Life’s complicated. But it’s more complicated when you’re some elite pederast setting up orgies in the White House.
Homosexual prostitution inquiry ensnares VIPs with Reagan, Bush ‘Call boys’ took midnight tour of White House
Washington Times, June 29, 1989
A homosexual prostitution ring is under investigation by federal and District authorities and includes among its clients key officials of the Reagan and Bush administrations, military officers, congressional aides and US and foreign businessmen with close social ties to Washington’s political elite, documents obtained by The Washington Times reveal.
One of the ring’s high-profile clients was so well-connected, in fact, that he could arrange a middle-of-the-night tour of the White House for his friends on Sunday, July 3, of last year. Among the six persons on the extraordinary 1 a.m. tour were two male prostitutes.
Federal authorities, including the Secret Service, are investigating criminal aspects of the ring and have told male prostitutes and their homosexual clients that a grand jury will deliberate over the evidence throughout the summer, The Times learned.
Reporters for this newspaper examined hundreds of credit-card vouchers, drawn on both corporate and personal cards and made payable to the escort service operated by the homosexual ring. Many of the vouchers were run through a so-called “sub-merchant” account of the Chambers Funeral Home by a son of the owner, without the company’s knowledge.
Among the client names contained in the vouchers – and identified by prostitutes and escort operators – are government officials, locally based US military officers, businessmen, lawyers, bankers, congressional aides and other professionals.
Editors of The Times said the newspaper would print only the names of those found to be in sensitive government posts or positions of influence. “There is no intention of publishing names or facts about the operation merely for titillation,” said Wesley Pruden, managing editor of The Times.
The office of US Attorney General Jay B. Stephens, former deputy White House counsel to President Reagan, is coordinating federal aspects of the inquiry but refused to discuss the investigation or grand jury actions.
Several former White House colleagues of Mr. Stephen are listed among clients of the homosexual prostitution ring, according to the credit card records, and those persons have confirmed that the charges were theirs.
Mr. Stephen’s office, after first saying it would cooperate with The Times’ inquiry, withdrew the offer late yesterday and also declined to say whether Mr. Stephens would recuse himself from the case because of possible conflict of interest.
At least one highly placed Bush administration official and a wealthy businessman who procured homosexual prostitutes from the escort services operated by the ring are cooperating with the investigation, several sources said.
Among clients who charged homosexual prostitutes services on major credit cards over the past 18 months are Charles K. Dutcher, former associate director of presidential personnel in the Reagan administration, and Paul R. Balach, Labor Secretary Elizabeth Dole’s political personnel liaison to the White House.
In the 1970s, Mr. Dutcher was a congressional aide to former Rep. Robert Bauman, Maryland Republican, who resigned from the House after admitted having engaged in sexual liaisons with teen-age male prostitutes. Mr. Dutcher also worked on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle when he represented an Indiana district in the House.
A charge also was discovered against the credit card of a former White House staffer who prepared the president’s daily news summary in the Reagan administration. Todd A Blodgett said he had not made the charge.
One of the ring’s big spending clients is Craig J. Spence, Washington socialite and international trade consultant, according to documents and interviews with operators and prostitutes who say they engaged in sexual activities with Mr. Spence.
Mr. Spence spent upwards of $20,000 a month for male prostitutes who provided sex to him and his friends, said to include military personnel who also acted as his “bodyguards.” It was Mr. Spence who arranged the nocturnal tour of the Reagan White House. Repeated attempts to reach Mr. Spence by telephone, fax machine and personal visits to his home, were unsuccessful.
Credit card vouchers confirm that Mr. Spence charged thousands of dollars on American Express and Visa cards, sometimes making $600 charges against his cards several times a day, drawn in behalf of an escort service called Professional Services Inc.
Members of major news organizations also procured escort services from the ring, credit card documents show. These include Stanley Mark Tapscott, who was an assistant managing editor of The Washington Times.
Mr. Tapscott, whose resignation on June 20 was accepted, said he had not procured homosexual escorts or sexual services of any kind. He said in an interview that he had talked to two women he arranged to meet through the escort service as part of an investigation of a dial-a-porn services he had initiated a year earlier when he was editor of the newspaper’s Money section. The charges were made against his company American Express card. His editors knew of no such investigation.
Before joining The Times, Mr. Tapscott worked for the Office of Personnel Management in the Reagan administration.
