Pfizer partnering with Ido Bachelet on DNA nanorobots
OUTRAGED HUMAN
“No, no it’s not science fiction; it’s already happening,” said Ido Bachelet to a somewhat incredulous audience member








https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzLTWU2EqP4 Ido Bachelet - Moonshot Thinking


... when they cause too much damage by mistake...

or intentionally...


5:12

study your biology and activate targeted medication when necessary.


5:36

We also know how to remote-control these robots, using magnetic fields.

5:40

Furthermore, we can control them, as you saw in the clip, with a joystick,

5:43

directing them to a specific part of the body,

5:46

and then activating them with the push of a button.

5:49

We have also connected this joystick to the internet.

5:51

Our robots have a IP address,

5:54

so you can connect with them from afar and activate them online.



6:01

Imagine that in a couple of years,

6:03

your doctor will be able to sit at home with his smartphone,

6:05

and instead of playing "Candy Crush"

6:08

he will connect with the robots inside of you,

6:11

activate a certain medication and possibly even save you, just in time.

AND IMAGINE THAT YOU WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW IT, YOU WOULDN'T BE TOLD ABOUT IT.

AND THAT IN ORDER TO IMPLANT/INJECT IT, YOU WOULD BE TOLD THAT THERE IS A DREADFUL PANDEMIC, AND AT EVERY STEP YOU WOULD BE FORCED TO TAKE IT AS A NECESSARY "VACCINATION." AND A “PCR TEST”.

BY YOUR GOVERNMENT, THE AIRLINES, THE EMPLOYER, THE WAITER AT THE RESTAURANT, THE FDA, THE EMA, THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION...

AND YET IMAGINE THAT MANY PEOPLE WOULD DIE FROM IT, AND THEY WOULD BE YOUR RELATIVES AND FRIENDS.

BUT YOU WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THAT IT WAS BECAUSE OF IT.

IMAGINE BEING SURROUNDED BY CENSORSHIP, BEING RIDICULED, HAVING YOUR RIGHTS TO DO YOUR JOB, MOVE AROUND, OR EVEN SPEAK THE TRUTH AT ALL TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU....

ISN’T THIS A BRIGHT FURTURE AND A FANTASTIC REALITY?

ARE YOU AGAINST SCIENCE? AGAINST PROGRESS? AGAINST PREVENTING DISEASES?



https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/05/pfizer-partnering-with-ido-bachelet-on.html

Pfizer is cooperating with the DNA robot laboratory managed by Prof. Ido Bachelet at Bar-Ilan University. Bachelet has developed a method of producing innovative DNA molecules with characteristics that can be used to "program" them to reach specific locations in the body and carry out pre-programmed operations there in response to stimulation from the body. This cooperation was revealed in a lecture by Pfizer president of worldwide research and development (WRD), portfolio strategy and investment committee chairman, and executive VP Mikael Dolstein at the IATI Biomed Conference in Tel Aviv being concluded today.

Research will focus on the possibility that the robots will deliver the medical proteins to designated tissue.

Bachelet came to Bar-Ilan from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) several years ago. At a Tedmed event held two years ago, he explained, "In order to make a nanometric robot, we first of all create a selected DNA sequence, and then fold it using a process called DNA origami. With this method, a person can give a command to a computer, which folds the DNA molecule as needed.

"The result is that a DNA sequence can be made in the form of a clam, for example, and containing a drug. The DNA molecule, however, contains a code activated upon encountering certain materials in the body. For example, the clam can be designed to change its shape and release the drug only when it meets a cancer cell or the right tissue.

"In addition, the molecules can receive signals from each other, and can theoretically change their shape according to signals from the body, and can be pre-programmed to attach themselves to one another. In the future, it will be possible to combine each such molecule with a miniature antenna. When the antenna receives an external signal, it will make a small change in the molecule that will make it open or close, and dissipate or connect itself to another molecule."



In a brief talk, Bachelet said DNA nanobots will soon be tried in a critically ill leukemia patient. The patient, who has been given roughly six months to live, will receive an injection of DNA nanobots designed to interact with and destroy leukemia cells—while causing virtually zero collateral damage in healthy tissue.

According to Bachelet, his team have successfully tested their method in cell cultures and animals and written two papers on the subject, one in Science and one in Nature.

Contemporary cancer therapies involving invasive surgery and blasts of drugs can be as painful and damaging to the body as the disease itself. If Bachelet's approach proves successful in humans, and is backed by more research in the coming years, the team’s work could signal a transformational moment in cancer treatment.

If this treatment works this will be a medical breakthrough and can be used for many other diseases by delivering drugs more effectively without causing side effects.

2012 Video with answers from George Church, Ido Bachelet and Shawn Douglas on the medical DNA double helix clamshell nanobucket nanobot



George Church indicates the smart DNA nanobot has applications beyond nanomedicine. Applications where there is any need for programmable and targeted release or interaction at the cellular or near molecular scale.

2014 Geek Time Presentation from Ido Bachelet



“AND THE LAST THING I AM GOING TO SCHOW YOU IS… PANDEMIC.

SO, WE ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT PANDEMICS… ESPECIALLY INFLUENZA PANDEMICS.

SO THE BEST WAY TO AVOID PANDEMICS OR TO HANDLE PANDEMICS, IS SIMPLY TO KNOW WHERE THE VIRUS IS AND NOT TO BE THERE…

IT SOUNDS STUPID, BUT IT IS ACTUALLY THE CASE…

IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY WHERE THE VIRUS IS IN REAL TIME AND YOU CAN CONTAIN THAT AREA, YOU WOULD STOP THE PANDEMIC, YOU WOULD STOP THE DISEASE… OK?


SO, WHAT WE DEVELOPED IS A SENSOR… COMPOSED OF CARBON NANOTUBES FUNCTIONALIZED WITH ALL KIND OF THINGS… THE SENSOR IS EXTREMELY SENSITIVE… WE’VE BUILT THIS APPLICATION… THEY SEND THEIR GPS COORDINATES TO OUR SERVER SO WE CAN SORT OF RECONSTRUCT A REAL MAP…

I HOPE YOU ENJOYED THIS AND UNDESTOOND WHAT BIONICS IS ALL ABOUT…

At the British Friends of Bar-Ilan University's event in Otto Uomo October 2014 Professor Ido Bachelet announced the beginning of the human treatment with nanomedicine. He indicates DNA nanobots can currently identify cells in humans with 12 different types of cancer tumors.

A human patient with late stage leukemia will be given DNA nanobot treatment. Without the DNA nanobot treatment the patient would be expected to die in the summer of 2015. Based upon animal trials they expect to remove the cancer within one month.

Within 1 or 2 years they hope to have spinal cord repair working in animals and then shortly thereafter in humans. This is working in tissue cultures.

Previously Ido Bachelet and Shawn Douglas have published work on DNA nanobots in the journal Nature and other respected science publications.

One Trillion 50 nanometer nanobots in a syringe will be injected into people to perform cellular surgery.

The DNA nanobots have been tuned to not cause an immune response.
They have been adjusted for different kinds of medical procedures. Procedures can be quick or ones that last many days.


Medicine or treatment released based upon molecular sensing - Only targeted cells are treated

Ido's daughter has a leg disease which requires frequent surgery. He is hoping his DNA nanobots will make the type of surgery she needs relatively trivial - a simple injection at a doctor's office.

We can control powerful drugs that were already developed

Effective drugs that were withdrawn from the market for excessive toxicity can be combined with DNA nanobots for effective delivery. The tiny molecular computers of the DNA nanobots can provide molecular selective control for powerful medicines that were already developed.

Using DNA origami and molecular programming, they are reality. These nanobots can seek and kill cancer cells, mimic social insect behaviors, carry out logical operators like a computer in a living animal, and they can be controlled from an Xbox. Ido Bachelet from the bio-design lab at Bar Ilan University explains this technology and how it will change medicine in the near future.

Ido Bachelet earned his Ph.D. from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and was a postdoctoral fellow at M.I.T. and Harvard University. He is currently an assistant professor in the Faculty of Life Sciences and the Nano-Center at Bar Ilan University, Israel, the founder of several biotech companies, and a composer of music for piano and molecules.


Researchers have injected various kinds of DNA nanobots into cockroaches. Because the nanobots are labelled with fluorescent markers, the researchers can follow them and analyse how different robot combinations affect where substances are delivered. The team says the accuracy of delivery and control of the nanobots is equivalent to a computer system.

This is the development of the vision of nanomedicine.
This is the realization of the power of DNA nanotechnology.
This is programmable dna nanotechnology.

The DNA nanotechnology cannot perform atomically precise chemistry (yet), but having control of the DNA combined with advanced synthetic biology and control of proteins and nanoparticles is clearly developing into very interesting capabilities.

"This is the first time that biological therapy has been able to match how a computer processor works," says co-author Ido Bachelet of the Institute of Nanotechnology and Advanced Materials at Bar Ilan University.

The team says it should be possible to scale up the computing power in the cockroach to that of an 8-bit computer, equivalent to a Commodore 64 or Atari 800 from the 1980s. Goni-Moreno agrees that this is feasible. "The mechanism seems easy to scale up so the complexity of the computations will soon become higher," he says.

An obvious benefit of this technology would be cancer treatments, because these must be cell-specific and current treatments are not well-targeted. But a treatment like this in mammals must overcome the immune response triggered when a foreign object enters the body.

Bachelet is confident that the team can enhance the robots' stability so that they can survive in mammals. "There is no reason why preliminary trials on humans can't start within five years," he says

Biological systems are collections of discrete molecular objects that move around and collide with each other. Cells carry out elaborate processes by precisely controlling these collisions, but developing artificial machines that can interface with and control such interactions remains a significant challenge. DNA is a natural substrate for computing and has been used to implement a diverse set of mathematical problems, logic circuits and robotics. The molecule also interfaces naturally with living systems, and different forms of DNA-based biocomputing have already been demonstrated. Here, we show that DNA origami can be used to fabricate nanoscale robots that are capable of dynamically interacting with each other in a living animal. The interactions generate logical outputs, which are relayed to switch molecular payloads on or off. As a proof of principle, we use the system to create architectures that emulate various logic gates (AND, OR, XOR, NAND, NOT, CNOT and a half adder). Following an ex vivo prototyping phase, we successfully used the DNA origami robots in living cockroaches (Blaberus discoidalis) to control a molecule that targets their cells.

Nature Nanotechnology - Universal computing by DNA origami robots in a living animal


44 pages of supplemental information

Ido Bachelet's moonshot to use nanorobotics for surgery has the potential to change lives globally. But who is the man behind the moonshot?

Ido graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem with a PhD in pharmacology and experimental therapeutics. Afterwards he did two postdocs; one in engineering at MIT and one in synthetic biology in the lab of George Church at the Wyss Institute at Harvard.

Now, his group at Bar-Ilan University designs and studies diverse technologies inspired by nature.

They will deliver enzymes that break down cells via programmable nanoparticles.
Delivering insulin to tell cells to grow and regenerate tissue at the desired location.
Surgery would be performed by putting the programmable nanoparticles into saline and injecting them into the body to seek out remove bad cells and grow new cells and perform other medical work.


Research group website is here.












SOLVE FOR DISEASE X?

https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-pfizer-to-collaborate-on-bar-ilan-dna-robots-1001036703


Pfizer is cooperating with the DNA robot laboratory managed by Prof. Ido Bachelet at Bar-Ilan University. Bachelet has developed a method of producing innovative DNA molecules with characteristics that can be used to "program" them to reach specific locations in the body and carry out pre-programmed operations there in response to stimulation from the body. This cooperation was revealed in a lecture by Pfizer president of worldwide research and development (WRD), portfolio strategy and investment committee chairman, and executive VP Mikael Dolstein at the IATI Biomed Conference in Tel Aviv being concluded today.

Bar-Ilan Research & Development Co. CEO Orli Tori said, "This is Pfizer's first cooperative venture with someone in Israeli higher education. The technology is fairly new for a drug company, but Pfizer has agreed to take up the challenge and support this technology, in the hope that it will make a contribution to the company at the proper time.

"As in all of our research agreements, the company coming from the industry has the right to negotiate the acquisition of the technology at the end of the process." The financial volume of the deal was not disclosed, but most such agreements amount to several hundred thousand dollars at most. The medical sector in which cooperation will take place was also not disclosed,

but it appears that research will focus on the possibility that the robots will deliver the medical proteins to designated tissue.

Bachelet came to Bar-Ilan from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) several years ago. At a Tedmed event held two years ago, he explained, "In order to make a nanometric robot, we first of all create a selected DNA sequence, and then fold it using a process called DNA origami. With this method, a person can give a command to a computer, which folds the DNA molecule as needed.

"The result is that a DNA sequence can be made in the form of a clam, for example, and containing a drug. The DNA molecule, however, contains a code activated upon encountering certain materials in the body. For example, the clam can be designed to change its shape and release the drug only when it meets a cancer cell or the right tissue.

"In addition, the molecules can receive signals from each other, and can theoretically change their shape according to signals from the body, and can be pre-programmed to attach themselves to one another. In the future, it will be possible to combine each such molecule with a miniature antenna.

When the antenna receives an external signal, it will make a small change in the molecule that will make it open or close, and dissipate or connect itself to another molecule."

Tori adds, "What is special about the robots is that they open and close according to signals from the surroundings, and that makes it possible to manage the disease. The robot exposes the drug to the target site according to biological signs within the body. For example were we to develop a product for diabetes, although that is not the purpose of this cooperation, it would be possible to develop a robot that would release insulin only when it sensed a rise in the blood sugar level."

Published by Globes [online], Israel business news - www.globes-online.com - on May 14, 2015

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2015/03/ido-bachelet-dna-nanobots-summary-with.html

Disadvantages

1. Designing of nanorobot is very costly and complicated

2. Stray field might be created from electrical systems which can trigger bioelectric based molecular recognition system in biology

3. Electrical nanorobots remain vulnerable to electrical interference from other sources like radiofrequency or electric fields, electromagnetic pulse and stray fields from other in-vivo electronic devices.

4. Nanorobots are difficult to design, and customize

5. These are capable of molecular level destruction of human body thus it can cause terrible effect in terrorism field. Terrorist may make usage of nanorobots as a tool for torturing opponent community

6. Other possible threat associated with nanorobots is privacy issue.

As it dealt with designing of miniature form of devices, there are risks for snooping than that exist already.

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200718043030/https://pharmascope.org/ijrps/article/download/2523/5031]

[https://web.archive.org/web/20150911233849/http://www.nanosafe.org/home/liblocal/docs/Nanosafe%202014/Session%201/PL1%20-%20Fran%C3%A7ois%20TARDIF.pdf]

NANOROBOTS:

SOCIETAL CONCERNS: INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, TRANSHUMANISM!!!

http://immortality-roadmap.com/nanorisk.pdf










http://jddtonline.info/index.php/jddt/article/download/891/533

There are several drawbacks with this technology like toxicity, contamination. Sometime human body generates strong immune response against them.

https://web.archive.org/web/20051218111931/http://teknologiskfremsyn.dk:80/download/58.pdf


“Nanotubes can be highly toxic”

Fifteen percent of the rats treated with carbon nanotubes suffocated to death within twenty-four hours due to clumping of the nanotubes that obstructed the bronchial passageways.








Toxicity- the issue of toxicity of nanoparticles was raised as an area in which more research is needed, particularly in terms of whether the regulatory system is sufficient.




…

And it's injected into people, soldiers, children, even infants…

Thank you Zz for this link.



Pfizer partnering with Ido Bachelet on DNA nano robots.

“No, no it’s not science fiction; it’s already happening,” said Ido Bachelet to a somewhat incredulous audience member, displaying a test tube in which he says just one drop contains approximately 1,000 billiard robots.

https://outraged.substack.com/p/pfizer-partnering-with-ido-bachelet?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=1087020&post_id=143153580&utm_campaign=956088&isFreemail=true&r=1sq9d8&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Follow @zeeemedia
Website | X | Instagram | Rumble

https://telegra.ph/Pfizer-partnering-with-Ido-Bachelet-on-DNA-nanorobots-04-03

The emergence of nanobot society
OUTRAGED HUMAN













So, they injected it into the military, police, emergency services.... Now everyone is injected with a device with a "real IP ADDRESS"....






0:00

Thank you very much. So one word of notice before we begin,

0:03

all the technologies that you are going to see here now are real.

0:06

And with that said

0:07

I'd like to first tell you the story about

0:10

this uh... little girl named Dana

0:12

she's very special for me because she's my daugther

0:14

and Dana was born with a leg condition requiring frequent surgeries like this one

0:19

uh... she had when we were in Boston

0:21

and um... I remember taking her to that particular surgery

0:25

and uh...

0:26

I rembember her being admitted and she was excited at first

0:31

and then just before they got into her the OR

0:33

I looked at her and she was... afraid, she was little worried and

0:38

who wouldn't be? Because surgeries today are complicated

0:41

and they're often very risky.

0:42

Now let's imagine a few years into the future, into the near future hopefully,

0:47

Dana will arrive to hospital for her ??? surgery

0:50

and instead of being prepped for anesthesia for the OR

0:54

the surgeon will just take a syringe and inside the syringe

0:58

there are millions of tiny robots, of tiny machines

1:02

that will be injected into Dana's bloodstream.

