Netanyahu was indicted for corruption,” Tlaib tweeted. “This political stunt gets us no closer to peace or justice.”

“This is a political ploy by both leaders to distract from their abuse of power, designed to help Netanyahu win the election in less than six weeks,” Emily Meyer, co-founder of Jewish progressive group If Not Now, said in a statement. “The plan itself is a plan for permanent Israeli military occupation and control, not a plan for peace. It is simply a continuation of Trump’s strategy since entering office: to disenfranchise Palestinians and deny their rights, their agency, and even their identity.”


Source: https://www.commondreams.org

Netanyahu indicted for corruption in three cases, in first for a sitting PM

Move comes hours after premier abandons bid for immunity from prosecution; sources close to PM say he is ‘the target of obsessive persecution’

By Raoul Wootliff,

Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit on Tuesday filed the indictment against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust with the Jerusalem District Court.

“The indictment was filed a short time ago… as is required by law,” Mandelblit’s office said.

The move marks the first time in Israel’s history that a serving prime minister will face criminal charges, casting a heavy shadow over Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, his legacy and his ongoing attempts to remain in power.

Responding to Mandelblit’s decision, “sources close to the prime minister” accused the attorney general of conducting a witch hunt against Netanyahu, a Likud spokesperson said in a statement.

“If anyone still had any doubt that Prime Minister Netanyahu is the target of obsessive persecution, he was now given further clear and sharp proof,” the sources were quoted as saying. “The eagerness to file the unfounded indictment against the prime minister is so great that they could not wait even one day until after the historic summit in Washington, one of the most important in the history of the state.”

According to the text of the indictment, released by the Justice Ministry in November, Netanyahu is charged with fraud and breach of trust in Cases 1000 and 2000, and bribery, fraud and breach of trust in Case 4000.

The filing of charges came hours after Netanyahu announced Tuesday morning that he was withdrawing his request for parliamentary immunity from the pending indictment in the corruption cases against him.

Netanyahu’s announcement came hours before the Knesset was set to form a committee to debate — and almost certainly reject — his immunity request.

In a Facebook post, the premier denounced the “immunity circus” taking place while he was in Washington on a “historic mission.”

“During this fateful time for the people of Israel, while I am in the US on a historic mission to shape Israel’s permanent borders and ensure our security for future generations, another Knesset episode is expected to begin in the immunity circus,” the prime minister wrote.

“Since I was not given due process, because all the rules of the Knesset were trampled on, and since the results of the procedure were pre-dictated without proper discussion, I decided not to allow this dirty game to continue,” Netanyahu added.

The text of Netanyahu’s Facebook post was included in the official letter sent by his lawyers to Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein requesting that he withdraw the immunity bid.

The date for Tuesday’s plenum discussion was set before the premier announced he would travel to Washington for the unveiling of US President Donald Trump’s long-awaited peace plan, whose timing, announced last week, has been criticized in Israel as an attempt to rescue Netanyahu from the immunity proceedings.

By withdrawing his request, the prime minister avoided the spectacle of defeat in the Knesset immunity process. Rather than battling for his immunity in the run-up to the elections, however, he will now face the electorate as a defendant in three criminal cases.

Netanyahu had reportedly originally agonized over asking for immunity, which undercut his earlier defense that he would ultimately be found innocent of the charges against him.

US President Donald Trump shakes hands with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Jan. 27, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)

The premier’s main election rival, Blue and White party leader Benny Gantz, met Trump on Monday before traveling back to Israel to take part in the planned Knesset deliberation on forming a House Committee to debate Netanyahu’s immunity request.

Responding to the prime minister’s announcement, Gantz said Tuesday that Netanyahu cannot run the country while standing trial in the three three cases against him.

“Netanyahu is going to trial — we must move forward. Israel’s citizens have a clear choice: A prime minister who will work for them or a prime minister working for himself, Gantz said in a statement.

“No one can run a state and at the same time manage three serious criminal cases for bribery, fraud and breach of trust,” he added, citing the charges against the prime minister.

According to the indictment, the prime minister “damaged the image of the public service and public trust in it,” and is suspected of abusing his position and status, and of knowingly “taking a bribe as a public servant in exchange for actions related to your position.”

The prime minister has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in all three cases, and has alleged that the investigations against him are a “witch hunt” involving the left, the media and the police relentlessly pressuring a “weak” attorney general.

In Case 1000, involving accusations that Netanyahu received gifts and benefits from billionaire benefactors including Israeli-born Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan in exchange for favors, Mandelblit charged Netanyahu with fraud and breach of trust — the latter being a somewhat murkily defined offense relating to an official violating the trust the public has placed in him.

According to the indictment in that case, Netanyahu “damaged the image of public service and the public’s trust in it, in that while serving in public positions, and foremost as prime minister… maintained for years an inappropriate relationship with billionaire benefactors.”

