Article Video – What Kind of “Assembly”? July 5, 2020 By Anna Von Reitz

Help support the work of Anna and the Living Law Firm here https://paypal.me/annavonreitz/20 or look for the PayPal button on http://www.annavonreitz.com
Link to original article http://www.paulstramer.net/2020/07/what-kind-of-assembly.html
Download and print http://annavonreitz.com/whatkindofassembly.pdf
Ed’s YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnjHRMflqs9CFCx6k07h2bw
Watch on YouTube https://youtu.be/EB-ym3tJZOY

X-TAL: The frequencies of freedom and liberty are unleashed



SMS

Denice: Have a moment for X-TAL?

Terran: Yes

Denice: Skype

Terran: OK

SKYPE

Terran: Hi! I didn’t expect you! Glad youre here!

X-TAL: TERRAN. THE “OBSERVATIONS” POST LUNAR EVENT ARE COMPLETED.

Terran: Any insights?

X-TAL: HUMANITY OF THE EARTHSPHERE FAR EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS. THE FREQUENCIES OF “FREEDOM” AND “LIBERTY” ARE UNLEASHED. THESE ACCELERATE THE NEXT MOMENTS AS ALL “EVENTS” ARE INTERCONNECTED

 NOW.

Terran: Wonderful!

X-TAL: TERRAN. OUR OBSERVATIONS FOR NOW ARE COMPLETED. WE REMAIN IN THE “FIELD” FOR THESE NEXT “EVENTS”. WE ARE PREPARED TO CONTACT YOU AS THE NEXT MOMENTS FOR POTENTIAL OBSERVATIONS ARISE.  FOR NOW WE WITHDRAW OUR REQUESTS FOR OBSERVATIONS AND OFFER NEW REQUESTS AS NEEDED.

Terran: That’s is very gracious of you!  Thank your for being a good house guest!

X-TAL: TERRAN. IT IS OUR HONOUR AND PLEASURE TO WORK WITH YOU. WE RETURN TO OUR “STATIONS” AND CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS COMMENCE AT ANOTHER MOMENT. X-TAL. END TRANSMISSION.

TERRAN:  Thank you!  Until next time!   Terran end.

The End of Fluoridation Is in Sight

Water fluoridation is one of the biggest public health failures of the 20th century. Despite solid scientific evidence of harm, politics and public relations have kept the practice alive.

Proponents, including the American Dental Association (ADA) and the Oral Health Division of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), have spent millions of dollars on promotion and public relations to sell fluoridation using half-truths, convincing talking points, and diversions. 

But fluoridation is also one of the most widely rejected health interventions on Earth, with 95% of the world’s population consuming water from systems that are not fluoridated. 

For the past decade, the trend has moved in the direction of communities ending the practice, not starting it. And now, due to an abundance of new research, a landmark lawsuit and the sustained advocacy and education efforts of the Fluoride Action Network and its supporters like you, the practice could be on the brink of extinction.

The Evidence of Harm Is Too Great To Be Ignored

All tissues are important, but the most important organ to protect during fetal and infant development is the brain. Damage occurring to this organ during these early stages of life is permanent and cannot be undone later in life. 

The evidence of neurotoxic harm from water fluoridation has been mounting at an unprecedented rate in recent years, and has quickly become the most urgent reason to end the practice as soon as possible. A cavity can easily be filled, but damage to a child’s brain is permanent.

A large body of government-funded research now indicates that fluoride is neurotoxic and is associated with lowered IQ in children and a significant increase in ADHD diagnosis and related behaviors in children at doses experienced in fluoridated communities. Experts in the field have likened the size of the effect to that from lead.

This includes over 200 animal studies showing that prolonged exposure to varying levels of fluoride can damage the brain, 65 human studies linking moderately high fluoride exposures with reduced intelligence, three human studies linking fluoride exposure with impaired fetal brain development, and seven Mother-Offspring studies linking fluoride exposure during pregnancy to reduced IQ in offspring. 

Over the past year, we’ve also seen unprecedented new science from Canada and the USA showing fluoride harms the developing brain from exposures due primarily to artificial water fluoridation at the “optimal level.” Several of these high-quality studies were funded by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (formerly the National Institutes of Health).