1:04

They will autonomously locate the place they need to be in,

1:08

they will excite out the injured tissue,

1:11

then will remove dead cells,

1:13

then they will...

1:14

stimulate and guide the regrowth of healthy cells across those tissue gaps,

1:18

they will release drugs that relief pain and reduce inflammation

1:23

and all the while Dana will be sitting on the chair

1:25

eating a sandwich, reading a book, might be the next

1:28

twilight saga book which she'll be able to read because she will be 16 by then

1:32

And...(giggles)

1:33

uh... when these robots

1:35

have completed their job they'll simply disintegrate

1:39

and disappear from her bloodstream the next day.

1:42

So these nanobots have been envisioned in the past 30 years

1:45

by people like Eric Drexler, Robert Freitas and Ray Kuzweil.

1:49

Today I'm going to show you that these robots exist

1:51

here in Israel.

1:54

I'll show you this syringe

1:56

which I've brought from my lab.

1:58

So this syringe has inside it a thousand billion robots.

2:03

So these robots are each fifty nanometers

2:06

long as you can see in this slide under the microscope.

2:11

Fifty nanometers is about 2000 times thinner than the thickness of your hair

2:16

OK? And... umm... These robots were born actually 3 years ago

2:20

in a research I did with Shawn Douglas, now a UCSF Professor.

2:24

But over the past year and a half

2:25

in my group at Bar-Ilan University

2:27

We've been developing and testing robots for a variety of

2:31

medical and therapeutic tasks.

2:33

We've invented ways of making them safe for use

2:37

and non-inmunogenic

2:38

and we learned how to tune their stability in our bloodstream

2:41

to fit either short-term or long-term

2:44

even days long medical procedures.

2:47

So to carry out medical and therapeutic procedures in our body

2:50

with the upmost precision,

2:51

we need to be able to control molecules

2:53

Controlling molecules is a very simple challenge

2:56

in modern scientific knowledge.

2:58

OK? Let's speak for example about the class of molecules we know as drugs

3:02

So despite...

3:04

amazing progress made in the past four decades

3:06

the way we think about drugs and we the way we use drugs

3:09

has been essentially unchanged

3:11

and it's similar as two hundred years ago

3:14

right? You hear about about big pharmaceutical companies

3:17

spending huge amounts of money

3:19

searching for better, safer drugs.

3:22

Attempts that usually fail.

3:24

OK? but,

3:25

searching for let's say a safer cancer drug,

3:28

half it is a concept that has a flaw in it.

3:30

Because searching for a safer cancer drug

3:32

is basically like searching for a gun that kills only bad people

3:36

We don't search for such guns,

3:37

what we do is training soldiers to use that gun properly

3:42

Of course in drugs we can't do this because it seems very hard

3:45

But there are things we can do with drugs

3:47

for example, we can put the drugs

3:49

in particles from which they difuse slowly.

3:51

We can attach a drug to a carrier

3:54

which takes someplace but, this is not real control.

3:57

When we were thinking about control we're thinking about

4:00

processes is the real world around us

4:02

and what happens when we want to control a process

4:06

that's beyond our capabilities as humans

4:08

we just connect this process to a computer

4:10

and let the computer control this process for us.

4:13

OK? So that's what we do.

4:15

But obviously this cannot be done with drugs because

4:19

the drugs are so much smaller than the computers as we know them

4:23

The computer is in fact so much bigger

4:25

it's about a hundred million times bigger that any drug molecule.

4:28

Our nanobots which were in the syringe

4:31

solve this problem because they are in fact

4:34

computers the size of molecules.

4:36

and they can interact with molecules

4:38

and they can control molecules directly,

4:40

so just think about all those

4:42

drugs that have been withdrawn from the market

4:45

for excessive toxicity

4:46

right?

4:47

It doesn't mean that they are not effective,

4:49

they were amazingly effective,

4:51

they were just guns shooting in all directions

4:53

but in the hands of a well-trained soldier

4:56

or a well-programed nanobot

4:58

using all the existing drugs

5:01

we could hypothetically kill almost any disease.

5:05

So we might not need even new drugs.

5:07

We have amazing drugs already,

5:09

we just don't know how to control them, this is the problem

5:11

and our nanobots...

5:13

hopefully solve this problem and I'll show you how.

5:15

So there is an interesting question "how do we build

5:19

a robot or a machine the size of a molecule?"

5:21

so the simple answer would be: we can use molecules

5:25

to build this machine.

5:26

So we're using molecules, but we're not using just any molecule.

5:30

We're using the perfect, most beautiful molecule on earth, at least in my opinion,

5:34

which is DNA.

5:36

And in fact every part of the robot,

5:38

every part of out nanorobots:

5:40

Moving parts, axis, locks, chasis, software,

5:44

everything is made from DNA molecules.

5:46

And the techonology that enables us to do this

5:49

originated thirty years ago when the pioneering works of Nadrian Seeman,

5:52

culminating 7 years ago in the works of Paul Rothemund from Caltech,

5:56

which was also featured in TED,

5:58

and it's called DNA origami.

5:59

Now in DNA origami we do not use a piece of paper,

6:02

we use a single long strand of DNA

6:05

and we fold it into virtually any shape we want.

6:08

For example these shapes, so these are actual microscopic images

6:12

of shapes the size of molecules that were folded from DNA.

6:16

so the smiley you see here in the center of the screen for example

6:19

are a hundred nanometers in size

6:21

and we make billions of them in few... in a single reaction.

6:24

Now since 2006 several researchers, really talented ones,

6:28

have been expanding the limits of the technically feasible in DNA origami

6:32

and now we have an astonishig array of shapes and objects which we can build

6:35

using this technique.

6:36

And these researchers also gave us computer-aided design tools

6:41

that enable everyone

6:43

very very simply to design objects from DNA

6:46

So these CAD tools amazingly

6:49

enable us to focus o n the shape we want

6:52

forgetting the fact that these structures are in fact assemblies of molecules.

6:57

so this is for example a shape the computer can actually turn into DNA molecules.

7:02

and the output of this CAD software, as you can see,

7:05

is a spreadsheet with fragments of DNA

7:08

which you can attach to a message and send to a company

7:11

one of two dozen companies that make DNA by order and you'll get those DNA's

7:16

several days later to your doorstep

7:18

and when you get them all you need to do is just mix them in a certain way

7:23

and these molecular bricks will self-assemble into

7:26

millions of copies of the very structure that you designed using that CAD software

7:30

which is free by the way, you can download it for free.

7:34

So, let's have a look at our nanorobots.

7:38

So, this is how the nanorobots look like, it's built from DNA as you can see

7:42

And it resembles a clam shell in which you can put cargo

7:45

You can load anything you want starting from small molecules, drugs,

7:49

proteines, enzymes, even nano-particles. Virtually any function

7:54

that molecules can carry out, can be loaded into the nanobot

7:57

and the nanobot can be programmed to turn on and off

8:01

these functions at certain places and at certain times

8:05

this is how we control those molecules

8:07

and so this particular nanorobot is in an off state, it's closed,it's securely

8:12

sequestres anything, any payload you put inside

8:16

so it's not accessible to the outside of the robot,

8:18

for example, it cannot engage target cells or target tissues

8:22

But we can program the nanobot to switch to an on state

8:26

based on molecular cues it finds from the environment

8:30

so programming the robot is virtually like assemblying a combination lock

8:34

using disks that recognize digits,

8:37

but of course instead of digits we are assemblying disks that recognize molecules.

8:42

So these robots can turn from off to on and when they do

8:47

any cargo inside is now accessible,

8:49

it can attack target cells or target tissues

8:52

or other robots which you'll see later on.

8:54

And so we have robots that can switch from off to on

8:58

and off again, we can control their kinetics of transition.

9:02

We can control which payload becomes accessible at which time point

9:05

Let's see an example how these robots for example control a cancer drug

9:12

So what you can do is you can take nanobots,

9:14

you can put the nastiest cancer drug you may find

9:17

into the robots, even a cancer drug

9:19

that's been withdrawn because of excessive toxicity

9:23

Ok? When the robot is locked

9:25

and you put them in your mixture of healthy cells and tumor cells

9:29

nothing happens, no cell is affected, because the robot

9:32

safely sequesters those drugs inside.

9:35

When we unlock the robots

9:37

all cells die because the cargo inside the [robot] attacks anything on sight.

9:42

So all cells eventually die. In this case this is a fluorescent molecule

9:46

to help us see better the output.

9:48

But when we program the nanobots to search for tumor cells particulary,

9:53

so only the tumor cells

9:56

uh... only the tumor cells die because

9:59

the robot doesn't care about the bystander cells, about the healthy cells.

10:04

So it does not harm them at all.

10:06

And we have nanorobots in our lab that can target

10:09

about ten types of cancer already and other cell targets

10:12

and my team keeps expanding this range monthly.

10:17

So these are nanorobots and to another topic

10:22

organisms in nature, like bacteria and animals

10:26

have learned very early in evolution that working in a coordinated group

10:29

conveys advantage

10:31

and capabilities beyond those of the individual

10:34

and since we are interested in

10:36

very complex medical procedures, very complex therapeutic settings,

10:40

we're wondering what we could do

10:42

if we could engineer artificial swarm behaviors

10:46

into our nanobots as well so we could have extraordinarily large groups of nanobots

10:51

Can we teach them to behave like animals, like insects

10:55

and how do you do this? So the question is interesting.

10:58

So you could think one way to do it would be

11:01

to look at a natural swarm like this one of fish

11:04

and simulate the dynamics of the entire swarm and then try to write the codes

11:09

in molecules of course

11:10

that mimic the same behaviour

11:12

this is virtually impossible, it's impractical

11:15

what we do is we take the single fish or a single nanobot in our case

11:20

and you design a very basic set of interaction rules

11:23

and then you take this one, this nanobot, you make a billion copies of it

11:27

and you let the behaviours emerge from that group

11:31

let me show you some examples of the things we can already do

11:35

for example, just as ants

11:38

can shake hands and form physical bridges between two trees

11:42

or two remote parts of the same tree,

11:44

we already have nanorobots that can reach out for each other

11:47

touch each other and shake hands in such a way

11:49

they form physical bridges.

11:51

Then you can imagine these robots

11:53

extending, making bridges extending from one-half

11:56

to the other half of an injured tissue,

11:58

an injured spinal cord for example

12:00

or an injured leg in the case of Dana, my daughter

12:03

and once they stretched over that tissue gap

12:06

they can apply growth factors, as payloads, and those growth factors

12:10

stimulate the re-growth and guide re-growth of cells across the gap.

12:14

So we already did that and...

12:17

we have robots that can cross regulate each other just like animals do in groups

12:21

and this is amazing because as you can see here

12:24

you can have two types of robots, Type-A and Type-B

12:28

they can cross regulate each other, such that "A" is active

12:32

while "B" is not and viceversa.

12:34

So this is good for combination therapy

12:36

with combination therapy we take multiple drugs, right?

12:39

and sometimes two or more of these drugs

12:41

can collide and generate side effects,

12:43

but here you can put one drug here, one drug here

12:46

and the robots will time the activities so that

12:49

one drug is active, the other is not and then they can switch

12:52

and so two or more drugs can operate at the same time without actually colliding.

12:57

Another example that we did is the quorum sensing.

13:00

Now quorum sensing is great, it's a bacterial inspired behaviour

13:05

It means nanorobots can count themselves

13:08

and they can switch to "on" only when reaching a certain population size

13:12

this is a mechanism invented by bacteria in evolution

13:15

and they regulate amazing behaviours based on just their population density

13:18

for example, bioluminescence, this one of the well-studied examples

13:23

so our robots can count themselves and switch to on

13:26

only when reaching a certain population size which we can program.

13:29

This is great because this is a mechanism of programming a drug

13:33

to become active only when reaching a certain dose

13:36

around the target, regardless of its inherent dose-response curve.

13:41

One last I'm gonna show to you is computing,

13:43

so this nanobots can do computing.

13:45

How's so? If you think about your computer at home,

13:48

the processor of the computer is in fact a gigantic swarm of transistors

13:53

In an i7 core for example you have 800 million transistors approximately

13:58

and they're set to interact in certain ways to produce logic gates

14:02

and these logic gates are set to interact to produce computations

14:05

so we can also produce computation by setting interactions between nanorobots

14:10

to emulate logic gates like you see here

14:13

and they form chains and they form pairs

14:15

and my team in Bar-Ilan University [has] already developed several architectures

14:19

of computing based on interacting nanorobots

14:22

and to prototype these

14:24

we are using animals, very interesting animals

14:27

these are cockroaches,

14:28

they are very easy to work with, the're very sweet,

14:30

they're actually from South America

14:32

and I'm a Soutamerican myself so I fell kinda related

14:35

[Laughter]

14:36

And hum... so what we do is we inject those robots into the cockroach

14:40

and to do that we of course had to put the cockroaches to sleep

14:43

have you ever tried putting cockroach to sleep?

14:46

We put in the freezer for seven minutes

14:48

in they fall asleep

14:49

and we can inject these nanorobots inside

14:52

and after 20 minutes they start running around, they're happy.

14:55

And those robots

14:57

while they're doing this, the robots read molecules

14:59

from the cockroaches' inputs

15:01

and they write their outputs in the form of drugs

15:04

activated on those cockroaches' cells

15:06

so we can do, we can see that and we already have, as you can see,

15:09

architectures of interecting nanorobots that can emulate logical operators

15:14

and you can use these as modular parts to build any type universal computer you want

15:19

[....]

15:21

that can control multiple drugs simultaneously

15:25

as a result of biocomputing, this is real universal computing in a living animal.

15:30

Now we already have systems that have [the] computing capacity

15:33

of an 8-bit computer like Commodore 64.

15:36

To make sure we don't lose control over the nanobots after they're injected

15:40

my team [has] developed nanorobots that carry antennae

15:44

these antennae are made from metal nano-particles.

15:47

Now, the antennae enable the nanobots

15:49

to respond to externally applied electromagnetic fields

15:52

so these nanorobots, this version of nanobots

15:55

can actually be activated with a press of a button on a joystick

15:58

or for example using a controller

16:01

such as the Xbox or Wii if you ever had the chance of playing with those

16:05

and you can see one of my students in the lab configuring an Xbox app

16:09

to control nanobots.

16:11

For example you can imagine nanorobots being injected

16:14

to Dana, my daughter for example,

16:16

and the doctor can guide those robots

16:19

into the site, into the leg and just activate them with a hand gesture.

16:23

And you can already see an example where we actually took

16:26

cancer cells and loaded robots with cancer drugs

16:29

and activated the drug by a hand gesture.

16:31

and we can actually kill cancer cells just by doing this,

16:34

as you can see here.

16:36

And the interesting thing is that

16:39

because the controller like the Xbox is connected to the internet,

16:44

the controller actually links those nanobots to the network

16:47

so they have an actual IP address

16:49

and they can be accessed from a remote device sitting on the same network,

16:53

for example, my doctor's smartphone

16:55

So, OK?, just like controlling a controller, this can be done.

17:00

The last thing I'm gonna show is, if you look at our body

17:04

you'll see that every cell type, every organ, every tissue

17:08

has their own unique molecular signature

17:11

and this is equivalent to a physical IP address made of molecules

17:15

and if you know these molecules

17:17

you can use those nanobots to browse the Organism Wide Web, as we call it

17:21

and you can program them to look for bits,

17:23

this could be for example signally molecules between cells,

17:26

and either fetch them for diagnostics

17:28

or carry them to different addresses.

17:30

And we already have robots that can hijack

17:33

signals between cells

17:34

and manipulate an entire network of communications between cells

17:37

and this is great for controlling very complex diseases in which many cell types

17:43

communicate and orchestrate to perpetuate a disease.

17:46

So before I finish I'd just like to thank

17:50

my amazing team at Bar-Ilan University

17:52

and all the colleagues that took part in this extraordinary journey,

17:55

starting from the George Chuch's Lab in Harvard

17:57

and ending today in Bar-Ilan University in the new Faculty of Life Sciences,

18:01

and I really hope that

18:03

anywhere between a year and five years from now

18:06

we'll be able to use this in humans

18:08

and finally witness the emergence of nanobot society.

18:11

Thank you very much.


https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nanobots-live-cockroach-thought-control/





https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/nanobots-live-cockroach-thought-control/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-scientists-use-nanobots-and-thoughts-to-administer-drugs/


Israeli scientists say they have come up with a way for brain power to control when drugs are released into the body, by using tiny robots made out of DNA to deliver the medication internally.

Researchers at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya and Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan have built the nanobots to which medication is attached and then are injected into the body. The nanobots have a “gate” that opens or closes — thereby controlling drug release — depending on brain activity.

In order to achieve this, the New Scientist magazine said, the researchers developed a computer algorithm that could tell whether a person’s brain was resting or carrying out some form of mental activity, such as math problems. A fluorescent-tinted drug was then added to the nanobots, which were injected into a cockroach placed inside an electromagnetic coil.