Publisher and owner of the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper Arnon ‘Noni’ Mozes arrives for questioning at the Lahav 433 investigation unit in Lod, January 15, 2017. (Koko/Flash90)

In Case 2000, involving accusations Netanyahu agreed with Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper publisher Arnon Mozes to weaken the circulation of a rival daily in return for more favorable coverage from Yedioth, Mandelblit charged the premier with fraud and breach of trust, while Mozes will be charged with bribery. The case is said to have been a contentious one in Mandelblit’s office, with many prosecution officials reportedly arguing that Netanyahu should be charged with bribery, while Mandelblit considered not charging the prime minister at all.

The indictment says that Netanyahu and Mozes “recognized that the one had the ability to promote the other’s interest” in the run-up to the 2015 elections and discussed such possibilities.

“According to suspicions, in your actions while performing your duties you have committed acts that amount to breach of trust, and have caused substantial harm to the integrity [of the position] and the public’s trust,” it said.

In Case 4000, widely seen as the most serious against the premier, Netanyahu stands accused of having advanced regulatory decisions that benefited Shaul Elovitch, the controlling shareholder in the Bezeq telecom giant, in exchange for positive coverage from the Elovitch-owned Walla news site. In that case Mandelblit is charging Netanyahu and Elovitch with bribery.

Shaul Elovitch arrives at the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court for a remand hearing in Case 4000, February 26, 2018. (Flash90)

The indictment says the relationship between Netanyahu and Elovitch was “based on give and take,” and the prime minister’s actions benefiting Elovitch netted the businessman benefits to the tune of some NIS 1.8 billion ($500 million) in the period 2012-2017. In exchange, Elovitch’s Walla news site “published [Netanyahu’s] political messages that [he] wished to convey to the public,” according to the indictment.

“[He] took benefits… while knowing [he was] taking a bribe as a public servant in exchange for actions related to your position,” it alleged.

The prime minister’s actions, wrote state prosecutors, “were carried out amid a conflict of interests, the weighing of outside considerations relating to his own and his family’s interests, and involved the corrupting of the public servants reporting to him.”


Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com

Deaths Caused by British Empire Should Be Condemned Just Like Deaths under Stalin

By Tomasz Pierscionek,

Western historians who condemn the USSR for the deaths under Stalin?’s dictatorship should shed a spotlight on ?the millions who died under British rule?, including those in engineered famines across the Indian subcontinent.

The UK general election is a week away and a significant chunk of the country’s media, three-quarters of which is reportedly owned by a few billionaires, is hard at work digging up dirt on Jeremy Corbyn to prevent a Labour Party victory at all costs. However, this uphill task is becoming harder as recent polls show the frequently cited Conservative lead over Labour is rapidly decreasing. The possibility that Mr. Corbyn will be Britain’s next prime minister, perhaps at the head of a minority government, is now grudgingly acknowledged.

When Corbyn launched Labour’s manifesto at the end of November, he pledged to conduct a formal enquiry into the legacy of the British Empire “to understand our contribution to the dynamics of violence and insecurity across regions previously under British colonial rule” and set up an organization “to ensure historical injustice, colonialism, and role of the British Empire is taught in the national curriculum.”

The idea of teaching a population about the unsavory aspects of its history, and in Britain’s case revealing how several of today’s geopolitical crises are rooted in the past folly and avarice-fuelled actions of its ruling class, is commendable.

It would be prudent to inform UK citizens about the British Empire’s divide and conquer tactics across the Indian subcontinent and Africa, the stirring up of Hindu-Muslim antagonism in the former, or the impact of the Sykes-Picot agreement that precipitated instability across the Middle East which continues to the present day. Doing so might enable the public to gain a better understanding of how past actions affect present realities, in turn making them more eager to hold contemporary politicians to account so past mistakes are not repeated. As Spanish philosopher George Santayana said: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Some right-wingers may be quick to dismiss Corbyn’s manifesto promise as self-indulgent politically-correct onanism. Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage commented: “I don’t think I should apologise for what people did 300 years ago. It was a different world, a different time.” Yet, some of the violence perpetuated in the name of protecting the empire’s interests is not exactly ancient history, having occurred within living memory for some. The Malayan EmergencyKenya’s Mau Mau uprising, the Suez Crisis, or the deployment of British troops to Northern Ireland are a few examples.

Segments of the intelligentsia may also feel unease at Corbyn’s manifesto promise, namely those academics who still view the British Empire as the UK’s legacy and ‘gift’ to the world. This includes those who, by extension, consider modern Britain (and the West in general) as bestowed with a cultural superiority that makes it the unchallenged arbiter of global affairs and the indisputable defender of ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’, regardless of what these laudable terms have been corrupted into justifying. The invasion of Iraq, the destruction of Libya, and the civil wars in Syria and Ukraine are a few manifestations of Western intervention.