Managers of the escort ring said that “a few women” were used for clients who called with specific requests but that the regular stable was altogether male.
The documents show that a number of clients – lawyers, doctors and business executives – used corporate credit cards to procure escort services and that a number of military officers from the United States and allied countries – including one foreign officer using a “Department of Defence” credit card – charged male escort services.
One former top-level Pentagon officer said that for the past eight years, military and civilian intelligence authorities have been concerned that “a nest of homosexuals” at top levels of the Reagan administration may have been penetrated by Soviet-backed espionage agents posing as male prostitutes, said one former top-level Pentagon official.
A major concern, said the former official with longtime ties to top-ranking military intelligence officers, was that hostile foreign intelligence services were using young male prostitutes to compromise top administration homosexuals, thus making them subject to blackmail.
“We have known for many, many years that there is a department of the KGB [Soviet intelligence] whose job it is to prey on sexual deviants,” said retired Lt. Gen. Daniel Graham, former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Because “closet” homosexuals in government service can be easily “turned” through blackmail for espionage purposes, Gen. Graham said, “we have always in intelligence tried very hard not to be giving classified information to known homosexuals.”
Those interviewed by The Times confirmed that there were blackmail attempts by male prostitutes who wanted money and other favors to protect clients’ sexual lives.
The clients interviewed say a Feb. 28 police raid on a house at 6004 34th Place NW was set off by reports of blackmail and possible credit-card fraud complaints and by District hotel operators about prostitution activities.
In the raid, spearheaded by the Washington Field Office of the U.S. Secret Service, authorities found a telephone switchboard operation serving a half-dozen homosexual escort services.
Secret Service agents and District police vice investigators confiscated financial records, as well as ledgers, photos, diaries, telephone records, Rolodexes and client lists of the prostitution network, during the raid and with subsequent subpoenas issued by D.C. Superior Court.
Although the confiscated material was turned over to District police on the scene, witnesses and law enforcement agents say the Secret Service kept one box containing names and other information about high-level government officials who were clients of the male escort business.
District police officials say that, to their knowledge, this is the first time the Secret Service has ever become involved in such a raid in this area.
Initially, the Secret Service denied it was involved in the raid, but after a second raid of the 34th Place house on May 18, the agency acknowledged its involvement in the investigation.
Secret Service spokesman Bob Snow said the agency participated in the search and seizure operation because of its jurisdiction over credit card fraud. “We come into such operations usually at the request of a U.S. attorney … if the fraud involves $10,000 or more … We are not involved in any local prostitution investigation,” said Mr. Snow.
Witnesses to the February raid said 12 Secret Service agents in blue parkas entered the house and spent several hours collecting and removing boxes of files.
Federal and District investigators have since interrogated several prostitutes working for the ring, as well as clients of homosexual escort services operating under such names as Jovan, Man-to-Man, Metrodate, Ultimate Models and Ultimate First Class.
In addition to credit-card fraud, the investigation is said to be focused on illegal interstate prostitution, abduction and use of minors for sexual perversion, extortion, larceny and related illicit drug trafficking and use by prostitutes and their clients.
One of the chief operators of Professional Services Inc. and a regular client of the service speculated in separate interviews that the investigation would be restricted because “big names” were involved.
“Henry Vinson [the operator] said a high level official is going to try to block the investigation and may succeed,” said Mr. Balach, the labor secretary’s liaison to the White House. Mr. Vinson said he believes a highly placed federal official, whom he would not name, is working to derail the investigation, but he would not elaborate.
Authorities have been investigation possible credit card fraud by the ring operators since last fall.
[…]
Operators of the ring told The Times that videotapes, audio tapes and still photographs were made of sex acts performed by clients and the call boys, including perverted acts.
Documents show that customers were charged for “videotapes” from the operation
“He described Mr. Spence as “strange,” saying that he often boasted that he was working for the CIA and on one occasion said he was going to disappear for awhile “because he had an important CIA assignment.” According to the businessman, Mr. Spence told him that the CIA might “doublecross him,” however, and kill him instead “and then to make it look like a suicide.” The businessman also said he attended a birthday bash for Roy Cohn at Mr. Spence’s house. He said Mr. Casey was at the party. “One time he stormed into another party with a big, white hat and an entourage of security guards,” the businessman said. “It was all rather bizarre.” (…) “He was quite secretive, but from what I could see these things had little or no substance,” Mr. Harbin said. “Usually a grain of truth, but he’d build a pile of lies on top of it. Usually he’d start with a photograph of himself with some guy and build a lie around it that he was his top adviser. Nakasone was one.” Mr. Spence also bragged about social companions, telling friends that he had hosted Mr. Cohn, Rock Hudson and others at his Wyoming Avenue home. The former Reagan administration aide said he decided to sever a friendship with Mr. Spence when he witnessed him trying to force his off-duty military bodyguards into homosexual acts.”