Israeli scientists say they have come up with a way for brain power to control when drugs are released into the body, by using tiny robots made out of DNA to deliver the medication internally.

This coil was then connected to an EEG cap worn by a person asked to perform mental calculations. The computer recognized increased brain activity by the cap wearer, which triggered the “gate” on the nanobots inside the cockroach, releasing the fluorescent drug that was visible as it spread through the insect’s body.

The idea is to use the delivery system for people with mental health issues, which are sometimes triggered before sufferers are aware they need medication.

By monitoring brain activity, the nanobots could deliver the required preventative drugs automatically,

for example before a violent episode of schizophrenia.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2102463-mind-controlled-nanobots-could-release-drugs-inside-your-brain/


The group has built nanorobots out of DNA, forming shell-like shapes that drugs can be tethered to. The bots also have a gate, which has a lock made from iron oxide nanoparticles. The lock opens when heated using electromagnetic energy, exposing the drug to the environment. Because the drug remains tethered to the DNA parcel, a body’s exposure to the drug can be controlled by closing and opening the gate.

By examining when fluorescence appeared inside different cockroaches, the team confirmed that this worked.

The idea would be to automatically trigger the release of a drug when it is needed. For example, some people don’t always know when they need medication – before a violent episode of schizophrenia, for instance. If an EEG could detect it was coming, it could stimulate the release of a preventative drug.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxJPceCV51g Nanobots Successfully Used on Living Animal for the First Time - IGN News

0:38

to treat human ailments or weaponized

0:40

hijacked by a snake themed terrorist

0:42

organization and then used to destroy

0:43

Paris but I suppose it's only a matter

0:45

of time


“This syringe has inside it a thousand billion robots.”

https://outraged.substack.com/p/the-emergence-of-nanobot-society?utm_source=cross-post&publication_id=1087020&post_id=143145132&utm_campaign=956088&isFreemail=true&r=1sq9d8&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Follow @zeeemedia
Website | X | Instagram | Rumble

https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/04/the-emergence-of-nanobot-society.html

Why Does the WHO Make False Claims Regarding Proposals to Seize States’ Sovereignty?
By David Bell, Thi Thuy Van Dinh December 11, 2023 Government, Law, Public Health 15 minute read
The Director General (DG) of the World Health Organization (WHO) states:

No country will cede any sovereignty to WHO,

referring to the WHO’s new pandemic agreement and proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), currently being negotiated. His statements are clear and unequivocal, and wholly inconsistent with the texts he is referring to.

A rational examination of the texts in question shows that:

The documents propose a transfer of decision-making power to the WHO regarding basic aspects of societal function, which countries undertake to enact.
The WHO DG will have sole authority to decide when and where they are applied.
The proposals are intended to be binding under international law.
Continued claims that sovereignty is not lost, echoed by politicians and media, therefore raise important questions concerning motivations, competence, and ethics.

The intent of the texts is a transfer of decision-making currently vested in Nations and individuals to the WHO, when its DG decides that there is a threat of a significant disease outbreak or other health emergency likely to cross multiple national borders. It is unusual for Nations to undertake to follow external entities regarding the basic rights and healthcare of their citizens, more so when this has major economic and geopolitical implications.

The question of whether sovereignty is indeed being transferred, and the legal status of such an agreement, is therefore of vital importance, particularly to the legislators of democratic States. They have an absolute duty to be sure of their ground. We systematically examine that ground here.

The Proposed IHR Amendments and Sovereignty in Health Decision-Making

Amending the 2005 IHR may be a straightforward way to quickly deploy and enforce “new normal” health control measures. The current text applies to virtually the entire global population, counting 196 States Parties including all 194 WHO Member States. Approval may or may not require a formal vote of the World Health Assembly (WHA), as the recent 2022 amendment was adopted through consensus. If the same approval mechanism is to be used in May 2024, many countries and the public may remain unaware of the broad scope of the new text and its implications to national and individual sovereignty.

The IHR are a set of recommendations under a treaty process that has force under international law. They seek to provide the WHO with some moral authority to coordinate and lead responses when an international health emergency, such as pandemic, occurs. Most are non-binding, and these contain very specific examples of measures that the WHO can recommend, including (Article 18):

require medical examinations;
review proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis;
require vaccination or other prophylaxis;
place suspect persons under public health observation;
implement quarantine or other health measures for suspect persons;
implement isolation and treatment where necessary of affected persons;
implement tracing of contacts of suspect or affected persons;
refuse entry of suspect and affected persons;
refuse entry of unaffected persons to affected areas; and
implement exit screening and/or restrictions on persons from affected areas.
These measures, when implemented together, are generally referred to since early 2020 as ‘lockdowns’ and ‘mandates.’ ‘Lockdown’ was previously a term reserved for people incarcerated as criminals, as it removes basic universally accepted human rights and such measures were considered by the WHO to be detrimental to public health. However, since 2020 it has become the default standard for public health authorities to manage epidemics, despite its contradictions to multiple stipulations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR):

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind including no arbitrary detention (Article 9).
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence (Article 12).
Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state, and Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country (Article 13).
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers (Article 19).
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association (Article 20).
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government (Article 21).
Everyone has the right to work (Article 23).
Everyone has the right to education (Article 26).
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized (Article 28).
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein (Article 30).
These UDHR stipulations are the basis of the modern concept of individual sovereignty, and the relationship between authorities and their populations. Considered the highest codification of the rights and freedoms of individuals in the 20th century, they may soon be dismantled behind closed doors in a meeting room in Geneva.

The proposed amendments will change the “recommendations” of the current document to requirements through three mechanisms on

Removing the term ‘non-binding’ (Article 1),
Inserting the phrase that Member States will “undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations” and recognize WHO, not as an organization under the control of countries, but as the “coordinating authority” (New Article 13A).
States Parties recognize WHO as the guidance and coordinating authority of international public health response during public health Emergency of International Concern and undertake to follow WHO’s recommendations in their international public health response.

As Article 18 makes clear above, these include multiple actions directly restricting individual liberty. If transfer of decision-making power (sovereignty) is not intended here, then the current status of the IHR as ‘recommendations’ could remain and countries would not be undertaking to follow the WHO’s requirements.

States Parties undertake to enact what previously were merely recommendations, without delay, including requirements of WHO regarding non-State entities under their jurisdiction (Article 42):
Health measures taken pursuant to these Regulations, including the recommendations made under Articles 15 and 16, shall be initiated and completed without delay by all State Parties and applied in a transparent, equitable and non-discriminatory manner. State Parties shall also take measures to ensure Non-State Actors operating in their respective territories comply with such measures.

Articles 15 and 16 mentioned here allow the WHO to require a State to provide resources “health products, technologies, and know-how,” and to allow the WHO to deploy personnel into the country (i.e., have control over entry across national borders for those they choose). They also repeat the requirement for the country to require the implementation of medical countermeasures (e.g., testing, vaccines, quarantine) on their population where WHO demands it.

Of note, the proposed Article 1 amendment (removing ‘non-binding’) is actually redundant if New Article 13A and/or the changes in Article 42 remain. This can (and likely will) be removed from the final text, giving an appearance of compromise without changing the transfer of sovereignty.

All of the public health measures in Article 18, and additional ones such as limiting freedom of speech to reduce public exposure to alternative viewpoints (Annex 1, New 5 (e); “…counter misinformation and disinformation”) clash directly with the UDHR. Although freedom of speech is currently the exclusive purview of national authorities and its restriction is generally seen as negative and abusive, United Nations institutions, including the WHO, have been advocating for censoring unofficial views in order to protect what they call “information integrity.”

It seems outrageous from a human rights perspective that the amendments will enable the WHO to dictate countries to require individual medical examinations and vaccinations whenever it declares a pandemic. While the Nuremberg Code and Declaration of Helsinki refer specifically to human experimentation (e.g. clinical trials of vaccines) and the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights also to the provider-patient relationship, they can reasonably be extended to public health measures that impose restrictions or changes to human behavior, and specifically to any measures requiring injection, medication, or medical examination which involve a direct provider-person interaction.

If vaccines or drugs are still under trial or not fully tested, then the issue of being the subject of an experiment is also real. There is a clear intent to employ the CEPI ‘100 day’ vaccine program, which by definition cannot complete meaningful safety or efficacy trials within that time span.

Forced examination or medication, outside of a situation where the recipient is clearly not mentally competent to comply or reject when provided with information, is unethical. Requiring compliance in order to access what are considered basic human rights under the UDHR would constitute coercion. If this does not fit the WHO’s definition of infringement on individual sovereignty, and on national sovereignty, then the DG and his supporters need to publicly explain what definition they are using.

The Proposed WHO Pandemic Agreement as a Tool to Manage Transfer of Sovereignty

The proposed pandemic agreement will set humanity in a new era strangely organized around pandemics: pre-pandemic, pandemic, and inter-pandemic. A new governance structure under WHO auspices will oversee the IHR amendments and related initiatives. It will rely on new funding requirements, including the WHO’s ability to demand additional funding and materials from countries and to run a supply network to support its work in health emergencies (Article 12):

In the event of a pandemic, real-time access by WHO to a minimum of 20% (10% as a donation and 10% at affordable prices to WHO) of the production of safe, efficacious and effective pandemic-related products for distribution based on public health risks and needs, with the understanding that each Party that has manufacturing facilities that produce pandemic-related products in its jurisdiction shall take all necessary steps to facilitate the export of such pandemic-related products, in accordance with timetables to be agreed between WHO and manufacturers.

And Article 20 (1):

…provide support and assistance to other Parties, upon request, to facilitate the containment of spill-over at the source.

The entire structure will be financed by a new funding stream separate from current WHO funding – an additional requirement on taxpayers over current national commitments (Article 20 (2)). The funding will also include an endowment of voluntary contributions of “all relevant sectors that benefit from international work to strengthen pandemic preparation, preparedness and response” and donations from philanthropic organizations (Article 20 (2)b).

Currently, countries decide on foreign aid on the basis of national priorities, apart from limited funding that they have agreed to allocate to organizations such as WHO under existing obligations or treaties. The proposed agreement is remarkable not just in greatly increasing the amount countries must give as treaty requirements, but in setting up a parallel funding structure disconnected from other disease priorities (quite the opposite of previous ideas on integration in health financing). It also gives power to an external group, not directly accountable, to demand or acquire further resources whenever it deems necessary.

In a further encroachment into what is normally within the legal jurisdiction of Nation States, the agreement will require countries to establish (Article 15) “…, no-fault vaccine injury compensation mechanism(s),…”, consecrating effective immunity for pharmaceutical companies for harm to citizens resulting from use of products that the WHO recommends under an emergency use authorization, or indeed requires countries to mandate onto their citizens.

As is becoming increasingly acceptable for those in power, ratifying countries will agree to limit the right of their public to voice opposition to the WHO’s measures and claims regarding such an emergency (Article 18):

…and combat false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through effective international collaboration and cooperation…

As we have seen during the Covid-19 response, the definition of misleading information can be dependent on political or commercial expediency, including factual information on vaccine efficacy and safety and orthodox immunology that could impair the sale of health commodities. This is why open democracies put such emphasis on defending free speech, even at the risk of sometimes being misleading. In signing on to this agreement, governments will be agreeing to abrogate that principle regarding their own citizens when instructed by the WHO.

The scope of this proposed agreement (and the IHR amendments) is broader than pandemics, greatly expanding the scope under which a transfer of decision-making powers can be demanded. Other environmental threats to health, such as changes in climate, can be declared emergencies at the DG’s discretion, if broad definitions of ‘One Health’ are adopted as recommended.

It is difficult to think of another international instrument where such powers over national resources are passed to an unelected external organization, and it is even more challenging to envision how this is seen as anything other than a loss of sovereignty. The only justification for this claim would appear to be if the draft agreement is to be signed on the basis of deceit – that there is no intention to treat it other than as an irrelevant piece of paper or something that should only apply to less powerful States (i.e. a colonialist tool).

Will the IHR Amendments and the Proposed Pandemic Agreement be Legally Binding?

Both texts are intended to be legally binding. The IHR already has such status, so the impact of the proposed changes on the need for new acceptance by countries are complicated national jurisdictional issues. There is a current mechanism for rejection of new amendments. However, unless a high number of countries will actively voice their oppositions and rejections, the adoption of the current published version dated February 2023 will likely lead to a future shadowed by the permanent risks of the WHO’s lockdown and lockstep dictates.

The proposed pandemic agreement is also clearly intended to be legally binding. WHO discusses this issue on the website of the International Negotiating Body (INB) that is working on the text. The same legally binding intent is specifically stated by the G20 Bali Leaders Declaration in 2022:

We support the work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) that will draft and negotiate a legally binding instrument that should contain both legally binding and non-legally binding elements to strengthen pandemic PPR…,

repeated in the 2023 G20 New Delhi Leaders Declaration:

…an ambitious, legally binding WHO convention, agreement or other international instruments on pandemic PPR (WHO CA+) by May 2024,

and by the Council of the European Union:

A convention, agreement or other international instrument is legally binding under international Law. An agreement on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response adopted under the World Health Organization (WHO) would enable countries around the globe to strengthen national, regional and global capacities and resilience to future pandemics.

The IHR already has standing under international law.

While seeking such status, WHO officials who previously described the proposed agreement as a ‘treaty” are now insisting neither instrument impacts sovereignty. The implication that it is States’ representatives at the WHA that will agree to the transfer, rather than the WHO, is a nuance irrelevant to its claims regarding their subsequent effect.

The WHO’s position raises a real question of whether its leadership is truly ignorant of what is proposed, or is actively seeking to mislead countries and the public in order to increase the probability of acceptance. The latest version dated 30 October 2023 requires 40 ratifications for the future agreement to enter into force, after a two-thirds vote in favor within the WHA. Opposition by a considerable number of countries will therefore be needed to derail this project. As it is backed by powerful governments and institutions, financial mechanisms including IMF and World Bank instruments and bilateral aids are likely to make opposition from lower-income countries difficult to sustain.

The Implications of Ignoring the Issue of Sovereignty

The relevant question regarding these two WHO instruments should really be not whether sovereignty is threatened, but why any sovereignty would be forfeited by democratic States to an organization that is (i) significantly privately funded and bound to obey the dictates of corporations and self-proclaimed philanthropists and (ii) jointly governed by Member States, half of which don’t even claim to be open representative democracies.

If it is indeed true that sovereignty is being knowingly forfeited by governments without the knowledge and consent of their peoples, and based on false claims from governments and the WHO, then the implications are extremely serious. It would imply that leaders were working directly against their peoples’ or national interest, and in support of external interests. Most countries have specific fundamental laws dealing with such practice. So, it is really important for those defending these projects to either explain their definitions of sovereignty and democratic process, or explicitly seek informed public consent.

The other question to be asked is why public health authorities and media are repeating the WHO’s assurances of the benign nature of the pandemic instruments. It asserts that claims of reduced sovereignty are ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation,’ which they assert elsewhere are major killers of humankind. While such claims are somewhat ludicrous and appear intended to denigrate dissenters, the WHO is clearly guilty of that which it claims is such a crime. If its leadership cannot demonstrate how its claims regarding these pandemic instruments are not deliberately misleading, its leadership would appear ethically compelled to resign.

The Need for Clarification

The WHO lists three major pandemics in the past century – influenza outbreaks in the late 1950s and 1960s, and the Covid-19 pandemic. The first two killed less than die each year today from tuberculosis, whilst the reported deaths from Covid-19 never reached the level of cancer or cardiovascular disease and remained almost irrelevant in low-income countries compared to endemic infectious diseases including tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV/AIDs.

No other non-influenza outbreak recorded by the WHO that fits the definition of a pandemic (e.g., rapid spread across international borders for a limited time of a pathogen not normally causing significant harm) has caused greater mortality in total than a few days of tuberculosis (about 4,000/day) or more life-years lost than a few days of malaria (about 1,500 children under 5 years old every day).

So, if it is indeed the case that our authorities and their supporters within the public health community consider that powers currently vested within national jurisdictions should be given over to external bodies on the basis of this level of recorded harm, it would be best to have a public conversation as to whether this is sufficient basis for abandoning democratic ideals in favor of a more fascist or otherwise authoritarian approach. We are, after all, talking about restricting basic human rights essential for a democracy to function.

Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

Authors

David Bell
David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA.

View all posts
Thi Thuy Van Dinh
Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh (LLM, PhD) worked on international law in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Subsequently, she managed multilateral organization partnerships for Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund and led environmental health technology development efforts for low-resource settings.

View all posts
Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

https://brownstone.org/articles/why-does-the-who-make-false-claims-regarding-proposals-to-seize-states-sovereignty/

Win Real Money Online Instantly: Proven Methods for Immediate Financial Gain

Win Real Money Online Instantly Join Here 👇👇
https://grabify.link/S7MPC7

In recent years, the quest to win real money online instantly has driven many towards innovative online platforms. Games like Slots Cash™ on the App Store and mobile gaming platforms provided by Skillz showcase how digital arenas are becoming lucrative sources of income for players worldwide 12. With platforms such as Swagbucks and InboxDollars, individuals have multiple pathways to earn by engaging in games, surveys, and various online tasks, enhancing the accessibility to instant financial gains 2.