Strongest Studies Published Over the Past Year

Seven studies published in 2019 and 2020 are among the strongest yet, and are obviously relevant to water fluoridation as they were conducted in communities with what the ADA considers the “optimal level” of fluoride in drinking water. These include:

  1. Green 2019 published in the Journal of the American Medical Association’s journal on Pediatrics. It reported substantial IQ loss in Canadian children from prenatal exposure to fluoride from water fluoridation.
  2. Riddell 2019 published in Environment International. It found a shocking 284% increase in the prevalence of ADHD among children in fluoridated communities in Canada compared to nonfluoridated ones.
  3. Till 2020 published in Environment International. It reported that children who were bottle-fed in Canadian fluoridated communities lost up to 9 IQ points compared to those in nonfluoridated communities.
  4. Uyghurturk 2020 published in Environmental Health. It found that pregnant women in fluoridated communities in California had significantly higher levels of fluoride in their urine than those in nonfluoridated communities. The levels found in their urine were the same as those found to lower the IQ of the fetus in Green et al, 2019 and Bashash et al, 2017.
  5. Malin 2019 published in Environmental Health. It linked a doubling of symptoms indicative of sleep apnea in adolescents in the U.S. to levels of fluoride in the drinking water. The link between fluoride and sleep disturbances may be through fluoride’s effect on the pineal gland.
  6. Malin 2019 published in Environment International. It reported that exposure to fluoridated water led to a reduction in kidney and liver function among adolescents in the U.S., and suggested those with poorer kidney or liver function may absorb more fluoride bodies. The CDC funded this study.

The claims made by proponents of fluoridation that there is only “one or two studies” finding harm, or that they are only from areas with naturally high fluoride levels, are no longer relevant. The scientific evidence can now be considered overwhelming and undeniable. In fact, the level of evidence that fluoride is neurotoxic now far exceeds the evidence that was in place when lead was banned from gasoline.

A recent review by Danish scientist, Harvard professor and neurotoxicity expert Philippe Grandjean, MD, DMSc, also concluded that:

“… there is little doubt that developmental neurotoxicity is a serious risk associated with elevated fluoride exposure, whether due to community water fluoridation, natural fluoride release from soil minerals, or tea consumption, especially when the exposure occurs during early development.”

It should come as no surprise then, that a draft systematic review published in 2020 by the National Toxicology Program of human studies of fluoride’s neurotoxicity concluded that fluoride was a “presumed” neurotoxin based on the large number, quality and consistency of brain studies. 

The review identified 149 human studies and 339 animal studies, but did not include the three most recent neurotoxicity-related studies from the York University group (Till 2019; Riddell 2019), or the study showing that women in the U.S. had levels of fluoride in urine high enough to cause damage to the brain of the fetus (Uyghurturk 2020).

While the draft NTP review is equivocal about effects at low exposures, these newest high-quality mother-child studies support a conclusion that artificially fluoridated water causes substantial IQ reductions. This fact was recently echoed in a letter published in Pediatric Research by the co-authors of the JAMA Pediatrics fluoride/IQ study, which said:

“Over the past 75 years, health authorities have declared that community water fluoridation-a practice that reaches over 400 million worldwide-is safe. Yet, studies conducted in North America examining the safety of fluoride exposure in pregnancy were nonexistent.

When a Canadian study reported that higher fluoride exposure in pregnant women was associated with lower IQ scores in young children, critics attacked the methodology of the study and discounted the significance of the results.

Health authorities continued to conclude that fluoride is unequivocally safe, despite four well-conducted studies over the last 3 years consistently linking fluoride exposure in pregnancy with adverse neurodevelopmental effects in offspring …

The tendency to ignore new evidence that does not conform to widespread beliefs impedes the response to early warnings about fluoride as a potential developmental neurotoxin. Evolving evidence should inspire scientists and health authorities to re-evaluate claims about the safety of fluoride, especially for the fetus and infant for whom there is no benefit.”

FAN Leads the Fight Against Neurotoxins

Since 2000, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has been committed to reducing exposure to fluoride, and even with all of the science firmly on our side, we couldn’t wait for legislators and public health officials to cast aside their entrenched dogma in favor of fluoridation and catch up on the science. Instead, we initiated the legal process to end the practice that today affects more than 200 million Americans.

A little-known provision of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) gave us our opportunity. It offers citizens a way to circumvent the corruption and force the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prohibit or limit the use of toxic substances. 

Watchdog groups no longer have to convince the EPA of unreasonable risk; they can now have an objective judge decide based on an independent review of the evidence.

We are also laying the foundation for future TSCA challenges by citizens and environmental groups. For example, because of Judge Edward Chen’s ruling to deny the EPA’s motion to dismiss our case, TSCA law will now be interpreted to allow the EPA to be petitioned to regulate single uses of substances, rather all uses, which was the EPA’s position. This change will make it easier for activists to force the EPA to review the risks of specific chemicals used commercially.

While it has been four years since this effort began in November of 2016 — when the Fluoride Action Network, together with a coalition of nonprofits and individual citizens, presented a petition to the EPA to end the deliberate addition of fluoridation chemicals to the public’s drinking water — it has actually taken 20 years of effort by FAN to bring us to this point.