I bolded Cohn references in the quotes above because he’s the original Epstein, the Pedo Pimp OG. Except he made his own money, wasn’t bankrolled by his mistresses. And he was a coveted gay pedo. And…
“Cohn’s job was to run the little boys. Say you had an admiral, a general, a congressman, who did not want to go along with the program. Cohn’s job was to set them up, then they would go along. Cohn told me that himself.”
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
IF YOU’RE READING THIS, YOU’RE PROBABLY TARGETED BY A GOVERNMENT OR TWO. SO I MADE SOMETHING FOR YOU. SEE DETAILS / ORDER
Hundreds of years after a minor increase in the duties paid on tea goaded American farmers and craftsmen to take on the greatest empire in the world, these colonials’ descendants are being told to hand over something much more personal than money.
In addition to the taxes expected to be handed over and responsibly spent by the government, the Internal Revenue Service will soon require Americans to submit biometric data to access their accounts.
Starting this summer, creating an account on the IRS website will require a photo of your government identification as well as a video for facial recognition purposes to be submitted to a third-party company.
According to CNBC, an account with the government contractor, ID.me, will not be required to pay taxes.
“Tax payments can be made from a bank account, by credit card or by other means without the use of facial recognition technology or registering for an account.”
Don’t run to thank the taxman yet — your personal biometrics must be handed over to access functions on the IRS website. Without this access, taxpayers may not be able to see their tax transcripts or check on payment agreements.
Even applying for a payment plan, creating a security PIN and viewing stimulus check status will be impossible without the personal data.
If this unsettles you, it gets worse.
The government’s need to know everything about you, down to the minor contours of your face, isn’t going away any time soon, it seems.Will you submit biometric data to the IRS?Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Taxpayers and others are being warned to create an account soon. The service is expected to grow and become a requirement for many other applications.
Unfortunately, a government contract and no competition do not appear to be the best incubator for a quality product. Major problems have already been reported with the system that could seriously hurt people’s finances.
Many have faced issues getting their identity verified. Some have had to wait for months while verification takes place.
The company asserts that there are remedies for these problems, including video calls with “trusted referees,” employees able to connect with citizens to work out issues.
Regardless of any issues, it looks like this verification system will only become a more integral part of the government and force ordinary people to go above and beyond to prove their identity.
Exposing Idemia: The Push For National Biometric IDs In America
Idemia, the focus of this report, is not a household name, despite its reach into the private and commercial affairs of most Americans. The company’s advance of biometric data strategies, databases and scanning devices for access and entry control—“augmented identification”—are also likely unknown. However, this global company is acquainted with most American citizens, whose private information flows through its equipment, databases, and software products. That said, it is unclear whether Idemia actually stores this data long-term. One news article on TSA PreCheck, the program that speeds clearance at airport security, says the data and fingerprints of program applicants are not stored by Idemia. The company simply collects them for the program and sends them to the FBI, which destroys them or sends them back.
This report seeks to acquaint Americans and their elected representatives with Idemia and biometric ID cards—and draw attention to our organization’s concern that current or future augmented identification requirements could negatively impact individual freedom and patient access to medical services.
In addition, as we often say, “He who holds the data makes the rules.” Third parties that collect, store or have the power to access personal data on Americans without their consent also have the power to use that data to interfere in the personal lives and private choices of individuals. This report will add weight to that reality
INTRODUCING IDEMIA & BIOMETRICS
Imagine sitting at a bank applying for a credit card and waving your hand through a scanner, allowing the bank to capture a biometric scan. Or imagine being required to scan your fingerprint to use that card for payment. Picture your identification documents being stored on your mobile or digital devices and being unlocked with a biometric face scan, similar to how Face ID,
Apple’s new technology, unlocks iPhones.4 Visualize walking through an airport and having scanners capture your facial, iris, and fingerprint biometrics as you go through each phase of security or reach your gate. Pick out a rental car online and imagine using your biometric ID to unlock and operate the car instead of a key.