As technology advances, options to win span across a broad spectrum, including traditional and digital game forms. From classic slots with high Return to Player (RTP) percentages like Mega Joker and Blood Suckers, to engaging in the gig economy through apps that offer micro-jobs, users have a plethora of opportunities to win real money online instantly 32. This article explores proven methods for immediate financial gain, delving into the worlds of cashback apps, cryptocurrency, stock trading platforms, and more, providing readers with insights on navigating the digital landscape profitably.

Exploring Micro-Jobs and Gig Economy Platforms

Exploring the gig economy and micro-job platforms unveils a dynamic landscape where individuals can monetize their skills and services efficiently. Key platforms facilitating this include:

Appen and Clickworker: Specializing in tasks that train artificial intelligence, ranging from object recognition in images to human interaction simulations 7.
Amazon Mechanical Turk and Neevo: Offering a wide array of micro-tasks, these platforms help businesses outsource small, yet significant tasks, such as data annotation and manual task training for AI 7.
Fiverr and Upwork: These platforms allow professionals to sell their services across various fields like design, writing, and music, catering to a broad audience looking for specialized skills 8.
Moreover, platforms like TaskRabbit and PeoplePerHour provide opportunities for individuals to offer their services both locally and globally, thus expanding the potential for financial gain 89. The gig economy's flexibility and the diversity of available tasks make it an attractive option for those looking to win real money online instantly 6789.

Leveraging Cashback and Rebate Apps

Leveraging cashback and rebate apps is a savvy strategy for those looking to win real money online instantly. These apps offer a variety of ways to earn back a portion of your spending through everyday purchases, dining, and even travel. Here's a breakdown of some top-rated apps and their unique features:

Ibotta and Rakuten: Both apps provide users with cashback on a wide range of shopping options. Ibotta requires users to activate offers and clip digital coupons, while Rakuten offers cash back on eligible purchases through their platform or browser extension. Users can receive their savings via bank deposit, PayPal, or gift cards once they reach the minimum threshold 12.
Dosh and Upside: Dosh offers automatic cashback without the need to scan receipts, making it a hassle-free option. Upside provides cashback at grocery stores, restaurants, and gas stations, with some users earning up to 25 cents back per gallon of gas 1213.
Specialty Apps:Fetch: Redeem any purchase receipts for points, exchangeable for gift cards. Despite some users finding it slow to accumulate rewards, the app boasts high ratings 11.Coupons.com: Online Promo Codes and Free Printable Coupons: Focuses on grocery coupons, automatically applying discounts when you link your store loyalty card 11.RetailMeNot: Known for coupons, this app also offers a cashback program, though not all stores participate 11.
Each app has its own set of advantages and potential drawbacks, from ease of use to the range of participating retailers. By choosing the right combination of apps, users can maximize their cashback earnings and move closer to achieving their goal of winning real money online instantly 10111213.

Win Real Money Online Instantly Here is the Way 👇👇
https://grabify.link/S7MPC7

Participating in the Sharing Economy

Participating in the sharing economy can be a lucrative way to win real money online instantly. This sector allows individuals to capitalize on their unused or spare resources, from accommodation and transportation to personal belongings and skills. Here are some key opportunities:

Accommodation & Space:List empty rooms or entire houses on platforms like Airbnb, Vrbo, or Booking.com: The largest selection of hotels, homes, and vacation rentals 14.Rent out underutilized spaces such as driveways, gardens, or parking spots through Neighbor | The Cheaper, Closer & Safer Storage Marketplace or Campspace 16.
Transportation:Share your car via Turo or Getaround, or become a ride-sharing driver with Uber or Lyft 14.Unique options like turning your car into a moving billboard with Carvertise - Advertise On Uber, Lyft, and Grubhub Cars offer additional income streams 14.
Personal Belongings & Skills:Platforms like Poshmark or Spinlister allow you to rent out clothes or sports equipment 14.Share your knowledge by creating online courses on Udemy or Teachable 14.
The sharing economy's flexibility and low entry barriers make it an appealing option for those looking to supplement their income. With the industry projected to grow significantly, exploring these avenues could lead to substantial financial benefits 17.

Investing in Cryptocurrency and Stock Trading Apps

Investing in the digital currency and stock markets offers a diverse range of options for those aiming to win real money online instantly. Key platforms and their features include:

Cryptocurrency Exchanges:Crypto Trading Platform | Buy, Sell, & Trade Crypto in the US | Binance.US: Offers trading in over 150 coins with fees starting at 0.57 percent for less-common coins, decreasing for high-volume traders. A 5 percent discount on fees is available with BNB payment 19.Coinbase: Known for its wide selection of cryptocurrencies, with fees typically at least 1.99 percent. Lower fees are available through Coinbase Advanced Trade 19.Kraken: Features a vast selection of 236 cryptocurrencies, with fees starting at 0.26 percent. Additional fees apply for card and online banking transactions 19.
Stock and Cryptocurrency Trading Apps:Robinhood: Offers commission-free trading in stocks, ETFs, options, and cryptocurrencies, making it a popular choice for beginners. No minimum deposit required 22.E*TRADE: Provides a user-friendly mobile app and access to a wide range of investment options including stocks, options, ETFs, and mutual funds. Charges $0 commission for online US-listed stock, ETF, and options trades 22.TD Ameritrade: Known for its educational resources and tools, this platform also offers a robust mobile app and access to a broad spectrum of investment options. No minimum deposit required 22.
These platforms provide various features tailored to different investing needs, from simple peer-to-peer payments to advanced trading strategies. By carefully selecting the right platform, individuals can enhance their prospects of financial gain in the digital marketplace 18192022.

Conclusion

This exploration into the myriad ways to win real money online has illuminated a diverse landscape of opportunities, each catering to different interests, skills, and investment levels. The gig economy, cashback and rebate apps, the sharing economy, and digital investing platforms are proven pathways that can lead to immediate financial gain. These methods reinforce the notion that with the right strategies and platforms, individuals can effectively navigate the digital realm to enhance their financial situation.

Moreover, the significance of these opportunities extends beyond individual gain, highlighting a shift towards a more accessible and flexible economic landscape. As we venture further into this digital era, the potential for innovation and growth in these areas is immense, promising even more avenues for financial success. Embracing these options not only offers immediate benefits but also sets the stage for ongoing financial empowerment and independence, urging readers to explore these avenues with keen interest and informed perspective.

FAQs

How can I quickly earn legitimate money?

To earn money quickly and legitimately, you can adopt various strategies such as:

Driving for rideshare services
Freelancing in your area of expertise
Selling unused gift cards
Renting out your car or parking space
Referring friends to apps
Searching for unclaimed money
Delivering groceries or takeout
Selling your clothes online
What apps can pay me real money immediately?

Some popular apps that pay out real money instantly include:

Gaming Apps: Play games and compete with others for rewards (e.g., Mistplay, Lucktastic, Swagbucks Games).
Survey Apps: Provide your opinions on various products and services to earn cash or gift cards.
What are some methods to get money right away?

You can obtain money instantly by:

Selling spare electronics
Selling unused gift cards
Pawning items
Working for immediate pay
Seeking community loans and assistance
Requesting bill forbearance
Asking for a payroll advance
Which app is the most trustworthy for earning money?

Some of the most reliable apps for making money include:

Swagbucks: Best for earning gift cards
Survey Junkie: Best for completing online surveys
Rocket Money: Best for managing finances
DoorDash: Best for delivery drivers
Rakuten Rewards: Best for cash back on purchases
Upside: Best for rewards at gas stations
Upwork: Best for freelancers looking for gigs

Win Real Money Instantly Here 👇👇
https://grabify.link/S7MPC7

#onlinemoney #makemoney #realmoney #cashapp #giveaway #cashappblessing #giftcard #freegiftcard

Avi Shlaim: ‘Three Worlds – Memoirs of an Arab – Jew’
This beautiful, inspiring, elegiac book is the story of the author’s journey – a journey from Baghdad to Israel in 1950, aged five, and from Israel to England. But Avi Schlaim’s journey was at different levels. It was geographical and it was cultural. It also became a political journey to his own position today.

His personal experiences illustrate a bigger story of the Jewish exodus from Iraq to Israel in 1950 following the creation of Israel in 1948. His story and his words speak more eloquently than any reviewer can, and so for the most part, I quote directly from his memoir.

The book is “a glimpse into the lost and rich world of the Iraqi-Jewish community”. Perhaps, coming from what he describes as a prosperous, privileged family, he may see the past through rose-tinted glasses. But his memories are precious.

“We belonged to a branch of the global Jewish community that is now almost extinct. We were Arab-Jews. We lived in Baghdad and were well integrated into Iraqi society. We spoke Arabic at home, our social customs were Arab, our lifestyle was Arab, our cuisine was exquisitely Middle Eastern and my parents’ music was an attractive blend of Arabic and Jewish…We in the Jewish community had much more in common, linguistically and culturally, with our Iraqi compatriots than with our European co-religionists.

Of all the Jewish communities in the Ottoman Empire, the one in Mesopotamia was the most integrated into local society, the most Arabised in its culture and the most prosperous… When the British created the Kingdom of Iraq…the Jews were the backbone of the Iraqi economy”

Jewish lineage in Mesopotamia stretched as far back as Babylonian times, pre-dating the rise of Islam by a millenium.

“Their influence was evident in every branch of Iraqi culture, from literature and music to journalism and banking. Banks – with the exception of government owned banks – and all the big markets remained closed on the Sabbath and the other Jewish holy days.” By the 1880s there were 55 synagogues in Baghdad.

He describes how in Iraq there was a long tradition of religious tolerance and harmony. “The Jews were neither newcomers nor aliens in Iraq. They were certainly not intruders”. By the time of the First World War, Jews constituted one third of the population of Baghdad.

He contrasts Europe and the Middle East. “Unlike Europe the Middle East did not have a ‘Jewish Question’. “Iraq’s Jews did not live in ghettos, nor did they experience the violent repression, persecution and genocide that marred European history. There were of course exceptions, notably the infamous pogrom against Jews in June 1941, for which the actions of British imperialism must take substantial responsibility.

By 1941, antisemitism in Baghdad was on the increase but was more a foreign import than a home grown product. There was a violent pogrom against the Jewish community named the farhud. The Jews were seen as friends of the British. 179 Jews were murdered and several hundred injured. It was completely unexpected and unprecedented. There had been no other attack against the Jews for centuries. Avi gives many examples of Muslims assisting their Jewish neighbours.

And yet he writes: “The overall picture, however, was one of religious tolerance, cosmopolitanism, peaceful co-existence and fruitful interaction.”

The critical moment was the creation of Israel. “As a result of the Arab defeat, there was a backlash against the Jews throughout the Arab world. “What had been a pillar of Iraqi society was increasingly perceived as a sinister fifth column”, with Islamic fundamentalists and Arab nationalists identifying the Jews in their countries with the hated Zionist enemy.

Palestinians “were the main victims of the Zionist project. More than half their number became refugees and the name Palestine was wiped off the map. But there was another category of victims, less well known and much less talked about: the Jews of the Arab lands”.

The sub-title of the book refers to ‘Arab-Jews’. “The hyphen is significant. Critics of the term Arab-Jew see it as… conflating two separate identities. As I see it, the hyphen unites: an Arab can also be a Jew and a Jew can also be an Arab…We are told that there is a clash of cultures, an unbridgeable gulf between Muslims and Jews… The story of my family in Iraq -and that of many forgotten families like mine – points to a dramatically different picture. It harks back to an era of a more pluralist Middle East with greater religious tolerance and a political culture of mutual respect and co-operation.”

Yet the Zionists portray the Jews as the victims of endemic Arab persecution and this is used to justify the atrocious treatment of the Palestinians. Thus the narrative of the ‘Jewish Nakba’ to create a ‘false symmetry between the fate of two communities. This narrative is not history; it is the propaganda of the victors.”

On 29th November 1947 the General Assembly of the United Nations voted for the partition of mandate Palestine into two states: one Arab, one Jewish. The General Council of the Iraqi Jewish community sent a telegram to the UN opposing the partition resolution and the creation of a Jewish state. “Like my family, the majority of Iraqi Jews saw themselves as Iraqi first and Jewish second; they feared that the creation of a Jewish state would undermine their position in Iraq… The distinction between Jews and Zionists, so crucial to interfaith harmony in the Arab world, was rapidly breaking down”.

Iraq’s participation in the war for Palestine fuelled tensions between Muslims and Jews. Iraqi Jews were widely suspected of being secret supporters of Israel. With the defeat of Palestine a wave of hostility towards Israel and the Jews living in their midst swept through the Arab world. Demonstrators marched through the streets of Baghdad shouting “Death to the Jews.” And the government needing a scapegoat did not simply respond to public anger but actively whipped up public hysteria and suspicion against the Jews.

At this point official persecution against the Jews began. In July 1948 a law was passed making Zionism a criminal offence punishable by death or a minimum sentence of seven years in prison. Jews were fired from government jobs and from the railways, post office and telegraph department, Jewish merchants were denied import and export licences, restrictions placed on Jewish banks to trade in foreign currency, young Jews were barred from admission to colleges of education and the entire community was put under surveillance.

The number of Jewish immigrants leaving Iraq to the end of 1953 numbered almost 125,000 out of a total of 135,000. The Jewish presence going back well over 2,000 years was destroyed.

And yet for all this the mass exodus did not occur till 1950/1951 in what was known as the ‘Big Aliyah”. The majority of Iraqi Jews did not want to leave Iraq and had no affinity with Zionism. Most who emigrated to Israel did so only after a wave of five bombings of Jewish targets in Baghdad. It has long been argued that the bombings were instigated by Israel and the Zionists to spark a mass flight of Iraqi Jews to Israel, needed as they were to do many of the menial jobs and to boost numbers in the army.

The author makes a forensic examination of the evidence – based on examination of documents and on interviews – and concluded that three out of the five bombings were carried out by the Zionist underground in Baghdad, a fourth – the bombing of the Mas’uda Shemtob synagogue, which was the only one that resulted in fatalities – was the result of Zionist bribery and there was one carried out by a far right wing, anti-Jewish Iraqi nationalist group.

When the Iraqi Jews arrived in Israel, their experience fell short of the Zionist myth. At the airport in Israel, many were sprayed with DDT pesticides “to disinfect them as if they were animals.” They were then taken to squalid and unsanitary transit camps. Some camps were surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by policemen. The immigration and settlement authorities had no understanding of their customs and culture. “They thought of them as backward and primitive and expected them to take their place at the bottom of the social hierarchy and be grateful for whatever they were given… The lens through which the new immigrants were viewed was the same colonialist lens through which the Ashkenazi establishment viewed the Palestinians.”

“We were Jews from an Arab country that was still officially at war with Israel. European Jews.. looked down on us as socially and culturally inferior. They despised the Arabic language…I was an Iraqi boy in a land of Europeans.”

For his grandmothers, Iraq was the beloved homeland while Israel was the place of exile. “Migration to Israel is usually described as Aliyah or ascent. For us the move from Iraq to Israel was decidedly a Yeridah, a descent down the economic and social ladder. Not only did we lose our property and possessions; we also our lost our strong sense of identity as proud Iraqi Jews as we were relegated to the margins of Israeli society.” The experience was to break his father.

“The unstated aims of the official policy for schools were to undermine our Arab-Jewish identity… A systematic process was at work to delegitimise our heritage and erase our cultural roots” It was a clash of cultures. The Mizrahim were earmarked to be the proletariat – the fodder to support the country’s industrial and agricultural development. As one author put it, “We left Iraq as Jews and arrived in Israel as Iraqis.” They were clearly, to borrow from current jargon, “the wrong kind of Israeli”.

His journey was a political one too. His message and his warnings are unequivocally universalist. “The Holocaust stands out as an archetype of a crime against humanity. For me as a Jew and an Israeli therefore the Holocaust teaches us to resist the dehumanising of any people, including the Palestinian ‘victims of victims’, because dehumanising a people can easily result, as it did in Europe in the 1940s, in crimes against humanity.”

He had previously argued that it was only after the 1967 war that Israel became a colonial power, oppressing the Palestinians in the occupied territories. However, “a deeper analysis… led me to the conclusion that Israel had been created by a settler-colonial movement. The years 1948 and 1967 were merely milestones in the relentless systematic takeover of the whole of Palestine… Since Zionism was an avowedly settler-colonial movement from the outset, the building of civilian settlements on occupied land was only a new stage in the long march… The most crucial turning point was not the war of 1967 but the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.”

And more: “the two-state solution is dead or, to be more accurate, it was never born… The outcome I have come to favour is one democratic state… with equal rights for all its citizens regardless of ethnicity or religion.” He is absolutely right in my view.

His family’s story “serves as a corrective to the Zionist narrative which views Arabs and Jews as congenitally incapable of dwelling together in peace and doomed to permanent conflict and discord… My experience as a young boy and that of the whole Jewish community in Iraq, suggests there is nothing inevitable or pre-ordained about Arab-Jewish antagonism… Remembering the past can help us to envisage a better future… Arab-Jewish co-existence is not something that my family imagined in our minds; we experienced it, we touched it.”