It took the development of our extensive website in the early days. It took the creation of our comprehensive health database (larger than any government had put together on fluoride’s toxicity).

It took countless submissions to government agencies and the translation of many Chinese neurotoxicity studies and much more. And, after much delay due to government shut downs and Covid-19, our day in court finally arrived.

Trial of the Century

The trial began with an opening statement from the attorney for the plaintiffs, Michael Connett. He made the succinct but powerful case that fluoride presents a hazard (threat to the brain); that this hazard is a risk at the doses experienced in fluoridated communities; and that it is an unreasonable risk.

The EPA, represented by lawyers from the Department of Defense, argued that establishing fluoride as a neurotoxic hazard requires a systematic review, which they claimed FAN’s experts didn’t perform.

They also argued that the evidence showing harm from fluoride at the levels found in communities that practice fluoridation wasn’t strong enough to yield action from the EPA. Both of these claims would be disproven by FAN’s experts and attorney during the trial.

This was followed by three days of testimony from FAN’s expert witnesses, all independent and leading scientists whose world-class expertise includes fluoride, neurotoxicity and risk assessments, and whose expertise the EPA has relied on in the past on other toxicants like lead and mercury. The witnesses included (click on links to see their declarations and resumes):

Their testimony was followed by the EPA’s witnesses, two of which were experts-for-hire from the corporate consulting firm Exponent, and one was a risk assessment expert from the EPA.

It was revealed that the EPA paid Exponent approximately $350,000 for their testimony, which was focused primarily on claiming that there was insufficient evidence of harm — something they’re known for doing in every trial, no matter who they’re representing or how strong the science is.

One of their witnesses, Dr. Ellen Chang, has a long history of defending and producing systematic reviews for corporate polluters, including for DOW Chemical’s Agent Orange, Monsanto’s glyphosate, 3M’s PFOAs, and pesticides from Syngenta and Croplife. She also worked for the American Chemistry Council, American Petroleum Institute, and the Manganese Interest Group.

Several paragraphs here couldn’t possibly do the in-depth proceedings of the trial justice, or highlight all of the shocking and incredible statements that were made. I would urge you to read our detailed summaries for each of the trial days. 

I would also urge you to visit our TSCA trial overview page, where you can find the basic facts, a timeline of all actions and rulings, links to all of the submissions made by FAN, links to all of the media coverage, and links to the studies we relied upon to make our case. You can also visit our Twitter page, where we provided live tweet coverage of days 3 through 7.

The Judge’s Reaction

After seven days of trial and closing statements from both parties, the judge held off on making a final ruling, but he did make it fairly obvious that he was convinced that FAN fluoride was a neurotoxin and likely posed an unreasonable risk. He said that the EPA had failed to properly assess that risk, and illegitimately turned down FAN’s 2016 petition for TSCA action.

The judge urged the parties to spend the next few weeks discussing the possibility of an amended TSCA petition and assessment by the EPA, or start a new petition and have the EPA conduct a proper review, and leave his final ruling until that is complete. Both parties expressed doubt that such an arrangement would be fruitful, but ultimately agreed to move forward with it and update the court on their progress in the beginning of August. 

We Expect the EPA Could Continue to Delay

We don’t expect the overzealous proponents of the fluoridation, including the EPA, CDC and ADA, to roll over without using every avenue possible to save their credibility by protecting fluoridation. They’ve already proven time and again, they have deep pockets and no shame.

Proponents don’t seem to realize that continued promotion will cause an ever-increasing loss of the public’s trust in the agencies that are meant to protect them. Continuing this practice in the absence of sound science — and investing millions of dollars in PR to cover up that fact — will further erode the public’s trust in public health programs.

Right now, the only thing being protected is a failed policy and the reputation of those who refuse to accept that this program has been a massive failure both ethically and scientifically.

Before the trial the EPA had already intimated that they could appeal a ruling in our favor, and that even if we win the appeal the rulemaking process to end fluoridation’s neurotoxic harm could take up to three years. This would mean tens of thousands more children permanently harmed by fluoridation.

This is why, regardless of the ultimate verdict, FAN will continue to need your support. We have forged this precedent-setting path together. Your support, contributions and sharing of our cause and legal case have played a critical role in making this happen, and we thank you. Whether we win or lose this trial, our important education efforts will have to continue.

Please consider investing in an end to fluoridation by making a tax-deductible donation to our work.

Also, please consider signing-up to receive FAN’s email bulletins and following us on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram. We will keep you informed about the latest fluoride research and news, plus give you opportunities help influence fluoride policy in your area and throughout the world.

New Tools and Resources to Educate Leaders About Neurotoxicity

While FAN is taking the lead in court at the federal and state level, and helping campaigners at the local level to educate decision-makers and public health officials, we need your help to spread this educational campaign to every community, including yours. To make the task easier, we have created a number of new educational materials.