Some Western historians fall over themselves condemning the USSR for the millions who died under the dictatorship of Stalin, with a significant proportion of these victims perishing during famines. The people of the former Soviet Union need to come to terms with their history, just like any other country. In the meantime, Western historians should shine a spotlight closer to home. Engineered famines across the Indian subcontinent reportedly killed up to 29 million in the late 19th century and a further 3 million in 1943.

The Indian subcontinent was only one of the regions under British rule and the deaths mentioned above do not include those violently killed by occupying forces. Unlike the USSR, which kept oppression confined within its borders and those of neighboring countries under its sphere of influence, Britain together with the American Empire (to which it handed over the baton of imperialism after WWII) has interfered on pretty much every continent except Antarctica. In modern times we see the UK, now a vassal of the US-led NATO empire, condemn nations that refuse to submit to Western hegemony.

Apologists for Empire claim it brought ‘progress’ such as railways, infrastructure, education, cricket, as well as free trade and order (i.e. Pax Britannica). Irrespective of whether such ‘gifts’ were appreciated by occupied nations, this line of reasoning opens up a dangerous precedent. For example, supporters of Stalin overlook his despotism by crediting him with rapidly industrializing an underdeveloped nation that later played a major role in defeating Nazism, bestowing upon him an honor that instead belongs to millions of rank and file soldiers, officers, and commanders of the Red Army.

During the time of the British Empire, as was the case with other European empires and many dictatorships, the majority of working people were not personally enriched by the plunder of imperialism and their descendants are not to blame for the actions of the former ruling class. Nevertheless, learning one’s history is the first step to understanding the present, ensuring today’s leaders are held to account, and preventing the same mistakes from being repeated.

*(Top image: Victims of the Great Famine of 1876–78 in India during British rule, pictured in 1877. Credit: Willoughby Wallace Hooper/ Wikimedia)


Source: https://ahtribune.com

Are Mandatory Vaccines Coming to Your State? Feds & Big Pharma Push to Force States to Mandate ALL CDC Recommended Vaccines

Comparison of doctor and soldier’s profession outlook. Military man wearing khaki uniform, Kalashnikov automatic machine. Doctor wearing white medical gown, blue gloves and mask, having syringe.

Is a Bill Requiring Your Children to Get Every CDC Recommended Vaccination Coming to Your State?

by Barbara Loe Fisher,

As vaccine-related bills are being introduced into state legislatures this month, a bill (HB1090) has been proposed in the Virginia legislature to require school children to receive every dose of all current and future vaccines added to the recommended childhood vaccine schedule by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) appointed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

It removes legal authority from the state Board of Health to make recommendations to the General Assembly, the Joint Commission on Health Care and the Governor for revision of the list of vaccines required for school children and effectively transfers that authority to an unelected federal advisory committee.

In what is a very transparent power grab by federal government officials that is sure to make pharmaceutical company stockholders smile, this type of proposed legislation could be coming soon to your state, too.

Here is why automatically codifying federal vaccine use recommendations into state law threatens the integrity of representative government in our constitutional republic and is a threat to the public health and civil and human rights.

Violation of Historic Separation of Federal and State Powers.

State legislators voting to enact laws, which automatically codify federal ACIP recommendations into state law, are abdicating responsibility and accountability for exercising power authorized by the U.S. Constitution by handing that power over to unelected members of a federal government advisory committee.

The authors of the U.S. Constitution recognized it was important to balance the powers of the federal and state governments,1 and to include a Bill of Rights guaranteeing individuals natural rights and civil liberties that limit the power of both federal and state governments.2 Anything not defined in the U.S. Constitution as a federal activity defaults to the states.3 4

Historically, the legal authority to create public health laws to control infectious disease transmission among residents living in each state has belonged to state legislatures, health departments and Boards of Health, while the legal authority to protect the U.S. population from infectious diseases brought into the country by people crossing national borders or state borders belongs to the federal government.5 6

In 1905, the US Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional authority of state legislatures to mandate that citizens receive smallpox vaccinations during epidemics. The Court warned states vaccine laws should not be implemented in way that they become “cruel and inhuman to the last degree” for individuals and “lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence.”7 8

Relinquishing power to the federal government that is reserved to the states and eliminating necessary checks and balances on federal power, betrays democratic principles foundational to the representative government of our constitutional republic.

Cuts Citizens Out of the Law-Making Process

Transferring authority to mandate vaccines from duly elected members of a state legislature to an unelected federal government advisory committee poses a risk to the health and welfare of children and usurps the right of Americans to publicly participate in the law making process through their elected representatives.