Optimistic? Yes, perhaps over-optimistic. But towards the end of this masterpiece, Avi Schlaim justifies his message. “Recalling the era of cosmopolitanism and co-existence that some Jews, like my family, enjoyed in Arab countries before 1948 offers a glimmer of hope… It’s the best model we have for a better future.”


https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/avi-shlaim-three-worlds-memoirs-of-an-arab-jew/

Avi Shlaim: ‘Three Worlds – Memoirs of an Arab – Jew’
This beautiful, inspiring, elegiac book is the story of the author’s journey – a journey from Baghdad to Israel in 1950, aged five, and from Israel to England. But Avi Schlaim’s journey was at different levels. It was geographical and it was cultural. It also became a political journey to his own position today.

His personal experiences illustrate a bigger story of the Jewish exodus from Iraq to Israel in 1950 following the creation of Israel in 1948. His story and his words speak more eloquently than any reviewer can, and so for the most part, I quote directly from his memoir.

The book is “a glimpse into the lost and rich world of the Iraqi-Jewish community”. Perhaps, coming from what he describes as a prosperous, privileged family, he may see the past through rose-tinted glasses. But his memories are precious.

“We belonged to a branch of the global Jewish community that is now almost extinct. We were Arab-Jews. We lived in Baghdad and were well integrated into Iraqi society. We spoke Arabic at home, our social customs were Arab, our lifestyle was Arab, our cuisine was exquisitely Middle Eastern and my parents’ music was an attractive blend of Arabic and Jewish…We in the Jewish community had much more in common, linguistically and culturally, with our Iraqi compatriots than with our European co-religionists.

Of all the Jewish communities in the Ottoman Empire, the one in Mesopotamia was the most integrated into local society, the most Arabised in its culture and the most prosperous… When the British created the Kingdom of Iraq…the Jews were the backbone of the Iraqi economy”

Jewish lineage in Mesopotamia stretched as far back as Babylonian times, pre-dating the rise of Islam by a millenium.

“Their influence was evident in every branch of Iraqi culture, from literature and music to journalism and banking. Banks – with the exception of government owned banks – and all the big markets remained closed on the Sabbath and the other Jewish holy days.” By the 1880s there were 55 synagogues in Baghdad.

He describes how in Iraq there was a long tradition of religious tolerance and harmony. “The Jews were neither newcomers nor aliens in Iraq. They were certainly not intruders”. By the time of the First World War, Jews constituted one third of the population of Baghdad.

He contrasts Europe and the Middle East. “Unlike Europe the Middle East did not have a ‘Jewish Question’. “Iraq’s Jews did not live in ghettos, nor did they experience the violent repression, persecution and genocide that marred European history. There were of course exceptions, notably the infamous pogrom against Jews in June 1941, for which the actions of British imperialism must take substantial responsibility.

By 1941, antisemitism in Baghdad was on the increase but was more a foreign import than a home grown product. There was a violent pogrom against the Jewish community named the farhud. The Jews were seen as friends of the British. 179 Jews were murdered and several hundred injured. It was completely unexpected and unprecedented. There had been no other attack against the Jews for centuries. Avi gives many examples of Muslims assisting their Jewish neighbours.

And yet he writes: “The overall picture, however, was one of religious tolerance, cosmopolitanism, peaceful co-existence and fruitful interaction.”

The critical moment was the creation of Israel. “As a result of the Arab defeat, there was a backlash against the Jews throughout the Arab world. “What had been a pillar of Iraqi society was increasingly perceived as a sinister fifth column”, with Islamic fundamentalists and Arab nationalists identifying the Jews in their countries with the hated Zionist enemy.

Palestinians “were the main victims of the Zionist project. More than half their number became refugees and the name Palestine was wiped off the map. But there was another category of victims, less well known and much less talked about: the Jews of the Arab lands”.

The sub-title of the book refers to ‘Arab-Jews’. “The hyphen is significant. Critics of the term Arab-Jew see it as… conflating two separate identities. As I see it, the hyphen unites: an Arab can also be a Jew and a Jew can also be an Arab…We are told that there is a clash of cultures, an unbridgeable gulf between Muslims and Jews… The story of my family in Iraq -and that of many forgotten families like mine – points to a dramatically different picture. It harks back to an era of a more pluralist Middle East with greater religious tolerance and a political culture of mutual respect and co-operation.”

Yet the Zionists portray the Jews as the victims of endemic Arab persecution and this is used to justify the atrocious treatment of the Palestinians. Thus the narrative of the ‘Jewish Nakba’ to create a ‘false symmetry between the fate of two communities. This narrative is not history; it is the propaganda of the victors.”

On 29th November 1947 the General Assembly of the United Nations voted for the partition of mandate Palestine into two states: one Arab, one Jewish. The General Council of the Iraqi Jewish community sent a telegram to the UN opposing the partition resolution and the creation of a Jewish state. “Like my family, the majority of Iraqi Jews saw themselves as Iraqi first and Jewish second; they feared that the creation of a Jewish state would undermine their position in Iraq… The distinction between Jews and Zionists, so crucial to interfaith harmony in the Arab world, was rapidly breaking down”.

Iraq’s participation in the war for Palestine fuelled tensions between Muslims and Jews. Iraqi Jews were widely suspected of being secret supporters of Israel. With the defeat of Palestine a wave of hostility towards Israel and the Jews living in their midst swept through the Arab world. Demonstrators marched through the streets of Baghdad shouting “Death to the Jews.” And the government needing a scapegoat did not simply respond to public anger but actively whipped up public hysteria and suspicion against the Jews.

At this point official persecution against the Jews began. In July 1948 a law was passed making Zionism a criminal offence punishable by death or a minimum sentence of seven years in prison. Jews were fired from government jobs and from the railways, post office and telegraph department, Jewish merchants were denied import and export licences, restrictions placed on Jewish banks to trade in foreign currency, young Jews were barred from admission to colleges of education and the entire community was put under surveillance.

The number of Jewish immigrants leaving Iraq to the end of 1953 numbered almost 125,000 out of a total of 135,000. The Jewish presence going back well over 2,000 years was destroyed.

And yet for all this the mass exodus did not occur till 1950/1951 in what was known as the ‘Big Aliyah”. The majority of Iraqi Jews did not want to leave Iraq and had no affinity with Zionism. Most who emigrated to Israel did so only after a wave of five bombings of Jewish targets in Baghdad. It has long been argued that the bombings were instigated by Israel and the Zionists to spark a mass flight of Iraqi Jews to Israel, needed as they were to do many of the menial jobs and to boost numbers in the army.

The author makes a forensic examination of the evidence – based on examination of documents and on interviews – and concluded that three out of the five bombings were carried out by the Zionist underground in Baghdad, a fourth – the bombing of the Mas’uda Shemtob synagogue, which was the only one that resulted in fatalities – was the result of Zionist bribery and there was one carried out by a far right wing, anti-Jewish Iraqi nationalist group.

When the Iraqi Jews arrived in Israel, their experience fell short of the Zionist myth. At the airport in Israel, many were sprayed with DDT pesticides “to disinfect them as if they were animals.” They were then taken to squalid and unsanitary transit camps. Some camps were surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by policemen. The immigration and settlement authorities had no understanding of their customs and culture. “They thought of them as backward and primitive and expected them to take their place at the bottom of the social hierarchy and be grateful for whatever they were given… The lens through which the new immigrants were viewed was the same colonialist lens through which the Ashkenazi establishment viewed the Palestinians.”

“We were Jews from an Arab country that was still officially at war with Israel. European Jews.. looked down on us as socially and culturally inferior. They despised the Arabic language…I was an Iraqi boy in a land of Europeans.”

For his grandmothers, Iraq was the beloved homeland while Israel was the place of exile. “Migration to Israel is usually described as Aliyah or ascent. For us the move from Iraq to Israel was decidedly a Yeridah, a descent down the economic and social ladder. Not only did we lose our property and possessions; we also our lost our strong sense of identity as proud Iraqi Jews as we were relegated to the margins of Israeli society.” The experience was to break his father.

“The unstated aims of the official policy for schools were to undermine our Arab-Jewish identity… A systematic process was at work to delegitimise our heritage and erase our cultural roots” It was a clash of cultures. The Mizrahim were earmarked to be the proletariat – the fodder to support the country’s industrial and agricultural development. As one author put it, “We left Iraq as Jews and arrived in Israel as Iraqis.” They were clearly, to borrow from current jargon, “the wrong kind of Israeli”.

His journey was a political one too. His message and his warnings are unequivocally universalist. “The Holocaust stands out as an archetype of a crime against humanity. For me as a Jew and an Israeli therefore the Holocaust teaches us to resist the dehumanising of any people, including the Palestinian ‘victims of victims’, because dehumanising a people can easily result, as it did in Europe in the 1940s, in crimes against humanity.”

He had previously argued that it was only after the 1967 war that Israel became a colonial power, oppressing the Palestinians in the occupied territories. However, “a deeper analysis… led me to the conclusion that Israel had been created by a settler-colonial movement. The years 1948 and 1967 were merely milestones in the relentless systematic takeover of the whole of Palestine… Since Zionism was an avowedly settler-colonial movement from the outset, the building of civilian settlements on occupied land was only a new stage in the long march… The most crucial turning point was not the war of 1967 but the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.”

And more: “the two-state solution is dead or, to be more accurate, it was never born… The outcome I have come to favour is one democratic state… with equal rights for all its citizens regardless of ethnicity or religion.” He is absolutely right in my view.

His family’s story “serves as a corrective to the Zionist narrative which views Arabs and Jews as congenitally incapable of dwelling together in peace and doomed to permanent conflict and discord… My experience as a young boy and that of the whole Jewish community in Iraq, suggests there is nothing inevitable or pre-ordained about Arab-Jewish antagonism… Remembering the past can help us to envisage a better future… Arab-Jewish co-existence is not something that my family imagined in our minds; we experienced it, we touched it.”

Optimistic? Yes, perhaps over-optimistic. But towards the end of this masterpiece, Avi Schlaim justifies his message. “Recalling the era of cosmopolitanism and co-existence that some Jews, like my family, enjoyed in Arab countries before 1948 offers a glimmer of hope… It’s the best model we have for a better future.”


https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/avi-shlaim-three-worlds-memoirs-of-an-arab-jew/

Chimaeras and interspecies hybrids; the sinister agenda hiding behind covid
Rhoda WilsonMarch 20, 2024
There is something that has quietly slipped through the din of the murderously phoney episode called covid-19, Dr. Mathew Maavak writes. “If the covid-19 vaccines were ‘experimental gene therapies’, what other genetic experimentations continue unhindered out there?” he asks.

In May 2020, Dr. Maavak wrote an article about how SARS-CoV-2 was not germinated in a vacuum. The Wuhan Institute of Virology conducted research with alarming global parallels including the pursuit of superintelligence and the development of chimaeras, or interspecies hybrids.

What he wrote in May 2020 is still relevant today, he says. So yesterday, Dr. Maavak reposted his now four-year-old article.

Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

Coronavirus in a Time of Chimaeras and Beyond

By Dr. Mathew Maavak

In May 2020, just as the coronavirus made hourly headlines, I had suspected that the virus was part of a much more sinister agenda. What I wrote back then remains just as relevant today. Here it is.

Genetically-Enhanced Competitiveness

The Sars-Cov-2 virus, which allegedly causes covid-19, was not germinated in a vacuum. The type of research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had ominous analogues worldwide. These included the quest for super intelligence and the development of interspecies hybrids or chimaeras.

What began as a scientific mission to remedy congenital defects has rapidly morphed into a global race to create designer babies, super soldiers and transhumans through the aid of biotechnology, artificial intelligence and/or machine-neuralinking. 21st century eugenics is tacitly justified by the need to boost “national competitiveness.”

China leads the way here. In one revealing episode, genome sequencing giant BGI Shenzhen had procured and sequenced the DNA of more than 2,000 people – mostly Americans – with IQ scores of at least 160. According to Stephen Hsu, a theoretical physicist from Michigan State University and scientific adviser to BGI:

An exceptional person gets you an order of magnitude more statistical power than if you took random people from the population …

BGI Shenzhen intends to become a “bio-Google” that will collate the “world’s biological information and make it universally accessible and useful.” From 2012 onwards, it began collaborating with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (“BMGF”). No surprises there.

Scientific endeavours like these are based on the assumption that an assemblage of smart samples can help in the identification and transplantation of optimal bits of genetic material into future generations.

Can a virus or vaccine perform this transplantation? Or will such agencies be used to cull the majority of the human population before a “genetic antidote” emerges to reverse their lethal effects? It will be too late for the vast majority of mankind by then. artificial selection, backed by artificial intelligence, may decide who gets this new booster. But is such a hypothetical scenario even realistic? There are too many imponderables here but viruses, nasal swabs and “vaccines” will surely deliver vital data for the “New Human Genome Project.”

New Eugenics Zeitgeist

The science of eugenics is not dissuaded by the nurture over nature debate, even after exhaustive studies had failed to establish genetic variants associated with intelligence. For example, a 2010 study led by Robert Plomin, a behavioural geneticist at King’s College London, had probed over 350,000 variations in single DNA letters across the genomes of 7,900 children but found no prized variant. Curiously, most of the smart samples procured by BGI Shenzhen were sourced from Plomin’s research activities.

Periodic setbacks did not deter the proponents of “procreative beneficence” who argue that it is a human duty to augment the genetic codes of future generations. Failure to do so is couched in terms of “genetic neglect” and even child abuse. If this sounds eerily familiar, look no further than the worldview which once animated the Western world before the Nazis elevated it to a whole new level altogether.

The eugenics zeitgeist has gripped China in a big way. Under its Maternal and Infant Health Care Law (1994), foetuses with potential hereditary diseases or deformities are recommended for abortion. At the rate Beijing is building its eugenics utopia, the definition of deformity may ultimately include a genetically pre-diagnosed average IQ.

Instead of inciting public outrage, the law precipitated a headlong rush to select “intelligent” babies through methods like preimplantation genetic diagnosis (“PGD”). The idea behind PGD is to screen and identify the most promising embryos for implantation and birth. Combined with CRISPR gene-editing tools, next-generation Chinese citizens are expected to exhibit remarkably higher IQs – at least according to bioethicists who fret over a future marked by the “genetic haves” and “genetic have-nots.” China already has three CRISPR-edited babies whose current fate remains unknown.

In the aftermath of the corona psychosis, the availability of “smart samples” would have increased exponentially and may dovetail nicely with the eugenics agenda of the Rockefeller Foundation and BMGF. Incidentally, Bill Gates grew up in a household that was heavily invested in population control and eugenics.

Our smart societies may inevitably face the existential question of “live-lets” and “live-nots” down the line. The orchestrated rebellion towards selective extinction, if it occurs, has a tragicomical public face: An autistic Swede who parrots the “listen to the science” and “listen to the experts” mantra.

How will future designer babies contribute to society? For one thing, we will be missing individuals like Beethoven (deaf); Albert Einstein (learning disability/late development); John Nash (schizophrenia); Andrea Boccelli (congenital glaucoma) and Vincent van Gogh (chronic depression/anxiety) and a host of others like them. A future Stephen Hawking (motor neurone disease) and Greta Thunberg (Asperger’s Syndrome – allegedly) will be genetically disqualified before birth.

It is now inconvenient to consider intelligence as a result of peer interactions, human environment and ingenious reactions to adversity. (I personally define intelligence as an ability to nip the bullsh*t in its foetid bud).

Mapping out the complex and sometimes unpredictable interplay between 100 trillion synaptic connections in a human brain may take centuries to accomplish but that does not deter the utopians of today.

After all, genetic manipulation is the eugenic wormhole that promises to accelerate the emergence of a super society at warp speed. The late billionaire paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein, was a prominent proponent of this philosophy. Epstein intended to breed a “super race of humans with his DNA by impregnating women at his New Mexico ranch, genetic engineering and artificial intelligence.” Welcome to Lebensborn 2.0!

Prominent scientists linked to Epstein’s transhumanist fantasies included “molecular engineer George Church; Murray Gell-Mann, the discoverer of the quark; the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould; the neurologist and author Oliver Sacks; and the theoretical physicist Frank Wilczek.” The late Stephen Hawking – who will ironically flunk the genetic pre-screenings of tomorrow – was another Epstein associate.

Forget about Mars missions; major powers see eugenics as the next great frontier. Its hyper-materialistic focus is encapsulated by the following analogy from Russian scientist Denis Rebrikov:

It currently costs about a million roubles (US$15,500 at that time) to genetically change an embryo – more than a lot of cars – but prices will fall with greater use … I can see the billboard now: “You Choose: a Hyundai Solaris or a Super-Child?”

You are comparing a child, super or not, with a Hyundai? I mean a Hyundai, really? Sometimes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions but most of the time, it begins with a diabolically silly proposition.

But why stop at children? From genetically engineered horses in Argentina that are supposedly faster, stronger and better jumpers to super-dogs in China that are comprehensively superior to the average mutt, the DNA of the entire natural world is being slated for a revolutionary redesign.