Idemia, which calls itself “the global leader in trusted identities,” has imagined it already. These augmented identification systems using individual biometrics for entry, access and commercial transactions are portrayed in a video found on Idemia’s website, and available on YouTube.5 The company considers itself “the world number one” in the biometric algorithm and sensor technology market.
In last week’s report on India’s demonetization disaster I began to connect the dots between demonetization, the push for a cashless society, and the biometric identification schemes that will eventually tie everyone’s fingerprints, iris scans, and other identifying details to every transaction they ever make.
Well, that game of “connect the dots” just became even easier to play.
First, it was reported last week that a key panel advising the government on its implementation of the “digital payments ecosystem” (that is being pushed and funded by USAID) is now recommending that India links its national biometric ID database directly to tax returns.
And now comes word that India is “working on a biometrics-backed payment system that will be connected to a user’s unique ID number, or Aadhaar.” (Who could have seen that coming?)
No, it doesn’t take a Nostradamus to understand where this is all heading: From the cashless society and the biometric ID grid to the cashless biometric grid. And we already know about the cashless society. Now it’s time to collect the data on the biometric ID grid.
And let’s not be naive: As I’ve demonstrated before, this is a coordinated plan to institute a worldwide biometric id system to track every human on the planet.
But given how fast and furious these new biometric databases are coming online, no one person can possibly keep track of them all. That’s why I’m calling on Corbett Report members to help assemble this information. Like last year’s open source investigation into the War on Cash, this country-by-country guide will be updated with input from the Corbett Report community. Members of the site are invited to log in and leave links to information about the biometric ID grid in their country in the comments section below.
The Biometric ID List
Afghanistan – In 2016 the US bragged about their role in helping the Afghan Ministries of Defense and Interior roll out biometric ID systems for their workers. Also in 2016 the Afghanistan Telecom Regulatory Authority revealed that they wanted to “start linking biometrics to new SIM card registrations, to improve national security.” As has been widely reported, the US military has been waging “biometric warfare” in the country as part of its invasion, occupation and (de)stabilization effort since at least 2010. The Afghanistan National Security Forces has now deployed their own Automated Biometric Information System with fingerprint, iris, and facial scan capabilities and is “compatible with the U.S. DoD ABIS and the FBI Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System.”
Bolivia – In 2009 Bolivia’s elections were held using an electoral voter list created by using biometric data. In 2016 the Bolivian government began a 12-month program to perform a biometric census on the country’s foreign population.
Bulgaria – Bulgaria began issuing biometric identity cards (mandatory for all citizens) in March 2010. Bulgaria also issues biometric passports and driver’s licenses containing embedded biometric data.
Brazil – Brazil began issuing biometric identity cards in 2011 with the intention of issuing cards as part of its Registro de Identidade Civil, which intends to capture the biometric details of all 150 million citizens by 2020. Also in 2011 the Brazilian Electoral Justice approved the roll out of a biometric voter registration system that requires voters to register their fingerprints in order to vote (which is mandatory).
Canada – Under NEXUS, the joint Canada-US “preferred traveler” program, iris scans are used to identify passengers. In 2015 the Canadian government expanded biometric screening, including fingerprints and digital photos, to visitors from all 151 visa-required countries.
Chile – In 2013 Chile rolled out its new national ID and passport infrastructure including an eID card which “is based on a multi-biometric system comprised of an Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) and a Facial Recognition System.” The country aims to issue all of its 18+ million citizens with a card by 2022.
China – In 2016 China debuted its first airport biometric entry system. The system takes travelers’ photos at security checkpoints within the airport, linking their faces to their boarding passes. In 2017, the Chinese government unveiled new biometric travel passes (including fingerprint scans) for mainland visitors to Taiwan.
Finland – Finland introduced biometric residence permit cards in 2012. The cards include a chip that stores a digital photograph and two fingerprints.
France – France has issued only biometric passports since 2009. The passport requires the collection of a biometric digital photo and eight fingerprints.
Germany – Germany introduced biometric passports in 2005 and biometric residence permits in 2011, both of which require a biometric digital photograph and two fingerprints to be collected and stored on an embedded chip. Germany’s identity card does require a biometric photo, but so far fingerprint collection is optional.