First, is our handout on neurotoxicity. We have both a color version along with a black and white version for cheaper bulk printing, as well as a list of the references for this handout that you can combine to make a nice double-sided handout if you so choose. You can also check out our other handouts here.

Second, FAN’s Research Director, Chris Neurath, filmed a Zoom webinar in which he presented detailed evidence that fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin.

He described the rapidly accumulating peer-reviewed science showing that fluoride lowers the IQ of children and increases their risk of neurobehavioral problems like ADHD. He put those studies into perspective in ways we can all understand.

This video a powerful tool for campaigners and parents looking to learn the science and to share it with decision-makers. Neurath’s presentation is about 50 minutes and includes a 30-minute question and answer session that took place at the end. Click here to access the PowerPoint slides used in this presentation.

Help educate your state-level decision makers about the neurotoxic harm caused by water fluoridation. Use our simple automated email system to send Neurath’s presentation to your state legislators and urge them to introduce a bill next session to end the practice throughout your state: Educate Your Legislators NOW.

FAN has also produced a new video series entitled, “Four Game-Changing Studies,” explaining the science behind fluoridation’s neurotoxicity in four short videos featuring Paul Connett, Ph.D. The shorter format makes the content easier to share on social media and easier for local authorities to digest incrementally.

Who Is Getting Rich Off Coronavirus Pandemic?

In May 2020, the U.S. unemployment rate was 13.3%,1 which means 21 million Americans were unemployed. Not surprisingly, financial stress is a major concern, with 88% of Americans surveyed by the National Endowment for Financial Education (NEFE) saying that the COVID-19 pandemic is creating stress for their personal financial situation.2

Fifty-four percent were particularly worried about having enough money saved for emergency savings or retirement, while another 48% were worried about paying bills.

A report by the Well Being Trust (WBT) and the Robert Graham Center for Policy Studies in Family Medicine and Primary Care that up to 75,000 people may die during the COVID-19 pandemic from drug or alcohol misuse and suicide, which they deemed “deaths of despair” caused, in part, by unprecedented economic failure paired with massive unemployment.3

This experience of scarcity and financial uncertainty is not being felt by all, however. In stark contrast, many of the richest among us — particularly health care and biotech billionaires — have gotten even richer due to COVID-19, profiting handsomely off the pandemic that’s left the general public financially reeling.

Pandemic Propels Moderna CEO to the Billionaire’s Club

Forbes compiled a list of 10 health care billionaires who collectively raked in more than $7 billion since March 11, 2020 — the day the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a global pandemic.4 Topping the list is Stéphane Bancel, CEO of Moderna, the biotech firm that’s seen as the frontrunner for developing a COVID-19 vaccine. According to Forbes:5

“When the WHO declared a pandemic, Bancel’s estimated net worth was some $720 million. Since then, Moderna’s stock has rallied more than 103%, lifting his fortune to an estimated $1.5 billion. A French citizen, Bancel first joined the billionaire ranks on April 2, when Moderna’s stock rose on the news that the firm was planning to begin phase two trials of its vaccine.”

Moderna partnered with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci to create the vaccine. In February 2020, its stock price increased 78.1% when it announced that its messenger RNA vaccine was ready for clinical trials.6 “The company’s CEO has become a new billionaire overnight,” wrote Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC).7

Moderna began human trials of its experimental mRNA vaccine in March 2020, and its stock soared again in May, hitting $29 billion, even though the company currently doesn’t sell any products,8 when it released early results from its Phase 1 study of 45 healthy volunteers between the ages of 18 and 55 — the first released from a study involving human volunteers.

Moderna’s press release9 stated that 25 participants who received two doses of its low or medium dose vaccine had levels of binding antibodies — the type that are used by the immune system to fight the virus but do not prevent viral infections — at levels approximating or exceeding those found in the blood of patients who recovered from COVID-19.10

Data for the more significant neutralizing antibodies, which stop viruses from entering cells, was reported for only eight people, with Moderna stating that levels in each of these initial participants met or exceeded antibody levels seen in recovered COVID-19 patients.

Four study subjects experienced a “Grade 3” adverse event, which is described by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as “severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; limiting self-care” such as “bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications.”11

During Phase 2 trials, 600 people will receive the vaccine, while a Phase 3 trial is expected to start in July 2020 — an unprecedented move in terms of typical vaccine development timelines. Bancel owns a 9% stake in the company, which received a grant of up to $483 million from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to accelerate its COVID-19 vaccine development.12

Nine More COVID-19 Billionaires

Making up the rest of Forbes’ list is a mix of entrepreneurs, biotech executives and diagnostic test makers, which come from seven different countries:13

1. Gustavo Denegri — With a net worth of $4.5 billion, which is up 32% since the beginning of the pandemic, Denegri has a 45% stake in DiaSorin, a biotech company based in Italy. DiaSorin makes swab-based diagnostic tests for COVID-19 as well as antibody blood testing kits for the virus.