Crouching Chimaeras, Hideous Hybrids

The masters of our universe however cannot create future generations of superhumans without being adept at recombining genetic sequences across species. That is the logic guiding eugenicists. As a result, a slew of chimaeras or interspecies hybrids have been spawned with the aid of CRISPR technology. These include ghastly human-monkey hybrids, monkey-pig hybrids, human-rabbit hybrids and a host of other lab-manufactured monstrosities.

Chimaeras are created when human embryonic stem cells are injected into embryos of other species. The goal, for the time being, is to induce growth of targeted human organs. Those facing terminal illnesses will no longer have to worry about long organ waiting lists. Chinese scientists have just transplanted a modified pig liver into a brain-dead human and it seems to have worked.

A less controversial approach to human organ replacement is 3D bioprinting or its 4D bioprinting iteration. These techniques involve the “printing” of a replacement organ from the stem cells of a transplant recipient, thereby eliminating the odds of organ rejection.

But why stop at replacement organs when we can have “replacement humans” altogether? Future generations must think like Einsteins, be as nimble as leopards and possess owl-like night visions. And, of course, be virus-resistant as well!

The manipulation of the human genome is the new “grand response” to the venerable set of “grand challenges” for 2030 and beyond. China is the go-to place for such genetic tinkering as some of these undertakings are technically illegal in the West. And this is where the utility of covid-19 comes into the picture. It provides the perfect pretext to remove such ethical constraints. After all, “Disease X” is just waiting to escape from the belly of some bat or pangolin …

Since 2014, the Wuhan Institute of Virology has been the recipient of a two-stage grant worth $7.2 million from the United States government for gain-of-function research into bat coronaviruses. According to a Newsweek report in April 2020:

Many scientists have criticised gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.

Such caution has not deterred a flurry of research into microbial gene manipulation. The Wuhan experiments may have either spawned the Sars-Cov-2 virus or it may have provided a fraudulent context for future tyrannical mandates.

But to solely blame China for the coronavirus “pandemic” is a tad unfair. Just as China is the factory of the world for foreign corporations, it is also the genetic incubator for a variety of viruses and chimaeras for foreign governments and foundations. Even so, the human-pig chimaera was the creation of the Salk Institute in California. Research into the world’s first human-mouse hybrid was largely a Japanese affair. The Portuguese in the meantime had created a virus chimaera.

The United Kingdom, on their end, had spawned a human-cow hybrid embryo in 2008 – perhaps in keeping with the bovine disposition of those glued to the BBC. It was in Britain where the game-changing Dolly the Sheep was cloned in 1996.

The transition from sheep to sheeple may turn out to be a short 21st century Jurassic Park ride.

Coincidences and Consequences

Before the advent of gene-editing tools and supercomputing, it would have been impossible to create a viable chimaera. The Biotech-Industrial Complex and contact tracing-type panopticons constitute a new growth area for Tech Titans that were once facing bankruptcy.

The dangers of genome editing were in fact included in the Worldwide Threat Assessment reports submitted to the United States Congress in 2016 and 2017. These risks were either omitted or glossed over in the 2018 and 2019 reports – just as such risks gravitated to the high impact-high likelihood quadrant.

Is it a coincidence that the nations most affected by covid-19 – at least during the first two years of its alleged spread – were the very ones that had either promoted or encouraged a variety of genetic experimentations that are contrary to nature? If – and that is a big “if” – these nations succeed in their quest for “designer babies” and “superhumans,” the rest of mankind will be rendered redundant. Some mass extermination event may transpire under the guise of World War III, food shortages, Disease X or a combination thereof.


If everything goes according to plan, however, there will be 500 million potential specimens left for The Great Reset. The Third World, whose leaders are being monetarily incentivised to focus on unattainable Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”), will be consigned to the ash heaps of history.

It is quite ironic that a new generation of cerebrally deficient “thought leaders” and “experts” are being groomed to promote the demises of their societies and themselves.

About the Author

Mathew Maavak, with a PhD in Policy Studies, specialises in systems science, global risks, strategic foresight, geopolitics and governance. He is a Malaysian expert on risk foresight and governance.

Dr. Maavak has published numerous op-eds on a variety of eclectic subjects for over 20 years – by ‘connecting the dots’ in a disjointed world. He is the author of a Substack page titled ‘The Eye Opener’ which you can subscribe to and follow HERE.



https://expose-news.com/2024/03/20/chimaeras-and-interspecies-hybrids/

ReelRampage AI Review

Go VIRAL & Generate Unlimited Traffic

More Info: https://dilip-review.com/reelrampage-ai-review/

ReelRampage AI is a state-of-the-art artificial intelligence tool created to make the process of making interesting and compelling Instagram Reels more efficient. With ReelRampage AI, businesses, marketers, and content creators will be able to easily make high-quality material that appeals to their target audience. The technology was developed by a team of seasoned marketers and IT specialists.

Utilizing artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques, ReelRampage AI examines user behavior, trends, and interaction patterns on Instagram. Utilizing this information, ReelRampage AI creates highly relevant and personalized content ideas based on audience demographics and niche.

#HowDoesReelRampageAIWork
#HowtoMakeMoneywithReelRampageAI
#HowtoReelRampageAITraffic
#MakeMoneywithReelRampageAI
#ReelRampageAIApp
#ReelRampageAIBonus
#ReelRampageAIBonuses
#ReelRampageAIbyRamRawat
#ReelRampageAIDemo
#ReelRampageAIDownload
#ReelRampageAIHonestReview
#ReelRampageAILegit
#ReelRampageAILiveDemo
#ReelRampageAIOTO
#ReelRampageAIPreview
#ReelRampageAIReview
#ReelRampageAIReviews
#ReelRampageAIScam
#ReelRampageAIScamorLegit
#ReelRampageAISoftware
#ReelRampageAIUpgrades
#ReelRampageAIUpsells

BIDEN ADMIN DEPLOYED AIR FORCE TEAM TO ISRAEL TO ASSIST WITH TARGETS, DOCUMENT SUGGESTS


Biden Admin Deployed Air Force Team to Israel to Assist With Targets, Document Suggests
Ken Klippenstein, Matthew Petti
January 11 2024, 3:33 p.m.
A picture taken from Rafah shows smoke billowing over Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip during Israeli bombardment on January 11, 2024, amid ongoing battles between Israel and Palestinian Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip. (Photo by AFP) (Photo by -/AFP via Getty Images)
Targeting intelligence — the information used to conduct airstrikes and fire long-range artillery weapons — has played a central role in Israel’s siege of Gaza. A document obtained through the Freedom of Information Act suggests that the U.S. Air Force sent officers specializing in this exact form of intelligence to Israel in late November.

Since the start of Israel’s bombardment in retaliation for Hamas’s strike on October 7, Israel has dropped more than 29,000 bombs on the tiny Gaza Strip, according to a U.S. intelligence report last month. And for the first time in U.S. history, the Biden administration has been flying surveillance drone missions over Gaza since at least early November, ostensibly for hostage recovery by special forces. At the time the drones were revealed, U.S. Gen. Pat Ryder insisted that the special operations forces deployed to Israel to advise on hostage rescue were “not participating in [Israel Defense Forces] target development.”

“I’ve directed my team to share intelligence and deploy additional experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise the Israeli counterparts on hostage recovery efforts,” said President Joe Biden three days after the Hamas attack.

But several weeks later, on November 21, the U.S. Air Force issued deployment guidelines for officers, including intelligence engagement officers, headed to Israel. Experts say that a team of targeting officers like this would be used to provide satellite intelligence to the Israelis for the purpose of offensive targeting.

“They’re probably targeting people, targeting officers,” Lawrence Cline, who served as an intelligence engagement officer in Iraq before retirement, told The Intercept. Targeting intelligence refers to the identification and characterization of enemy activities including missile and artillery launches, location of leadership and command and control centers, and key facilities. “What I can see is we’ve got a lot of global assets in terms of satellites and the like and the Israelis have a lot in terms of more localized radar coverage.”

The deployment guidelines were issued by the Pentagon’s Air Force component command for the Middle East, Air Forces Central, on November 21. The document provides deployment instructions to air personnel sent to the country, including an “Air Defense Liaison Team” as well as “airmen assigned as the Intelligence Engagement Officer (IEO).”

Intelligence engagement officers, Cline explained, coordinate intelligence between the U.S. and partner militaries. When deployed in Iraq, Cline, who now works as an instructor for the Defense Department Counterterrorism Fellowship Program, recalled that he and other IEOs comprised a small team who spent “probably three quarters of our time working with the Iraqis, the other quarter checking in with headquarters,” adding that “it was sort of half and half a liaison and advising.”

Asked about the airmen’s mission, the Defense Intelligence Agency referred questions to the Air Forces Central, which did not respond to a request for comment. Neither the Office of the Secretary of Defense nor Central Command responded to requests for comment.

Most Read

The intelligence engagement process provides a low-profile mechanism through which the U.S. can coordinate with the Israeli military, a valuable tool amid the political sensitivity of the conflict.

A U.S. Army primer defines intelligence engagement as a “powerful” tool that is useful “especially when U.S. policy might restrict our interaction,” as it “often does not require large budgets or footprints.” Experts say that may be the case here.

Tyler McBrien, managing editor of Lawfare, a website specializing in national security law, said that there seems to be an “Israel exception” to the U.S. rules around military assistance.

Past presidents have issued several executive orders banning the U.S. government from carrying out or sponsoring assassinations abroad. This ban has been interpreted to include wartime targeting of civilians, according to a recent Foreign Affairs article by Brian Finucane, a former legal adviser for the State Department who now works for Crisis Group.

And the so-called Leahy law, a set of budget amendments named for Sen. Patrick Leahy, requires the U.S. government to vet foreign military units for “gross violations of human rights” when providing training or aid to those units. Several progressive members of Congress have raised concerns that U.S. aid to Israel — both before and during the present war — violates that requirement.

“For air advisory missions, which I imagine involve intelligence sharing and training, specific domestic legal restrictions such as the Leahy law and the assassination ban would likely come into play,” McBrien said. But the Leahy vetting process is “reversed” for Israel; rather than vetting Israeli military units beforehand, the U.S. State Department sends aid and then waits for reports of violations, according to a recent article by Josh Paul, who resigned from his post as a State Department political-military officer over his concerns with U.S. support for Israel.

“As a general matter, U.S. officials who are providing support to another country during armed conflict would want to make sure they are not aiding and abetting war crimes,” Finucane told The Intercept. He emphasized that the same principle applies to weapons transfers and intelligence sharing.

The Israeli military intentionally strikes Palestinian civilian infrastructure, known as “power targets,” in order to “create a shock,” according to an investigation by the Israeli news website +972 Magazine. Targets are generated using an artificial intelligence system known as “Habsora,” Hebrew for “gospel.”

“Nothing happens by accident,” an Israeli military intelligence source told +972 Magazine. “When a 3-year-old girl is killed in a home in Gaza, it’s because someone in the army decided it wasn’t a big deal for her to be killed — that it was a price worth paying in order to hit [another] target. We are not Hamas. These are not random rockets. Everything is intentional. We know exactly how much collateral damage there is in every home.”

The Biden administration has gone to great lengths to conceal the nature of its support for the Israeli military. The Pentagon quietly tapped a so-called Tiger Team to facilitate weapons assistance to Israel, as The Intercept has previously reported. The administration has also declined to reveal which weapons systems it’s providing Israel and at which quantities, insisting that the secrecy is necessary for security reasons.

“We’re being careful not to quantify or get into too much detail about what they’re getting — for their own operational security purposes, of course,” White House spokesperson John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing in October.

This contrasts with its support for Ukraine, about which it has been far more transparent. The administration has provided an itemized list of its weapons assistance to Ukraine, a country facing at least as much of a threat amid the invasion of Russia. The White House has never addressed the incongruity. Past administrations have also provided detailed public information about U.S. targeting support for the Saudi and Emirati military campaigns in Yemen, which U.S. officials claim was meant to reduce civilian casualties.

The secrecy “may reflect the fact that the U.S. has interests that are in tension, the Biden administration has interests that are in tension,” Finucane said. “On the one hand, they want to publicly embrace Israel and support Israel, providing what seems to be unconditional support. On the other hand, they don’t want to be perceived as taking the country into another war in the Middle East.”

https://theintercept.com/2024/01/11/israel-air-force-targeting-intelligence/

There's also a ton of information from the IEC regarding international Standards surrounding Biodigital convergence.

Quantum Dots are programmable graphene oxide nanoparticles which serve many functions, including biometric data harvesting (spying).

The demons want to build their Smart Cities from this material!

https://ambassadorlove.blog/2021/12/17/quantum-dots-dna-barcoding-nano-razors-the-israeli-state/


Quantum Dots, DNA Barcoding, Nano-Razors & The Israeli State
December 17, 2021 by Dr. Ariyana Love
December 2, 2021
By Dr. Ariyana Love, ND

In my latest interview with Stew Peter’s, I brought evidence confirming that Dr. Andreas Noack, the good doctor who risked his life to warn humanity of the extreme dangers of the death jab, is in fact deceased.

Days after Dr. Noack’s mysterious death, a video was leaked revealing Graphene Hydroxide nano-razors inside the Pfizer death jab, under Dark Field Microscopy. The sample is loaded with Graphene Hydroxide.

You will see an individual Microsphere releasing it’s payload of nanoscale Graphene Hydroxide which looks exactly like razorblades when zoomed in on the individual shiny specs. See more images here.

LEAKED FOOTAGE: GRAPHENE HYDROXIDE NANO-RAZORBLADES – DARK FIELD MICROSCOPY

An English translation of this video can be found in the article entitled, Dr. Ariyana Discusses Nano-Biosensors/Nanorazors and Dr. Noack’s Death After He Located Graphene Hydroxide in the COVID Vaccine.

MICROSPHERES & MICROBUBBLES

Microbeads and Microspheres are listed as an active ingredient in the Pfizer death jab patent. Microspheres and Microbubbles are listed in the Moderna death jab patent.

Microspheres and Microbubbles are micrometer size devices approximately equal in size to a red blood cell, according to the NIH. That’s about the width of a Human hair.


Microbubbles and Microspheres (bottom right)
Microspheres and Microbubbles are made from Poly(lactic-co-glycolic) acid (PLGA). PLGA is a copolymer made from Graphene Oxide (GO). Graphene Oxide-PLGA nanofibers are used in a host of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved “therapeutic” devices. However, the ingredients of these devices are cytotoxic, meaning they destroy cells.

Graphene Oxide PLGA Toxicity induces an inflammatory response and deadly cytokine storm reaction, according to animal studies. The FDA should be investigated for this.

Microspheres are coated with gold nanoparticles. Microspheres are used for scaffolding, which is artificial tissue engineering inside the Human body. PubMed writes, “Scaffolds are materials that have been engineered to cause desirable cellular interactions to contribute to the formation of new functional tissues for medical purposes. Cells are often ‘seeded’ into these structures capable of supporting three-dimensional tissue formation.”

This technology is being used for DNA-based tissue engineering and “scaffolding” of Humans, without their Informed Consent. See more scaffolding images from a Slovakian study of the death jab, here.

Microbubbles contain one or more “viral vectors coding CRISPR-Cas-9 system“. It’s a “state-of-the-art” drug and chemical delivery method. They contain lab enhanced chimeric proteins of the messenger RNA/DNA. Microbubbles have a lipid and nickel-coated quartz substrate. They contain a drug and chemical payload in the outer, lipid-coating and another payload on the inside.

Graphene Oxide Nanotubes enable Microbubbles to self-replicate via electrical pulse. They interlink by electrodes. Microbubbles were designed to break through the blood/brain barrier and deliver their drug and chemical payload into brain cells. Ultrasound is used to help Microbubbles breach the blood/brain barrier. Here’s a video animation of how microbubbles / microspheres work to deliver drugs into the brain.

This gene delivery technology was funded and developed for the purpose of treating sick people, not healthy people. It was intended to be used as a treatment for cancer, not as a medical intervention for our healthy kids.

The Microbubble and Microsphere devices carry drug and chemical payloads for controlled release of encapsulated DNA. It’s targeted drug delivery can be unloaded over an extended period of time. This is very important to understand. They can be formulated for “sustained release” and programmed to release it’s payload at a later date, over a period of days, weeks, months or years, as the Moderna patent specifies.


Moderna patent US10703789B2 delayed drug release
QUANTOM DOTS & MICROBEADS

Atomic scale nanometer devices called Quantum Dots and Microbeads, are also components of the death jab weapons system. They are found in the Pfizer and Moderna patents.

These nanoscale technological devices are 1000 times smaller than a micrometer. Quantum Dots have nothing to do with plastic particles, these are carbon based nanocrystals, 10-50 atoms thick, and made from Graphene.

Quantom Dots are used for DNA barcoding of Humans using CRISPR-Cas-9 technology. They are super conductors made for bio-imaging and bio-tracking of Humans. They too were developed for “therapeutic” use, to eradicate cancers, not to enslave Humans.

Quantum Dots are artificial, color based, bioluminescent marker genes. They use three colors taken from the enzymatic proteins of insects (Luciferase), glow worms and jellyfish. The chimeric proteins are being barcoded onto Human genes to make them trackable, programmable and encoded, so Human cells will light up, enabling the NWO oligarchs to monitor your every move.