CDC appointed members of ACIP, who can have financial ties to vaccine manufacturers, and government health officials engaging in public-private partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry,9 have no legal responsibility or accountability for what happens to the health of a child who is harmed by a state mandated vaccine.10 11 State legislatures, state health departments and Boards of Health are in a more knowledgeable position than the federal government to effectively address public health issues in the states.

Writes Pharma A Blank Check

Giving a federal agency blanket legal authority to automatically mandate every vaccine recommended by the CDC for use by all children attending daycare and school in every state will certainly financially benefit pharmaceutical companies but will not equally benefit citizens.

In 1980, the cost to “fully” vaccinate a child in a private doctor’s office according to CDC recommendations was $17 12 and that cost is now a staggering $3,000.13 There is no limit on future costs to vaccinate a child with every new vaccine licensed by the FDA and recommended for all children by the CDC.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) list 264 vaccines in active development by drug companies, including 137 infectious disease vaccines.14 The World Health Organization (WHO), with taxpayer funding by the CDC,15 is fast tracking development of 13 vaccines by multi-national pharmaceutical corporations.16

Most of these vaccines, as well as many others, will be recommended by ACIP for use by all children, including vaccines for HIV/AIDS, TB, Malaria, Influenza, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), Group A Streptococcus, Group B Streptococcus, Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV), E-coli; Shigella, Gonorrhea, Chikungunya and Salmonella.

The global vaccine market was valued at $28 billion in 2016 and is projected to become between $48 billion and $93 billion by 2025.17 Market forecasters predict North America will dominate the US vaccine market that “is expected to rise at a significant pace” due to “the presence of several key manufacturers in the region” and “favorable government policies for manufacturing and sales of vaccines.”18

Public-private business partnerships between the federal government and the pharmaceutical industry guarantee that most vaccines being developed by drug companies will be licensed and recommended for use by children and adults by the government.19

U.S. vaccine manufacturers Merck & Co. (rotavirus, HPV, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, varicella zoster (chickenpox), MMR, MMRV, pneumococcal vaccines) and Pfizer (pneumococcal, meningococcal B vaccines), as well as the UK pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (rotavirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, meningococcal, DTaP, DT, Tdap, HIB; polio vaccines) and France’s Sanofi Pasteur (influenza, meningococcal, DTaP, DT, Tdap, HIB, polio vaccines)20 will reap significant profits if states enact laws automatically mandating that children get every dose of every existing and new vaccine without deliberation by state health departments, Boards of Health or public hearings in the legislature providing input from residents impacted by vaccine mandates.

Creates Unfunded Mandates

Many states are already undergoing significant budget challenges. A law that automatically adds all ACIP recommended vaccinations to school requirements for children creates an unfunded mandate that increases the state’s health care costs at the expense of other programs and services.

Ignores Vaccine Risks and Rewards Liability-Free Vaccine Manufacturers

Vaccines are commercial pharmaceutical products carrying risks that can be greater for some individuals for genetic, epigenetic and other biological or environmental reasons but doctors cannot reliably predict who will be harmed.21

There are long standing vaccine safety knowledge gaps detailed by the Institute of Medicine in more than 20 years of published studies on vaccine safety issues,22 23 including lack of studies scientifically evaluating the safety of the birth to six year old vaccine schedule recommended by the CDC.24 25

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act created a federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) for children injured by CDC-recommended vaccines. The VICP has awarded more than $4 billion to vaccine victims since 1988, although two out of three vaccine injured plaintiffs are turned away without financial support.26

The Act passed in 1986 gave vaccine manufacturers partial liability protection and did not shield doctors or other vaccine administrators from civil liability when vaccines cause harm.

However, subsequent amendments and rule making changes by the federal government between 1987 and 2016 shielded vaccine providers from liability and substantially weakened the Act’s safety and compensation provisions.27

Since 2011 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that FDA licensed vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe,”28 pharmaceutical corporations have no civil liability for harm caused by vaccines mandated by state governments for children to attend daycare and school.29

Creates an Uncontrolled Scientific Experiment on School Children

The CDC acknowledges that clinical trials of new vaccines conducted by drug companies seeking licenses for new vaccines often contain too few participants followed up for limited time periods, who may not closely represent the U.S. population in terms of demographics, race and ethnicity.30

Some new vaccines licensed by the FDA have been proven to be too reactive and have been withdrawn from the market within a few years of licensure after persistent reports of vaccine-related brain and immune system damage and death.31 32

The true effectiveness of new vaccines following licensure is also not certain for years or even decades. Vaccinated persons can get infected with and transmit infectious diseases, often without showing symptoms or being diagnosed and reported.33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

For example, the Centers for Disease Control acknowledged in 2019 that vaccinated children can still get pertussis (whooping cough) because the B. pertussis microbe has genetically mutated and the current vaccines do not contain all strains. 41

Very few states have mandated that school children get HPV or annual influenza vaccinations, which are recommended for all children by the ACIP.