2. Seo Jung-Jin — Jung-Jin co-founded Celltrion, a biopharma company in Seoul. Jung-Jin’s net worth is $8.4 billion, up 22% thanks to the company’s experimental antiviral treatment for COVID-19, along with a self-administered diagnostic test that gives results in 15 minutes, which is expected to come to the market this summer.

3. Alain Mérieux — Mérieux’s $7.6 billion net worth is tied to BioMérieux, the diagnostic testing company he founded in 1963. It’s a branch of Institut Mérieux, a medical company founded by his grandfather in 1897. BioMérieux developed a faster version of a COVID-19 diagnostic test kit that was released in March 2020.

4. Maja Oeri — Oeri is a descendent of Fritz Hoffmann-La Roche, the founder of pharmaceutical giant Roche. She owns about 5% of Roche’s shares, with a net worth of $3.2 billion; Roche has clinical trials ongoing for its arthritis drug tocilizumab, which it is hoping to transition to a COVID-19 treatment, as well as a serology test to detect antibodies in people who have had COVID-19.

5. Leonard Schleifer — His net worth is $2.2 billion, a rise of 11% due to the pandemic. He founded Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, which is conducting clinical trials of its rheumatoid arthritis drug sarilumab on COVID-19 patients.

6. George Yancopoulos — Yancopoulos is Regeneron’s chief scientific officer; his net worth is $1.2 billion (up 14% since the beginning of the pandemic).

7. and 8. Thomas and Andreas Struengmann — The Struengmann twins have a net worth of $6.9 billion. They first made their fortune by selling generic drug company Hexal to Novartis in 2005, and they invest in biotech and health care companies. One of their investments is BioNTech, which partnered with Pfizer and Fosun Pharmaceuticals on a COVID-19 vaccine that’s currently in human trials.

9. Li Xiting — Xiting cofounded Mindray Medical International, China’s largest medical equipment producer. It tripled its production capacity of ventilators since the start of the pandemic. Xiting’s net worth is $12.6 billion, which is up 1% due to COVID-19.

US Billionaires $584 Billion Richer Thanks to COVID-19

The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), in partnership with Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF), published a report highlighting what they call America’s “pre-existing condition”: extreme wealth inequality.14 IPS is regularly updating U.S. unemployment and billionaire wealth during the pandemic, which shows the great divide among the wealthy and the majority of Americans.

As of June 18, 2020, U.S. billionaire wealth increased $584 billion, or 20%, since the start of the pandemic.15 Meanwhile, since March 18, the number of U.S. billionaires increased from 614 to 643; during the same period, more than 45.5 million Americans filed for unemployment. Other striking inequalities revealed by the report include:16

  • Jeff Bezos’s fortune increased by $25 billion from January 1, 2020, to April 15, 2020; the wealth surge alone is greater than Honduras’ Gross Domestic Product, which was $23.9 billion in 2018
  • From January 1, 2020 to April 10, 2020, the wealth of 34 of the richest U.S. billionaires increased tens of millions of dollars; eight of them had their net worth rise by more than $1 billion
  • From March 18 to April 10, 2020, U.S. billionaire wealth surged by nearly 10%, rising $282 billion; during the same period, more than 22 million Americans lost their jobs
  • U.S. billionaire wealth increased 1,130% from 1990 to 2020; U.S. median wealth grew by 5.37% during the same period
  • The tax obligations of U.S. billionaires decreased 79% between 1980 and 2018, when measured as a percentage of wealth

As noted by Inequality.org, IPS’ sister site:

“The top five billionaires — Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Warren Buffett and Larry Ellison — saw their wealth grow by a total of $101.7 billion, or 26%. They captured 17.4% of the total wealth growth of all 600-plus billionaires in the last three months. The fortunes of Bezos and Zuckerberg together grew by nearly $76 billion, or 13% of the $584 billion total.

‘This orgy of wealth shows how fundamentally flawed our economic system is,’ said Frank Clemente, ATF’s executive director. ‘In three months about 600 billionaires increased their wealth by far more than the nation’s governors say their states need in fiscal assistance to keep delivering services to 330 million residents.