I discussed Quantum Dots and more with Stew Peters on December 9th, 2021.

Dr. Ariyana Love on Stew Peters Show, Dec. 9, 2021
Microbead patent US20110017493A1, verifies that Microbeads “carbon based” (made from Graphene) and Microbead patent ES2784361T3/en specifies that it’s used to create molecular barcodes in Humans.

Thermo Ficher sells Microbeads and markets them as Dynabeads and SPIONs. See SPIONS here.

THE ISRAELI STATE

This technology was developed at the Hebrew University in occupied Jerusalem. The Quantum Dot patent WO201413562A1 is owned by Yissum, a Hebrew University company owned by the Israeli state and co-owned by Nanosys, a Silicon Valley based company. These two companies are sublicensing the technology, worldwide.

Yissum business partners include Google, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Microsoft, and many more, while Samsung has a partnership with Nanosys.

Moderna’s patents are owned by Israel. Pfizer patents are owned by Israel. Pfizer CEO is in bed with Israel. Moderna is partnered with Israel in medical maleficence.

Moderna’s CEO Stephane Bancel, wants every man, women and child injected with Moderna’s poison #DeathJab, including INFANTS!


Is it clear to you now who it is that has the greatest vested interest in branding and enslaving Humans like cattle? The cloning of insect DNA (Luciferase) into Humans is called cross-species genomics. This is the process of manually adding DNA from insects into Humans by transfection, a process also known as cloning, in order to change the genetic makeup of cells. It works by deleting one or more gene from the Human host and encodes Human cells to express the new genetic trait of an insect. Is that what you want to become?


BIOCHIP & HYDROGEL

Dr. Pablo Campra mentioned that nano-biosensors are in the death jabs. They can be found in the DARPA patent US7427497B2/en which lists “T-shaped micro-fluidic Biochips”.


Hydrogels contain the entire mRNA weapons system. They need us saturated with their cloning technology in order to succeed in genetically modifying Humans to the point of patent eligibility. They will do so by injections, masks, nasal swabs, hand sanitizer, aerial spraying, and any other means necessary to achieve their end goal.

We are in fact being saturated with Graphene Oxide Hydrogels. They’re being inserted into our food, clothing, hair and make-up products, household cleaners, alcohol, pharmaceutical drugs, sanitary items, water supply, etc.

Ethylene Oxide in masks and on PCR swabs, is in fact Graphene Oxide, Poly(ethylene oxide) Graphene Nanoribbons. The bad news is that Fauci and the NIH funded mRNA nanotechnology which is skin-penetrating and can be dispensed via aerial spraying, as reported by InfoWars. The good news is this weapons system can also be expelled through the skin, if you know how to properly detox. The key to protecting yourself from this biological attack is to boost your immune system and remain on a continued Protocol.

PROTOCOL

There is a special natural supplement that disables the operating system, kills the parasites, and removes Graphene and other metals, effectively expelling them from your body. This supplement increases endogenous glutathione by 800%, repairs damage to your cells and to your DNA, and turns genes on, according to scientific research. This medical breakthrough is being used now by doctors who are able to reverse the coagulation cascade in just minutes. You will find this supplement in my Protocol here.

https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/quantum-dots-dna-barcoding-nano-razors.html

Are You an Anti-Paxxer?

🇺🇸💊As doctors drop Paxlovid because of drug interactions and research shows it causes Covid rebounds and virus shedding, Pfizer and MSM crank the PR machine to hide the facts and shame "anti-paxxers."

Don't fall for it!


Are You an Anti-Paxxer?
As doctors drop Paxlovid because of drug interactions and research shows it causes Covid rebounds and virus shedding, Pfizer and MSM crank the PR machine to hide the facts and shame "anti-paxxers."

Linda Bonvie

Pfizer has a big public relations push on for its controversial drug Paxlovid. There’s even a name being bandied about for those who question the drug: “Anti-Paxxers.”
When an article by Los Angeles Times metro reporter Rong-Gong Lin II recommended last month that practically everyone who tests positive for Covid takes Pfizer’s Paxlovid, some media veterans may have wondered what had become of the traditional wall between news reporting and advertising.

The story, which appeared on January 28, swept away almost all of the reservations that have been raised about the safety and effectiveness of this patent medicine, assuring us that “Paxlovid rebound” is a non-issue and fear of serious side effects is “erroneous.” It even went so far as to suggest that if your doctor won’t prescribe this “highly effective” medication, it’s time to go doctor shopping.

So why is this LA Times writer so desperately trying to sell us this fast-tracked antiviral that comes with a black box warning?

The article appeared at a particularly critical time for Pfizer just as it transitions from Emergency Use Authorization, or EUA Paxlovid, to FDA-approved Paxlovid. Originally free to patients, the medication was stockpiled by the U.S. government to the tune of 24 million treatment courses at a cost to taxpayers of $530 a box. Now, the FDA-approved version (same drug, different box) sells for a list price of up to $1,500. (According to an analysis by researchers at Harvard University, the actual cost to Pfizer for a five-day Paxlovid course is $13).

But to Pfizer’s chagrin, it now doesn’t seem to be able to even give the stuff away, let alone sell it at a premium price. Last fall Pfizer accepted a return of nearly 8 million boxes sent back by the U.S. government.

What’s a drugmaker to do when both patients and doctors shun a product that was anticipated to be the better half of Pfizer’s post-Covid “multibillion-dollar franchise?

Flush with all that Covid cash and new Paxlovid FDA approval last May, Pfizer went shopping for partners to help promote its products.

No stranger to top-tier PR firms such as Edelman and Ogilvy, the drugmaker tagged two of the biggest names in contemporary communications companies, Publicis Groupe, a Paris-based giant PR and ad agency, and the humongous Interpublic Group. These high-level agencies come at a big price tag, but what they can offer is priceless—a way to get your story told by respected media outlets.

That’s right, if you have enough money to hire the folks with all the right contacts, you too can create your own “news!” And these special contacts are something that PR firms, such as Edelman, are very proud of. Many agency hires, in fact, are recruited directly from major media outlets, such as Edelman NYC Brand Director Nancy Jeffrey, who spent a decade at the Wall Street Journal.

As quoted in an Edelman website blog, Jeffrey recalls how Richard Edelman (son of founder Dan) would call her during her time working at the paper “to meet a client with a story to tell.” As Jeffrey says, “No one at Edelman ever rises too high to pitch a reporter.”

So was our LA Times reporter “pitched,” or does he just have an evangelical connection with Paxlovid?

Let’s take a close look at his story and see what we find.

Side effects be gone!

First, there’s the article’s headline, which began: “If it’s COVID, Paxlovid”? Getting your oft-advertised product’s rhyming tagline in a headline—now that’s branding! And we don’t have to tell any of the side effects in this venue. The LA Times piece was off to a great start.

Why aren’t more people being given Paxlovid, the reporter wanted to know. It’s “cheap or even free for many,” he said. And then he delivered his first rave review, calling it “highly effective.”

By paragraph four, however, our intrepid reporter had uncovered the bad news that “a number of doctors are still declining to prescribe it.” But why? It must be those pesky “outdated arguments” about “Paxlovid rebound.” Anyone who gets Covid “has a similar rare chance of rebound,” he told us. For extra punch, he called on Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, professor of medicine at UCSF, to back up that statement. Rebound is “like, bogus” and “just dumb,” Chin-Hong said.

What Lin didn’t report is that a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in November 2023, by researchers from Mass General Brigham, found that in Covid patients taking Paxlovid, rebound was “much more common” and often without symptoms. Nearly 21 percent had virologic rebound versus under 2 percent not on the drug. Of perhaps even more significance, prolonged viral shedding for an average of fourteen days was noted in those who rebounded, indicating that they “were potentially still contagious for much longer.” The virologic rebound “phenomenon,” in Paxlovid patients, the authors noted, “has implications for post-N-R (Paxlovid) monitoring and isolation recommendations.” This study closely monitored patients with follow-ups three times a week “sometimes for months.”

After quoting from several Paxlovid-positive FDA and CDC statements and referencing a California Public Health commercial where people dance to an upbeat tune singing “Test it, treat it, beat it, California you know you need it,” Lin got around to some serious stuff—side effects.

Not mentioned by Lin, but good to know anyway, Paxlovid bears an FDA-required black-box warning about drug interactions, cautioning of “potentially severe, life-threatening, or fatal events.” But the article carefully danced around this inconvenient issue, simply mentioning that some Paxlovid takers may need to have their medications adjusted. The fear of “serious side effects . . . is largely erroneous,” it claimed.

Really?

“There are 125 drug interactions (for Paxlovid) across twenty-five different classes of medicines,” author and FLCCC President Dr. Pierre Kory said in a phone interview. “I’ve never used any medicine that had that number and degree of drug interactions, and I find it absurd,” added Kory, who is an expert in early Covid treatment.

And this is no secret. The Paxlovid package insert lists thirty-nine specific drugs that interact with this anti-viral (which is not a complete list, we’re warned) including medications that treat conditions such as an enlarged prostate, gout, migraines, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, arrhythmias, and angina.

With side effects out of the way, our reporter moved on to an interesting idea—doctor shopping.

If your doctor turns you down for Paxlovid, “what other options are there?” How about “reaching out to another healthcare provider” we’re advised, one “who might be more knowledgeable about Paxlovid . . .”

Don’t be an ‘Anti-Paxxer!’

The LA Times isn’t alone in this timely pushing of Paxlovid. The New York Times also ran a glowing Paxlovid piece at the beginning of January. The black-box warning was glossed over by simply saying that some “doctors balk” over the “long list of medications not to be mixed with Paxlovid,” referring to the drug as being “stunningly effective.” The NYT reporter also added five mentions of a study—actually a preprint (not yet peer reviewed or published)—which through the use of statistical magic concluded that during the course of the research had only half of the eligible Covid patients in the U.S. taken Paxlovid, 48,000 lives would have been saved.

The server where the research was posted warns journalists and others when discussing preprints to “emphasize it has yet to be evaluated by the medical community and information presented may be erroneous.”

Paxlovid is not the only drug that gets special treatment by the media. Last January, a 60 Minutes segment was called out by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine as “an unlawful weight loss drug ad” for the med Wegovy. The piece, it noted, “looked like a news story, but it was effectively a drug ad,” the group said in a press release. PCRM also stated that Novo Nordisk, which makes Wegovy, paid over $100,000 to the doctors CBS interviewed for the segment.

With this new frenzy to sell Paxlovid, one can’t help but compare it to the campaign against ivermectin. Kicked off by the FDA in August 2021, it successfully branded this Nobel Prize-winning, FDA-approved drug as nothing more than a horse dewormer endorsed by fanatical outlier doctors and accepted by gullible patients. Despite being found to be an extremely safe treatment as well as an effective one for Covid, the FDA, CDC, and its media “partners” made ivermectin the subject of false accusations and warnings about the supposed risks of using it.

But early on in the game it was decided, as Dr. Kory pointed out, “to keep the market open for their novel pricey Paxlovid pill.” And to that effect, nothing was going to stand in the way. In an interview last summer with the head of the UCSF Department of Medicine, FDA Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf admitted that he helped promote Paxlovid—something he acknowledged is explicitly against the rules.

“In normal times, the FDA should not be a cheerleader . . .” Califf said. But since back then EUA drugs could not be advertised (a policy that changed in the fall of 2022) he went ahead and pitched it himself.

The Paxlovid campaign is far from over. In fact, it may now be revving up to full throttle. There’s even a name being bandied about for those who question the drug: “Anti-Paxxers.”

And if we can take any insight from the new Pfizer tagline (just filed for protection with the US Patent and Trademark Office), “Outdo Yesterday,” there are even more spurious strategies in its pharmaceutical pipeline.

Full story:👇
https://rescue.substack.com/p/are-you-an-anti-paxxer

Join ➡️ @ShankaraChetty


https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/are-you-anti-paxxer-as-doctors-drop.html

The dark web: a journey into the dark sides of the internet

The internet represents a large and complex aspect of human daily life, where information is exchanged and social interaction takes place in an unprecedented way. However, there is a small and dark part of the internet known as the dark web, which intrigues some and terrifies others.

The dark web is a part of the internet that remains hidden from traditional search engines and requires special technologies to access it, such as using the Tor private network (TOR). This dark side of the internet allows users to access sites and services for the exchange of information and goods in illegal or unethical ways.

Activities on the dark web are very diverse, as individuals can find sites for drug trafficking, selling weapons, exchanging confidential information, and even ordering electronic hacking services. In addition, there are also platforms for illegal file sharing and circulation of extremist ideas.

With such a wide variety, the dark web raises big questions about privacy and security on the internet. Can States and authorities effectively combat this dark side How can individuals protect themselves from potential dangers

However, it is worth noting that the dark web is not necessarily a completely dangerous place, as there are also activities there aimed at maintaining privacy and moving in the dark without it being harmful. Bloggers and journalists can sometimes use the dark web to share information confidentially and securely.

In the end, the dark web remains a controversial part of the internet, combining opportunities and challenges. Interaction with this dark world requires caution and awareness, as drifting into it can be dangerous and expose individuals to many dangers.

Attraction Bundle .

Many men find it difficult to seduce a woman. Too many blockages have built up over the years that make charisma, self-confidence and relaxed interactions with women difficult.
http://energetic-eternity.de/produkt/attraction-bundle/#aff=sarafraz
Approximately 90-95% of communication between women and men takes place on a subconscious level. It is the unconscious signals that control us and make male attraction to women possible.

The Attraction Bundle gives you a masculine-erotic attraction to women in combination with overwhelming charisma and a good dose of self-confidence. Have fun.

Japanese professor files lawsuit against Ministry of Health regarding vaccine safety and efficacy!
John Smith
Masanori Fukushima (福島雅典), professor emeritus at Kyoto University in Japan, has filed a lawsuit against the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW).[i]


https://twitter.com/ShortShort_News/status/1622224704064098304 - Click image to watch a clip of the conference
The lawsuit seeks the following:

The disclosure of all safety and efficacy data of the covid-19 vaccines, submitted by Pfizer and Moderna to the MHLW and the PMDA (Japanese pharmaceutical and medical device regulation agency similar to the FDA)

Full disclosure of the contracts between Japan and the pharmaceutical companies (i.e., Pfizer, Moderna, etc.)

Compensation for those injured by the covid-19 vaccines

Professor Fukushima has over 25 years of experience as an oncologist, and is also the Director and Chairman of the Translational Research Informatics Center in Japan, which is the first academic center in Japan dedicated to transforming basic medical research into clinical practices. He also became involved in pharmacoepidemiology (the study of interactions between drugs and human populations) since 2000.


Professor Fukushima in a recent Japanese interview https://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm41745638

Professor Fukushima is director of the TRI https://advances.tri-kobe.org/en/feature/11/from-lab-to-clinic.html
In November 2022, Professor Fukushima had previously hosted a discussion with other doctors and professors where he condemned the Japanese MHLW for ignoring the dangers of the covid-19 vaccines. Professor Fukushima had demanded investigations into all covid-19 vaccine injuries in a thorough case by case evaluation of medical records. He also warned of the indefinite production of spike proteins via the covid-19 vaccines, as well as the side effects due to lipid nanoparticles.


https://rumble.com/v1yofle-japanese-professor-rebukes-ministry-of-health-dissolve-vaccine-committiee-i.html
Then in December 2022, Professor Fukushima had stated in an interview his intention to sue the Japanese government because its refusal to disclose vital information regarding the efficacy of the covid-19 vaccines.

Which brings us to the current situation where on February 2nd 2023, Professor Fukushima held the press conference for his lawsuit at the Tokyo District Court.

In addition to the lawsuit demands previously mentioned, he also warned that additional lawsuits may be filed if the Japanese MHLW does not acknowledge a causal link between the vaccine and their associated deaths.

Professor Fukushima skeptically questions the actual result of the 90 trillion yen spent by the government on the covid-19 vaccines. Speaking not only as a doctor and scientist, but also as a citizen and taxpayer, he sees it as part of his duty on behalf of the nation to understand the real effect of the vaccines. He believes surprising information will be revealed from the disclosure of the documents from the pharmaceutical manufacturing companies. He is also studying the pathological mechanisms of the vaccines with other experts as well as medical guidelines for the treatment of vaccine injuries.[ii]

Japanese law already stipulates compensation for the vaccine injured, so Professor Fukushima argues that it should be applied now. The Japanese vaccination law outlines the scope of benefits as follows (computer translation from their website):


https://elaws.e-gov.go.jp/document?lawid=323AC0000000068
Below is a transcript of a clip of the February 2023 lawsuit press conference:

Professor Fukushima: We have already started to study vaccine harms, basically in cooperation with various experts. This is the first topic. So, we will find out later on what happens after vaccination as a mechanism, i.e., as a pathological and cytological process. Around April last year, the pathology and forensic societies have already issued statements that, in the future, autopsies should be done on people who have died after vaccination. In the future, we need to urgently establish guidelines on what kind of medical treatment should be provided for victims injured by vaccines, and we need to develop diagnostic techniques. Given the situation, we will carry out these tasks.