However, if states codify ACIP recommendations into law, children attending daycare and school would be required to receive the flu shot every year, despite the CDC reporting that the influenza vaccine was effective less than 50% of the time over the last 15 years.42 HPV vaccinations would be required, despite the fact that HPV cannot be transmitted in a school setting.43

Citizens in every state, along with state health departments and Boards of Health, should have an opportunity to review the scientific evidence when considering the benefits and risks of federally recommended vaccines for children and work with duly elected legislators to make informed decisions about whether a particular vaccine should be included in public health laws as a requirement for school attendance.

Endangers Medically Fragile Children

This type of proposed legislation could put more immune compromised and medically fragile students at risk of suffering vaccine reactions or contracting vaccine strain infections if all current and future vaccinations recommended by the federal government for children are automatically mandated for children to attend daycare and school in the states.

The ACIP has eliminated almost all contraindications to vaccination44 and the CDC now directs doctors to give inactivated vaccines and most live virus vaccines to all children, regardless of whether they are severely immune compromised or have suffered previous vaccine reactions.45 46 47

Depending upon the vaccine and an individual’s health at the time of vaccination, children and adults who have recently received live virus vaccines, such as varicella zoster,48 influenza49 and measles,50 shed vaccine strain virus in body fluids for different amounts of time. Immune compromised individuals receiving live virus vaccines often shed vaccine strain virus for longer periods of time.51 52 53

Additionally, vaccine strain infections can be misdiagnosed as wild type infections,54 which can result in mischaracterization of the true nature of reported outbreaks of disease.

For the past several decades, states have had to create more and more special education classrooms to meet the needs of disabled and chronically ill students.55 56

Children already disabled by vaccine reactions and medically fragile children will be at increased risk for vaccine injury. Special education costs could increase significantly in states if every ACIP recommended vaccine is required for every child to attend daycare and school in every state.

Contradicts Supreme Court Decisions on Parental Rights and Violates Human Rights

There is a long-standing principle in U.S. law that parents have a legal right to raise their children without undue adverse interference by the State.

In 1979, the Supreme Court stated that,

deeply rooted in our Nation’s history and tradition, is the belief that the parental role implies a substantial measure of authority over one’s children. Indeed, “constitutional interpretation has consistently recognized that the parents’ claim to authority in their own household to direct the rearing of their children is basic in the structure of our society.”57

The human right to exercise voluntary, informed consent to medical risk taking is central to the ethical practice of medicine and implementation of public health laws.58

Those rights can be protected if citizens are able to work with their elected representatives to ensure they are not stripped for public health laws.

The lucrative public private partnership between multi-national pharmaceutical companies and government health agencies that develop and regulate vaccines and make national vaccine policy are driving the mandatory vaccination lobby to persuade state legislators to give up their constitutional authority and ethical responsibility for creating state public health laws with the consent of those they govern.

State legislatures that transfer constitutional authority to mandate vaccines to unelected members of a federal agency committee are betraying foundational principles of representative government.

Monitoring Proposed Legislation In Your State

Virginia HB1090 is scheduled to be heard in a House health committee on Tuesday, Jan. 21 at 4 pm. For details and updates on that bill and other vaccine-related bills that have been introduced in state legislatures this year, become a user of and access the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal.


Source:  TheVaccineReaction.org.

People no longer believe working hard will lead to a better life, survey shows

By James Purtuill,

A growing sense of inequality is undermining trust in both society’s institutions and capitalism, according to a long-running global survey.

The 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer – now in its 20th year – has found many people no longer believe working hard will give them a better life.

Despite strong economic performance, a majority of respondents in every developed market do not believe they will be better off in five years’ time.

This means that economic growth no longer appears to drive trust, at least in developed markets – upending the conventional wisdom.

“We are living in a trust paradox,” said Richard Edelman, CEO of Edelman.

“Since we began measuring trust 20 years ago, economic growth has fostered rising trust. This continues in Asia and the Middle East but not in developed markets, where national income inequality is now the more important factor.

Fears are stifling hope, and long-held assumptions about hard work leading to upward mobility are now invalid.

Skip Animated GifFireFox NVDA users – To access the following content, press ‘M’ to enter the iFrame.

Growing ‘trust chasm’ between elites and the public
Fifty-six per cent of the surveyed global population said capitalism in its current form does more harm than good in the world.

Most employees (83 percent) globally are worried about job loss due to automation, a looming recession, lack of training, cheaper foreign competition, immigration and the gig economy.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents worry about losing the respect and dignity they once enjoyed in their country.