Their wealth increased twice as much as the federal government paid out in one-time checks to more than 150 million Americans. If this pandemic reveals anything, it’s how unequal our society has become and how drastically it must change.”17

‘One of the Greatest Wealth Transfers of History’

CNBC’s Jim Cramer, host of CNBC’s Mad Money and a former hedge fund manager, said the pandemic and resulting lockdown paved the way for “one of the greatest wealth transfers in history.”18 While many experts are predicting a V-shaped recovery for the stock market, which has been quickly rebounding, “that has almost nothing to do with a V-shaped recovery in the economy,” Cramer said.

While most big businesses are coming out of the state-ordered lockdowns largely unscathed, many small businesses have closed their doors. Already, Chapter 11 bankruptcies are up 48% compared to 2019, and the worst may be yet to come. Even as businesses are increasingly allowed to open for business, lower occupancy limits will continue financial hardships, despite relief funds provided by the government.

“… [I]n the end, the stimulus package probably won’t be enough, for one simple reason,” Cramer said. “It’s not going to work because of social distancing.”19 Meanwhile, big business will continue to thrive. “The bigger the business, the more it moves the major averages, and that matters because this is the first recession where big business … is coming through virtually unscathed, if not going for the gold.”20

The transfer of wealth from average people to the richest through a planned economic collapse is ongoing, and something that’s slated to get even more severe if a COVID-19 vaccine is released. In an article positing the question, “Is It Too Late to Buy Moderna Stock?” The Motley Fool suggested:21

“Let’s assume that Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine proves to be successful and wins regulatory approvals in the U.S. and other major markets. If the company was able to price its coronavirus vaccine similarly to flu vaccines currently on the market, its list price would probably be in the ballpark of at least $40.

If we also assume at least 2 billion doses of the vaccine would be given per year, Moderna could be looking at annual revenue of $80 billion.”

Shoshana Zuboff Meets Margrethe Vestager

In the video above, you can watch the first public conversation between social psychologist and Harvard professor Shoshana Zuboff and Margrethe Vestager, executive vice president of the European Union (EU) regarding the European way to shape the digital age.

In February 2020, the EU announced a new digital strategy — “Europe Fit for the Digital Age” — that’s intended to ensure technology serves the people and adds value to their lives.1

Privacy is a major concern in a digital era and, according to the EU, their “strategies for artificial intelligence (AI) and data aim to encourage businesses to work with, and develop, these new technologies, while at the same time making sure that they earn citizens’ trust.”2

With Vestager in charge of setting the strategic direction for this new initiative, a conversation with Zuboff is exciting. Her book, “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” is one of the best books I have read in the last few years. It’s an absolute must-read if you have any interest in this topic and want to understand how Google and Facebook have obtained such massive control of your life.

Her book reveals how the biggest tech companies in the world have hijacked our personal data — so-called “behavioral surplus data streams” — without our knowledge or consent and are using it against us to generate profits for themselves. She’s uniquely poised to help guide the EU and any nation looking out for personal privacy.

Why Privacy Matters Even if You ‘Have Nothing to Hide’

Mikkel Flyverbom, professor at Copenhagen Business School, who’s the moderator in the video above, asks an important question in that, when speaking about privacy, some people respond that certain forms of surveillance aren’t a big deal because they have nothing to hide.

It’s a mistake to give over your privacy to this thought process, though, and, as Zuboff explains, it is a sign that you’ve succumbed to a kind of authoritarian propaganda.

The propaganda is the notion that “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear” from their sensors, their devices and their surveillance. But at the very foundation, losing your privacy means giving up your right to an inner life — a fundamental change to the society we live in. Zuboff says:

“If everything is transparent and there is no privacy we have fundamentally changed the kind of society that we live in — a society that cherishes privacy is a society that cherishes freedom and autonomy and democracy. What we see is that when we succumb to this idea of total transparency they take our faces, they take our bodies, they take our bloodstreams, they take whatever they want.

These are used for data sets. As we’ve seen in facial recognition, they take our faces; they put them into data sets. Ultimately, we’ve seen as in the case with Microsoft, their facial recognition training data set sold to military divisions, including military divisions in China.

… We need an inner life. We need sanctuary to be a democracy and we need societies that are structured by that respect for the individual if we are to have a free democratic society and a free world.”

Digital Strategy Differences Between the EU, US and China

China, led by the Chinese Communist Party, has been intentionally crafting their vision of a digital future since at least 2010 — something the U.S. and the EU have failed to do.

In China’s case, Zuboff notes, “Their vision is one specifically that is to advance their form of government, which is an authoritarian state. They advanced their form of government domestically and they create the technologies and the training systems and value systems to support those technologies, which they export.”

At least 36 countries are now using these authoritarian training systems and surveillance technologies. The U.S. and the EU will now have to work to advance a digital age that will also advance democratic government. If they don’t, Zuboff says, “Our century will not remain democratic.”