One more thing. Pathological autopsies have already been conducted on people who died after receiving the vaccine. However, the Health Ministry is still unwilling to acknowledge the causal link between the vaccine and the deaths. If the Health Ministry maintains this unjustified position, we intend to file additional lawsuits in consultation with our lawyers. We demand that the Health Ministry provides appropriate victim compensation based on the vaccination law. In other words, victim compensation based on the Vaccination Law is properly stipulated by Japanese law. So, it is not necessary to create a new law to compensate for the vaccine harm. Scientists like us are taking responsible actions in every respect to ensure that the vaccine victims are compensated.

Journalist: Let me ask you a few questions. In your editorial, Professor Fukushima, you wrote two strong statements to all healthcare workers: a warning about the safety of vaccines and a request to stop vaccinations. For example, medical societies are flooded with case reports of various diseases in addition to myocarditis and shingles all over Japan. A huge number of case reports, more than 300 reports by medical experts have been released all over Japan. I consider that this is an extraordinary alarming situation. What is your message to the medical professionals?

Professor Fukushima: I want to say one thing very clearly to the Health Ministry in addition to the medical professionals. They should distribute a Vaccination Victim’s Handbook to everyone who has been vaccinated. The Vaccination Victim’s Handbook is similar to the Atomic Bomb Victim’s Handbook which is distributed to survivors of the atomic bombs. After distributing the Vaccination Victim’s handbook to vaccinated people, medical institutions should be encouraged to properly follow up with the vaccinated people. It is necessary to examine whether there is a link between the disease and the vaccine. Biopsy tests should be performed on sick people suspected of vaccine induced illness.

A different clip with English subtitles can be found here:




References:

[i] https://twitter.com/ShortShort_News/status/1622224704064098304

[ii] https://youtube.com/watch?v=GCPaPaAEP4g 【公式】2023.2.2福島雅典教授、厚労省に対する訴訟記者会見ハイライト (English with Japanese subtitles). Full press conference in Japanese available at https://nicovideo.jp/watch/so41730996

Share







https://infogame.substack.com/p/japanese-professor-files-lawsuit

February 2nd 2023: Professor Fukushima held the press conference for his lawsuit at the Tokyo District Court.
In addition to the lawsuit demands previously mentioned, he also warned that additional lawsuits may be filed if the Japanese MHLW does not acknowledge a causal link between the vaccine and their associated deaths

https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/japanese-professor-files-lawsuit.html

Will Disease X be Leaked in 2025?

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

New Year Donation Drive: Global Research Is Committed to the “Unspoken Truth”

***

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime, a one world government. The reason we can be sure there will be additional pandemics, whether manufactured using either fear and hype alone or an actual bioweapon created for this very purpose, is because the takeover plan, aka The Great Reset, is based on the premise that we need global biosecurity surveillance and centralized response

A new contagion will likely be born in 2025, and media are already preparing us for it

January 15-19, 2024, global leaders met at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Davos summit where the key topic of discussion was “Preparing for Disease X,” a hypothetical new pandemic predicted to kill 20 times more people than COVID-19

In August 2023, a new vaccine research facility was set up in Wiltshire, England, to begin work on a vaccine against the unknown “Disease X”

The U.S. Congress introduced the “Disease X Act of 2023” (H.R.3832) in June 2023. The bill calls for the establishment of a BARDA program to develop “medical countermeasures for viral threats with pandemic potential.” The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Health in early June 2023 but has not yet been passed

*



The COVID-19 pandemic allowed for an unprecedented shift in power and wealth distribution across the world and, as predicted, it was not to be a one-off event. A new contagion will likely be born in 2025, and media are already preparing us for it.

January 15-19, 2024, global leaders met at the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Davos summit where the key topic of discussion was “Preparing for Disease X,”1 a hypothetical new pandemic predicted to emerge in 2025 and kill 20 times more people than COVID-19.2 As reported by the Mirror:3

“The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned of a potential Disease X since 2017, a term indicating an unknown pathogen that could cause a serious international epidemic …

Public speakers at the ‘Preparing for Disease X’ event next Wednesday [January 17, 2024] include Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director-general of the WHO, Brazilian minister of health Nisia Trindade Lima, and Michel Demaré, chair of the board at AstraZeneca.

In their first post-pandemic meeting held in November 2022, the WHO brought over 300 scientists to consider which of over 25 virus families and bacteria could potentially create another pandemic.

The list the team came up with included: the Ebola virus, the Marburg virus disease, Covid-19, SARS, and the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). Others included lassa fever, nipah and henipaviral diseases, zift Valley fever, and zika — as well as the unknown pathogen that would cause ‘Disease X.’”

I’ve interviewed Meryl Nass about how the WHO is trying to take over aspects of everyone’s lives. She just published an important piece over the weekend, Why Is Davos So Interested in Disease? about how the WEF and the WHO have become partners to terrify the world.

Alexis Baden-Mayer, Esq., political director for the Organic Consumers Association, did some digging into the participants of this WEF event, and the two things they all have in common are 1) dumping the AstraZeneca COVID shot on the developing world (primarily India and Brazil) after rich countries rejected it due to its admitted blood clotting risk, and 2) pushing for the implementation of medical AI systems that will eliminate doctors along with patient choice and privacy.

Practice Runs or Responsible Planning?

In a January 11, 2024, tweet, Fox News analyst and former assistant secretary for public affairs for the U.S. Treasury Department, Monica Crowley, wrote:4

“From the same people who brought you COVID-19 now comes Disease X: Next week in Davos, the unelected globalists at the World Economic Forum will hold a panel on a future pandemic 20x deadlier than COVID …

Just in time for the election, a new contagion to allow them to implement a new WHO treaty, lock down again, restrict free speech and destroy more freedoms. Sound far-fetched? So did what happened in 2020. When your enemies tell you what they’re planning and what they’re planning FOR, believe them. And get ready.”

Dr. Stuart Ray, vice chair of medicine for data integrity and analytics at Johns Hopkins’ Department of Medicine, dismissed such warnings, telling Fortune magazine5 that “Coordination of public health response is not conspiracy, it’s simply responsible planning.”

I’d be willing to believe him if it wasn’t for a now-obvious trend: Whatever the globalists claim will happen actually does happen at a remarkable frequency, and their prognostic capabilities become easier to explain when you consider that most lethal pandemics have been caused by manmade viruses, the products of gain-of-function research. It’s pretty easy to predict a new viral outbreak if you have said virus waiting in the wings.

With that in mind, recent research from China certainly raises concern, to say the least. According to a January 3, 2024, preprint,6 a SARS-CoV-2-related pangolin coronavirus — described as a “cell culture-adapted mutant” called GX_P2V that was first cultured in 2017 — was found to kill 100% of the humanized mice (ACE2-transgenic mice) infected with it.7

The primary cause of death was brain inflammation. According to the authors, “this is the first report showing that a SARS-CoV-2-related pangolin coronavirus can cause 100% mortality in hACE2 mice, suggesting a risk for GX_P2V to spill over into humans.”

However, if this virus mutated as a result of passaging through cell cultures, then it’s not likely to emerge in the wild. It’s another unnatural lab creation, so rather than saying it may spill over from pangolins to humans, it would be more accurate to admit that it may pose a (rather serious) risk to humans were a lab escape to occur.

COVID Dress Rehearsals

In 2017, Johns Hopkins Center of Health Security held a coronavirus pandemic simulation called the SPARS Pandemic 2025-2028 scenario.8 Importantly, the exercise stressed “communication dilemmas concerning medical countermeasures that could plausibly emerge” in a pandemic scenario.

Then, in October 2019, less than three months before the COVID-19 outbreak, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in collaboration with Johns Hopkins and the World Economic Forum hosted Event 201.

The name itself suggests it may have been a continuation of the SPARS Pandemic exercise. College courses are numbered based on their prerequisites. A 101 course does not require any prior knowledge whereas 201 courses require prior familiarity with the topic at hand.

As in the SPARS Pandemic scenario, Event 201 involved an outbreak of a highly infectious coronavirus, and the primary (if not sole) focus of the exercise was, again, how to control information and keep “misinformation” in check, not how to effectively discover and share remedies.

Social media censorship played a prominent role in the Event 201 plan, and in the real-world events of 2020 through the present, accurate information about vaccine development, production and injury has indeed been effectively suppressed around the world, thanks to social media companies and Google’s censoring of opposing viewpoints.

In March 2021, an outbreak of “an unusual strain of monkeypox virus” was simulated.9 In late July the following year, the WHO director-general declared that a multi-country outbreak of monkeypox constituted a public health emergency of international concern,10 against his own advisory group.

‘Catastrophic Contagion’ Exercise

Considering both of these simulations, SPARS (“Event 101”?) and Event 201, foreshadowed what eventually occurred in real life during COVID, when Gates hosts yet another pandemic exercise, it’s worth paying attention to the details.

October 23, 2022, Gates, Johns Hopkins and the WHO cohosted “a global challenge exercise” dubbed “Catastrophic Contagion,”11,12 involving a fictional pathogen called “severe epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025” (SEERS-25).

Enterovirus D6813 is typically associated with cold and flu-like illness in infants, children and teens. In rare cases, it’s also been known to cause viral meningitis and acute flaccid myelitis, a neurological condition resulting in muscle weakness and loss of reflexes in one or more extremities.

Enteroviruses A71 and A6 are known to cause hand, foot and mouth disease,14 while poliovirus, the prototypical enterovirus, causes polio (poliomyelitis), a potentially life-threatening type of paralysis that primarily affects children under age 5. So, the virus they modeled in this simulation appears to be something similar to enterovirus D68, but worse.

Vaccine Drug Trials Begin for Deadly Nipah Virus

One known virus that bears some resemblance to the fictional SEERS-25 is the Nipah virus. This virus has a kill rate of about 75%,15 and survivors oftentimes face long-term neurological issues stemming from the infection. Nipah is also said to affect children to a greater degree than adults.16

Incidentally, human trials for a vaccine against the deadly Nipah virus were recently launched.17Volunteers received their first shots in early January 2024. The experimental injection uses the same viral vector technology used to produce AstraZeneca’s COVID shot.

The trial is reportedly being carried out by the University of Oxford in an undisclosed area where Nipah is actively infecting victims. (India seems to be indicated, as an outbreak in Kerala killed two people and hospitalized three in September 2023.18)

The disease is thought to spread via interaction with infected animals such as goats, pigs, cats and horses. It may also spread via tainted blood products and food. Symptoms can emerge anywhere from a few days after exposure to as long as 45 days.

Initial symptoms include fever, headache and respiratory illness, which can rapidly progress to encephalitis (brain swelling), seizures and coma within just a couple of days. According to the WHO, pigs are known to be “highly contagious” during the incubation period, and it’s possible that humans may be as well, although that has yet to be confirmed.

Training African Leaders to Go Along with the Narrative

Tellingly, the Catastrophic Contagion exercise focused on getting leadership in African countries involved and trained in following the script. African nations went “off script” more often than others during the COVID pandemic, and didn’t follow in the footsteps of developed nations when it came to pushing the jabs.

As a result, vaccine makers now face the problem of having a huge control group, as the COVID jab uptake on the African continent was only 6%,19 yet it fared far better than developed nations in terms of COVID-19 infections and related deaths.20

The Catastrophic Contagion exercise predicts SEERS-25 will kill 20 million people worldwide, including 15 million children, and many who survive the infection will be left with paralysis and/or brain damage. In other words, the “cue” given is that the next pandemic may target children rather than the elderly, as was the case with COVID-19.

Vaccine Against Unknown ‘X’ Pathogen Is Already in the Works


In August 2023, a new vaccine research facility was set up in Wiltshire, England, fully staffed with more 200 scientists, to begin work on a vaccine against the unknown “Disease X.” As reported by Metro:21

“It took 362 days to develop the Covid-19 vaccine. But the Vaccine Development and Evaluation Centre team wants to reduce that time to 100 days. Scientists at the facility will develop a range of prototype vaccines and tests.

The new lab is a part of a global effort to respond to global health threats. The UK and other G7 countries signed up to the ‘100 Days Mission’ in 2021. The government has invested £65 million into the lab.

Professor Dame Jenny Harries, the head of the UK Health Security Agency, said the new facility would ‘ensure that we prepare so that if we have a new Disease X, a new pathogen, we have as much of that work in advance as possible.’”

In the U.S., Congress also introduced the “Disease X Act of 2023” (H.R.383222) back in June 2023. The bill calls for the establishment of a BARDA program to develop “medical countermeasures for viral threats with pandemic potential.” The bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Health in early June 2023 but has not yet been passed.

The Disease X Act amends a section of the Public Health Service Act with two new clauses that call for “the identification and development of platform manufacturing technologies needed for advanced development and manufacturing of medical countermeasures for viral families which have significant potential to cause a pandemic,” and “advanced research and development of flexible medical countermeasures against priority respiratory virus families and other respiratory viral pathogens with a significant potential to cause a pandemic, with both pathogen-specific and pathogen-agnostic approaches …”

Needless to say, since it’s impossible to customize vaccines using the conventional method of growing viruses in eggs or some other cell media in 100 days, it seems inevitable that all these efforts are about the expansion of gene-based technologies. This, despite the fact that the mRNA technology used for the COVID jabs has proven to be disastrous from a safety standpoint, and ineffective to boot.

Why Manufactured Pandemics Will Continue

At this point, it’s quite clear that “biosecurity” is the chosen means by which the globalist cabal intends to seize power over the world. The WHO is working on securing sole power over pandemic response globally through its international pandemic treaty which, if implemented, will eradicate the sovereignty of all member nations.

The WHO’s pandemic treaty is the gateway to a global, top-down totalitarian regime, a one world government. Ultimately, the WHO intends to dictate all health care. But to secure that power, they will need more pandemics. COVID-19 alone was not enough to get everyone onboard with a centralized pandemic response unit, and they probably knew that from the start.

So, the reason we can be sure there will be additional pandemics, whether manufactured using either fear and hype alone or an actual bioweapon created for this very purpose, is because the takeover plan, aka The Great Reset, is based on the premise that we need global biosecurity surveillance and centralized response.

Biosecurity, in turn, is the justification for an international vaccine passport, which the G20 has signed on to, and that passport will also be your digital identification. That digital ID, then, will be tied to your social credit score, personal carbon footprint tracker, medical records, educational records, work records, social media presence, purchase records, your bank accounts and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC).

Once all these pieces are fully connected, you’ll be in a digital prison, and the ruling cabal — whether officially a one world government by then or not — will have total control over your life from cradle to grave.

We’re Already Suffering Under a Pseudo-One World Government

We actually already have a pseudo-one world government, in the form of Bill Gates’ nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). They are making health care decisions that should be left to individual nations and/or states, and they’re making decisions that will line their own pockets, regardless of what happens to the public health-wise.

They coordinate and synchronize pandemic communication during simulated practice runs, and then, when the real-world situation emerges that fits the bill, the preplanned script is played out more or less verbatim.

Between the G20 declaration to implement an international vaccine passport under the auspice of the WHO, and the WHO’s pandemic treaty, everything is lined up to take control of the next pandemic, and in so doing, further securing the foundation for a one world government.

As discussed in my 2021 article, “COVID-19 Dress Rehearsals and Proof of the Plan,” the pandemic measures rolled out for COVID-19 were the culmination of decades of careful planning to radically and permanently alter the governance and social structures of the world.

The medical system has been used in the past to drive forward a New World Order agenda — now rebranded as “The Great Reset” — and it’s now being used to implement the final stages of that longstanding plan. COVID-19 was a real-world practice run, and showed just how effectively a pandemic can be used to shift the balance of power, and strip the global population of its wealth and individual freedoms.

So, there’s no doubt in my mind that additional pandemics will be declared, because they’re the means to the globalists’ ends. To prevent this global coup, we need everyone to speak and share the truth to the point that you’re able. Only then will our voices outnumber the voices of the propaganda machine.

Door To Freedom (doortofreedom.org), an organization founded by Dr. Meryl Nass, has a poster that explains how the pandemic treaty and International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments will change life as we know it and strip us of every vestige of freedom. Please download this poster and share it with everyone you know. Also put it up on public billboards and places where communities share information.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Notes

1, 21 Metro January 15, 2024

2, 3 Mirror January 13, 2024

4 Twitter/X Monica Crowley January 11, 2024

5 Fortune January 12, 2024

6 ResearchGate January 2024 DOI: 10.1101/2024.01.03.574008

7 MSN January 15, 2024

8 SPARS Pandemic Scenario

9 NTI Paper November 2021

10 UN News July 23, 2022

11 Catastrophic Contagion

12 Catastrophic Contagion Videos

13 CDC Enterovirus D68

14 CDC Enteroviruses

15 Forbes September 15, 2023

16 Intractable & Rare Diseases Research February 2019; 8(1): 1-8

17 Forbes January 11, 2024

18 BBC September 14, 2023

19 First Post November 19, 2021

20 Yahoo News November 19, 2021

22 HR 3832 The Disease X Act of 2023

Featured image source

https://www.globalresearch.ca/will-disease-x-leaked-2025/5847210

https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/01/will-disease-x-be-leaked-in-2025-all.html