Nearly two in three feel the pace of technological change is too fast. Australia recorded one of the largest declines of trust in technology.

Australians were most worried about losing their job to the gig economy, followed by recession, lack of training, and foreign competitors.

The study also found a growing “trust chasm” between elites and the public that could be a reflection of income inequality, Edelman said.

We now observe an Alice in Wonderland moment of elite buoyancy and mass despair,” he said.
While 65 per cent of the worldwide informed public (aged 25-65, university-educated, in the top 25 per cent of household income) said they trust their institutions, only 51 per cent of the mass public (everyone else, representing 83 per cent of the total global population) said the same.

“The result is a world of two different trust realities,” the report says.

“The informed public – wealthier, more educated, and frequent consumers of news – remain far more trusting of every institution than the mass population.

“In a majority of markets, less than half of the mass population trust their institutions to do what is right.

“There are now a record eight markets showing all-time-high gaps between the two audiences – an alarming trust inequality.”

Trust levels among the informed public in Australia were at 68 per cent, far higher than the 45 per cent recorded among the mass population.


Source: https://www.abc.net.au

Twitter Openly Allows Pedophiles To Discuss Raping Children, While Banning Pro-Peace Accounts

From TheFreeThoughtProject:

Previously, TFTP reported how a disturbing push was made to attempt to normalize pedophilia as a mainstream “sexual orientation.” The move involved pedophiles rebranding themselves as “Minor Attracted Persons” (MAP) with the hope that they will be accepted like the LGBTQ community.

Disgustingly enough, it was somewhat effective as multiple outlets reported it like it was totally acceptable to be sexually attracted to children. While this incident was extremely disturbing, even more worrisome is that this normalization appears to be spreading and as some recent activity on Twitter illustrates, it’s condoned by social media giants.

For those who don’t recall, TFTP had multiple accountsunceremoniously deleted by Twitter in October of 2018 on the very same day Facebook removed all of our accounts.

While Banning Pro Peace Accounts, Twitter Openly Allows Pedophiles To Discuss Raping Children

TFTP has never once spread hatred, racism, violence, or anything that even closely relates to these repugnant topics. We have only advocated for peace by ending wars and transparency and accountability in government. Nevertheless, Twitter wiped us away like specs of dirt from under their shoe. They also wiped from existence multiple other pro-peace and freedom accounts like Carey Wedler and the Antimedia.

The reason for mentioning the censorship above is to draw a parallel between speech that helps to make the world a better place getting banned and the current speech which is simply fine and dandy according to Twitter.

Since we reported on Minor Attracted Persons several years ago, the terminology became so popular that it morphed into multiple categories and abbreviations. There are now NOMAPS, which apparently are the “best kind” of MAP because the “NO” means they don’t want to have sex with children.

That’s where the pro-c MAPs come in. The “pro-c” denotes pro-contact as in the belief that children can consent into having physical contact and sex with an adult. Children cannot consent to sex with an adult.

Nevertheless, tags on Twitter now openly trend to promote this content. Case in point, #mappositivity. When searching this term on Twitter, one can find an entire community of Minor Attracted Persons both those claiming to be anti-touching as well as those claiming it’s just fine and dandy to rape a child.

Yes, we are attracted to children.
…So what?

— ? Charlie ? (@HappyNight_o) December 26, 2019

TFTP found other MAPS on Twitter who claim that they are the victims because society doesn’t accept them. We definitely don’t believe in discriminating against people for their mental illnesses but the trail of abused children left behind in the rampant pedophilia wake across the planet would likely disagree.

What’s more, many MAPS think that their pedophilia is not an illness and that it is entirely natural and normal to be sexually attracted to children. The illness, they claim, comes from society not accepting people who want to have sex with children — not from wanting to have sex with children.

Pedophilic disorder is an illness that is caused by the stigma associated with being a pedophile.
The attraction itself isn’t an illness. Being depressed and feeling like shit because the world wants you dead is. And the cure would be to stop all of you from perpetuating stigma

— Fluffy (@Fluffy_MAP) December 26, 2019

There is an entire community on Twitter that discusses these ideas and it is likely healthy — as long as they don’t talk about exploiting children — as we see many of the NOMAPs claiming to be against the pro-c rapist crowds.

In fact, as we’ve seen with other speech, reducing discussions and ideas to the dark corners of the internet through bans and censorship only makes it far worse. Non-child raping MAPs having a place to discuss and hash out their sick desires is probably better than banning their speech and putting it in places where even sicker ideas and likely child porn is openly exchanged.

But this article isn’t about these folks. Just because some sicko has these desires and thoughts doesn’t mean they should be locked in a cage for not acting on them. Acting on them would mean touching a child or consuming child porn. If this doesn’t happen, it’s only thoughts and thoughts, no matter how sick, arguably have no victim. This is why people can openly claim to be MAPs and not be arrested.