At present, we’re “walking naked” into the digital future, and when asked how much progress the EU has made, Vestager says, “Well, I’m afraid we only have a thong on. We still have so far to go.” The EU enacted the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2018, which is designed to increase the protection of personal data and acts as a sort of digital citizen’s rights.

However, even with these rights in place, Vestager says, “we still need to go further to enforce them.” The COVID-19 pandemic offered a crash course of sorts in doing everything digital, which has shown the urgency in the need to ensure a safe digital future.

9/11 Terrorist Attacks Eroded Privacy Conversations

When asked whether European initiatives will be able to address privacy concerns, Zuboff states that steps are being made, even in the U.S., which has lagged behind but has recently had 29 key bills come out that are trying to tackle these important issues.

There are no laws in place to curtail this brand-new type of surveillance capitalism, and the only reason it has been able to flourish over the past 20 years is because there’s been an absence of laws against it, primarily because it has never previously existed. Surveillance has become the biggest for-profit industry on the planet, and your entire existence is now being targeted for profit.

But in order to really come to grips with the facts surrounding surveillance capitalism, Zuboff says, it’s necessary to understand how we got into this place to begin with:

“This goes back to a specific moment in history. This goes back to the day that the twin towers fell because in the United States on September 11th the conversation about the internet and the digital future changed dramatically. People were poised to be considering comprehensive federal privacy legislation on that day.

We see terrorist attacks and that conversation changed very, very quickly to one called Total Information Awareness, and this new obsession altered the way that Washington looked at these fledgling internet companies in Silicon Valley.

Google, right at the forefront, was already on record with the Federal Trade Commission as violating privacy rights with the cookies and the web bugs and the various early tracking procedures that they were implementing.

As a result of the so-called war on terror, Washington developed an unwritten doctrine that I’ve called surveillance exceptionalism — the idea that these budding tech companies would be allowed to develop their surveillance capabilities outside of democratic oversight, outside of constitutional constraints, and that ultimately these massive oceans of human-generated information that the tech companies would provide would be available to the state when they needed to avail themselves …

[This] allowed the state to pursue surveillance and allow the companies to develop and amplify, root and elaborate a complex economic logic called surveillance capitalism, which has now become the dominant economic logic.

So, what we have is for these last two decades our democracies chose to be surveillance societies instead of choosing to be democratic societies with the digital underneath that umbrella of democracy … and constrained by democratic constitutional constraints.”

Now, we’re at a point where the once fledgling startups have morphed into immense information empires, and control of our information and our privacy is in their hands.

The COVID-19 pandemic has made it clear how valuable digital technologies are acting as a safety net to allow many activities to continue, but because governments haven’t dealt with fundamental issues to protect privacy and digital rights, these information empires continue to own and operate the internet and global means of communication.

These monopolies lead to uncontrolled power that, in turn, leads the people to be even more constrained and living in a society based increasingly on surveillance. “When a human is seen as a resource and not as a citizen,” Vestager said, “well then democracy is undermined.”

COVID-19 Triggered a Rapid Digital Transformation

It’s likely that, in 20 years, we’ll look back at the pandemic as another pivotal point in the digital age, as it triggered one of the most rapid digital transformations in history. One thing it’s made clear is the many nuances that are lost during digital communication, leading Vestager to point out that the point of technology is not to become full-scale but to be used only when it’s useful.

“Humans, in order to stay human, we need to come together, because we educate each other, we develop together and we need each other in order to do that,” she said. “So, my hope over the next 20 years is that we will keep technology in its place as a tool and that we will stay proud and vigilant.”

What we’re seeing now, however, is a society with no escape from surveillance capitalism. From getting medical test results to making dinner plans with friends or relaxing at home with your smart TV, you’re encountering various surveillance capitalism supply chains. Google has also infiltrated education with its Google classrooms, usage of which has skyrocketed during the pandemic.

About 80% of students globally are now doing some type of remote learning, and many of them are using Google classroom or other platforms that also have surveillance capabilities. The Attorney General of New Mexico filed a suit against Google for its educational tools in its classroom suite, helping to “break through the fog,” Zuboff says, but many aren’t aware that even their children are being tracked:

“[The suit is bringing to light how they’re] identifying the huge amounts of data that they’re taking about kids, how they track them across the internet and integrate it with all the other Google streams of information and have it as a foundation for tracking those children all the way through their adulthood.”

The Digital Silver Lining

The silver lining is that many are beginning to realize that this is intolerable and something that citizens of democratic societies shouldn’t have to face. As a result, Zuboff says she believes the pandemic will mark the time of democratic resurgence.

“This is going to operate like the Great Depression. The Great Depression was a terrible crisis but it brought forth a sense that, no more, we must create the institutions, the laws and the rights that will protect us from this ever happening again.”