The point of this article, however, is to point out the hypocrisy of Twitter banning pro-peace and antiwar speech while allowing the pro-c MAPS a place to flourish and openly discuss sex with children.

“Discussions related to child sexual exploitation as a phenomenon or attraction towards minors are permitted, provided they don’t promote or glorify child sexual exploitation in any way,” reads Twitter’s terms of service.

However, TFTP found two accounts: one belonging to a person claiming to be a pro-c MAP male who was open about his sexual relationship with a 13-year-old boy — who also has an account:

Pro C Pedophile

And here is “Jacob’s” adult MAP who is pro-c, aka thinks it is fine to rape children:

Pro C Pedophile 2

Both of the profiles have similar icons of a small child’s hand holding a larger adult hand. Twitter has no problem with this despite the fact that it is an unlawful relationship with someone who openly admits he thinks it’s okay to have sex with children — oh, and his child victim.

It continues…

One user who goes by the handle @KevinRo31884980 thinks anyone who is anti-sex with children is a bad person and should unfollow him:

I have no respect for anti contact MAP’s who throw pro-contact MAP’s under the bus and perpetuate falsehoods about CSA like typical anti-MAP’s do. If you’re an anti contact MAP and you hate pro-contact MAP’s and you follow me then unfollow me right now.

— Abolish the Selective Service System (@KevinRo31884980) December 20, 2019

@KevinRo31884980 thinks that pro-c MAPs are not bad because children can consent to sex. Despite what he thinks, a child cannot consent. If a young child willingly allows an adult to have sex with them, this is likely do to fear or grooming.

Nevertheless, Shane Trejo, with BLP found multiple accounts openly discussing the sexual abuse of children:

Proc Map 1

The answers were repulsive to say the least.

In other words, how much sex diego would have with a child depends on how far he could groom the child into letting him go.

It got worse:

Proc Map 3

Proc Map 4

Proc Map 5

Proc Map 6

Proc Map 7

Proc Map 8

Proc Map 10

All these accounts are still active.

There you have it. The platform that swiftly moved in and banned pro-peace, anti-racist, pro-liberty, and antiwar speech has no problem allowing “pro-c MAPs” aka people who want to rape children, a forum for discussing just how much raping they do to children.

This is the state of social media today.

Event 201: Bill Gates & World Economic Forum Simulated Coronavirus Outbreak 6 Weeks Before First Case in Wuhan

By The Renegade,

Event 201 is a pandemic tabletop exercise hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY. The exercise illustrated the pandemic preparedness efforts needed to diminish the large-scale economic and societal consequences of a severe pandemic. Drawing from actual events, Event 201 identifies important policy issues and preparedness challenges that could be solved with sufficient political will and attention. These issues were designed in a narrative to engage and educate the participants and the audience.

Selected moments from the Event 201 pandemic tabletop exercise hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY.

Segment 1, Intro and Medical Countermeasures (MCM) Discussion

 Segment 2, Trade and Travel Discussion

Pandemic Exercise: Segment 3, Finance Discussion

Source: http://www.renegadetribune.com

Chinese Medics Reportedly Claim That Coronavirus Has Infected 100,000 And China Is Lying

By Aaron kesel,

Chinese medics are purportedly uploading videos onto social media app Weibo chat, which are being deleted and funneled out of China. Medics are claiming that the Wuhan coronavirus is much worse than what the Chinese government is stating to the public; two videos state that an estimated 90,000 – 100,000 people are infected in just Wuhan alone.

The virus has now been detected in — China, Australia, Nepal, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, France, Canada and the United States.

An unknown sobbing Chinese woman known only as Dr. Jinnhui – believed to work at the quarantined Wuhan hospital in China – claims the coronavirus is far worse than the Chinese government has said with 100,000 people infected. The woman adds a warning for everyone to stay indoors.

The woman can be heard stating the outbreak is hundreds of times worse than official figures coming out of China suggest.

The audio was shared by Chinese news outlet Global Himalaya, who claimed it was sent from a member of the medical staff in Wuhan.

In a translation verified by Anonymous Bites Back Asia team, a woman says:

I have been working all day long. Now I am off duty. I took off around 4pm, I have been crying my eyes out.

The infection is much more horrible than it’s reported on TV.

There are so many cases. Doctors have estimated about 100,000 infected.

She explains there are just over 10 doctors who have treated “more than 100 infected people in just one day”.

In a chilling prediction, the unnamed woman proclaims: “Many of them will not make it.”

“The government didn’t support us with medical supplies,” she continues.

The patients were begging us desperately but we couldn’t do anything.

They are dying right in front of our eyes.

Please take every measure to protect yourselves at home.