As it stands, there’s an unacceptable concentration of power in a handful of companies that are controlling the information empire, and the global data they’ve amassed is not being used for the public good but, rather, to advance the financial interests of surveillance capitalists and their clients.

By interrupting this “rogue economic logic,” Zuboff explains, the data can be freed for public uses, for those who want to use it to solve problems for the public good, while at the same time building trust and confidence toward a different, better kind of digital future. To get to this point, we need epistemic rights. Zuboff says:

“Part of the big picture is we need to be working on the charters of rights that are necessary in this historical moment — rights that never came under fire before but are now under attack. I call these to begin with epistemic rights.

[They are] the rights to know who gets to know about my life, who decides who gets to know, who decides who decides who gets to know. These issues of knowledge, authority and power need to be translated into rights as we begin to identify these rights.

We have the tools to truly interrupt and outlaw surveillance capitalism, because taking my face is an act of theft and it should be a criminal act. If I’m going to give my face for an enterprise that’s collecting data maybe for this treatment, maybe for improving some other aspect of public health, then this is my choice …

I do it transparently, and I do it understanding what my data will be used for, how it will be used, how it will be shared and so on and so forth. So, from these rights we can develop the tools the laws and the institutions that we need to fundamentally change.”

Benjamin Fulford 7-6-20… “Bilderberg Founder Ex-Queen Beatrix Offers Vladimir Putin Huge Bribe to Steal Global Wealth” REPOST

[Kp note: I’m reposting this as the link was not correctly posted. The first posting will be removed.]

New weekly report from Ben.

As always, suggest to follow Higher Discernment with all information such as this.

“The battle to liberate Planet Earth has reached a key juncture: the choice between freedom or techno-slavery. The faction that wants to kill 90% of humanity, then microchip and enslave the rest, is now making a big push to steal global wealth. Specifically, ex-queen Beatrix of Holland, together with Rothschild family members in Switzerland, offered Russian President Vladimir Putin an astronomical bribe to help them, together with the lifetime rule of Russia.

“As this report was about to go live we received unconfirmed reports that David de Rothschild, head of the French branch of the family, was arrested in Zurich, Switzerland. Keep your eyes out for announcements concerning Beatrix and Putin.

“As this report was about to go live we received unconfirmed reports that David de Rothschild, head of the French branch of the family, was arrested in Zurich, Switzerland. Keep your eyes out for announcements concerning Beatrix and Putin.”

—————————————————————————

Bilderberg Founder Ex-Queen Beatrix Offers Vladimir Putin Huge Bribe to Steal Global Wealth
By Benjamin Fulford July 6, 2020

The battle to liberate Planet Earth has reached a key juncture: the choice between freedom or techno-slavery. The faction that wants to kill 90% of humanity, then microchip and enslave the rest, is now making a big push to steal global wealth. Specifically, ex-queen Beatrix of Holland, together with Rothschild family members in Switzerland, offered Russian President Vladimir Putin an astronomical bribe to help them, together with the lifetime rule of Russia.

Last week, acting on Putin’s orders, Serbian gangsters illegally detained a Golden Dragon Family representative, family sources say. They are now trying to force her to hand over the keys to quadrillions of dollars in wealth. If they succeed, humanity will be in big trouble.

Remember, the Dutch Royals have always been high-ranking Nazis. It is they and their Nazi camp followers like Bill Gates who are behind the push to replace cash with digital money. People will have to accept being microchipped in order to access their digital wallets with free government support payments, NSA sources say. The microchips will allow for complete and permanent control of the global population by the Satan worshipping Khazarian Mafia. These are the people pushing the COVID-19 (Certificate Of Vaccination ID-19) scamdemic.

For this reason, a copy of the passport of the detained Dragon Family member has been given to various intelligence agencies. If they fail to arrest the Dutch Royals and the Rothschild family members hiding in Switzerland, then the White Dragon Society will be forced to consider more drastic measures. The WDS has nuclear weapons at its disposal that could be used to target the Hague, Tel Aviv and Zurich (local people will be given time to evacuate) if the Dragon Family representative is not released.

As this report was about to go live we received unconfirmed reports that David de Rothschild, head of the French branch of the family, was arrested in Zurich, Switzerland. Keep your eyes out for announcements concerning Beatrix and Putin.

The detained Dragon family representative holds the keys to releasing to humanity quadrillions in gold-backed currency. The money is intended to be used to finance a jubilee, followed by a massive campaign to end poverty and stop environmental destruction.

Without this financial freedom, the world could be headed for extremely dangerous and chaotic times. Pentagon sources say that already, inside the U.S., the Rothschilds and their Nazi Dutch royal allies are financing…

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net. Please Log In or Register to create an account