Don’t ever trust the government. We are on our own now.

Another short video claims much of the same, with another alleged doctor posting his message to the world.

“Wuhan in reality, it’s completely the opposite of what’s said on tv. No one, no hospitals. no particular hospital. The hospitals are fully packed, the dead bodies have been lying there for days and no one is coming to collect them,” the man says according to translation.

A third video with a Chinese conversation seen in the background seems to corroborate claims that the situation is much worse than what China is acknowledging. A voice message from medical staff alleged to be in Wuhan also mentions the 90,000 – 100,000 infected figure.

Multiple videos out of China have shown citizens falling over, and medical officials in hazmat suits removing dead bodies on a stretcher with a sheet covering them. Anons also compiled numerous videos coming out of China displaying dead being carried out, showing the death count is likely higher than what is being stated.

China is punishing everyone who posts this information to social media, and it has been hard for anyone to smuggle these videos outside of the country. On January 1, 2020, eight people were arrested in China for spreading rumors about this disease. A journalist shared a picture on Twitter allegedly showing that all staff at hospitals are forbidden to discuss any latest developments of the outbreak with family, relatives, and friends through email, phone calls, texts, WeChat, Weibo, or e-mail. This suggests that China is in fact trying to cover up something about the virus and that may just be the number infected in Wuhan.

A U.S. State Dept source who this writer has previously used before revealed that a secret meeting took place with Trump and U.S. Senators yesterday. In that meeting it was revealed that the virus is believed to be airborne and can remain on objects. Another reporter, Scott Wong, corroborated those claims.

Dr. Eric Feigl-Ding who taught for 15 years at Harvard and is a NYT-featured pharma whistleblower had this to say on Twitter:

The World Health Organization (WHO) has so far declined to call the outbreak a global health emergency, while the Center For Disease Control (CDC) has issued a level three warning (Avoid Nonessential Travel) with the U.S. State Department, advising the avoidance of China and specifically Wuhan.

Officially, according to the Chinese government, there are now an estimated 1,975 cases and 56 deaths in China alone at the time of this report. In addition, there are confirmed patients in at least 13 countries with several potential cases inside the United States and elsewhere, as this writer has been covering for The Mind Unleashed.

Symptoms include a fever, cough, shortness of breath, and breathing difficulties. However, according to Chinese state media, some are not experiencing any of these symptoms and are instead experiencing nausea, diarrhea, tiredness, bad concentration, headache, irregular heartbeat, chest pain, cornea inflammation, and muscular pains in the limbs, back, and waist.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said China was facing a “grave situation,” warning the virus was accelerating. China has locked-down most provinces and the death toll has now risen to 42, with announcements of restricting a total of 56 million people, according to AP. 29 out of 34 provincial jurisdictions have activated the highest emergency response. China is also sending in its medical response military to affected areas especially Wuhan, the origin of the virus.

As a fun fact, the Washington Times reports that Wuhan is also the site of two Chinese biological labs according to Dany Shoham, a former Israeli military intelligence officer who has studied Chinese biowarfare. The report suggests the virus was either accidentally let out or deliberately. If true, it would explain how the coronavius evolved so fast to jump from animals to humans.

When the Washington Times asked Shoham whether the new coronavirus may have leaked, Mr. Shoham said:

In principle, outward virus infiltration might take place either as leakage or as an indoor unnoticed infection of a person that normally went out of the concerned facility. This could have been the case with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but so far there isn’t evidence or indication for such incident.

What’s more is the lab was officially working with different strains of coronavirus, as well as other deadly illnesses like Ebola, beginning in 2018. This lab is just 20 miles away from the Huanan Seafood market where the first case of the Coronavirus is believed to be transmitted.


Before the lab opened, scientists all over the world were voicing concerns about the potential dangers. An article was even published in the science journal Nature in 2017, detailing the plans for the lab and sharing expert opinions about how a dangerous bug could leak from the facility. In fact, the SARS virus has escaped from high-level containment facilities in Beijing multiple times.

Interestingly enough, in 2004, China punished five top officials of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for the outbreak of SARS. The investigation found that the release of the virus was due to the negligence of two CDC employees who were infected and was not deliberate, China Daily reported.

Now there is a report that is going around the internet that indicates pathogens were sent from a Canadian laboratory to Wuhan illegally by a Chinese husband and wife spy team as recently as last July. The husband specialized in coronavirus research according to the report.

If China locking down almost all of its provinces and putting out threats against doctors isn’t a sign that the virus is more dangerous than what is being publicly claimed, nothing is. Especially since China just now broke a historic quarantine record of 56 million people being unable to travel within their country or out of it for at least the short term.

Also See: Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate (2015 – The Scientist)

**By [@An0nkn0wledge](https://steemit.com/@an0nkn0wledge)**