Greece – In compliance with the dictates of Washington, the Greek government is set to issue new biometric IDs this year. As Greek Report notes: “Failure to create the new IDs in a timely manner could lead to a suspension in the visa-free travel to the US that Greeks currently enjoy.”
Israel – In 2009 the Knesset enacted the controversial Biometric Database Law to pave the way for the implementation of a national biometric ID database. Last July it was reported that the “pilot program” had come to an end and all Israeli residents would be forced to register their biometric details with the government. In December it was announced that the mandatory implementation of the database was being delayed and that fingerprints may no longer be required.
Japan – In 2007 the Japanese government began requiring fingerprints and digital photographs from all foreign travelers. Now, the government is considering implementing a biometric ID payment system which will “allow” (sic) tourists to “register their fingerprints or finger vein patterns among other personal information with the service and then deposit a set amount of money in a connected account,” from which they can make purchases while in the country.
Mexico – In 2011 the Mexican government began a program to issue biometric identification cards to all children between 4 and 17 years old. The cards contain a digital photograph, a fingerprint and an iris scan. The scheme is part of a broader National Population Register that will eventually extend to adults and contain the biometric details of the entire population of Mexico.
New Zealand – New Zealand’s Inland Revenue Department rolled out “Voice ID” in 2011 to register “customers’” voice prints and identify them in future interactions. By 2015 1.4 million of the country’s 6.1 million taxpayers had registered their voice prints with the “service.”
Saudi Arabia – In 2015 Saudi Arabia finalized its Automated Central System to collect and store the biometric details (including fingerprints) of all citizens and expatriates. Also in 2015 the country’s biometric border security system was launched.
South Korea – In 2012 the Korean government began collecting fingerprints and digital photographs of all foreign visitors (except foreign government officials/international organization representatives and their accompanying immediate family members as well as persons under 17 years of age).
Switzerland – Switzerland launched its biometric passport in 2010 after a referendum was held to approve the measure. The referendum passed with 50.14% of the vote, making it one of the closest referendums in Swiss history. The passports adopt the “international standard” of collecting two fingerprints (one from each index finger) and a digital photograph of the holder’s unsmiling face.
Ukraine – A law passed by the Yanukovych government in 2012 requires all Ukrainian citizens, regardless of age, to obtain a biometric passport.
United Kingdom – The UK under the Labour government of Tony Blair and later Gordon Brown attempted to implement a national identity register and ID card system that would have required the logging of an extensive amount of personal and biometric information in a central database. However, the program caused waves of protest and the government eventually gave in to the public outcry, scrapping the plan for the national registry and instead only implementing the biometric id scheme for foreign nationals. The UK does issue biometric passports and recent polling suggests UK adults “are now willing to embrace biometric identity for online banking.”
United States – President Trump’s new Executive Order on “terrorist” (sic) entry calls on the Department of Homeland Security to “expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States.” (This comes as no surprise to those who warned that Trump’s transition team was swarming with biometric industry workers and lobbyists.) The United States already takes digital fingerprints of all foreign tourists (except Canadians) and stores them in a database for 75 years. The DoD has announced plans to replace Common Access Card access to information systems with biometric authentication. The US issues biometric passports and coordinates with the Canadian government on the biometric NEXUS preferred traveler program (see Canada).
Without explicit safeguards, your personal biometric data are destined for a government database
Security through biology is an enticing idea. Since 2011, police departments across the U.S. have been scanning biometric data in the field using devices such as the Mobile Offender Recognition and Information System (MORIS), an iPhone attachment that checks fingerprints and iris scans. The fbi is currently building its Next Generation Identification database, which will contain fingerprints, palm prints, iris scans, voice data and photographs of faces. Before long, even your cell phone will be secured by information that resides in a distant biometric database.
Unfortunately, this shift to biometric-enabled security creates profound threats to commonly accepted notions of privacy and security. It makes possible privacy violations that would make the National Security Agency’s data sweeps seem superficial by comparison.
Biometrics could turn existing surveillance systems into something categorically new—something more powerful and much more invasive. Consider the so-called Domain Awareness System, a network of 3,000 surveillance cameras in New York City. Currently if someone commits a crime, cops can go back and review sections of video. Equip the system with facial-recognition technology, however, and the people behind the controls can actively track you throughout your daily life. “A person who lives and works in lower Manhattan would be under constant surveillance,” says Jennifer Lynch, an attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit group. Face-in-a-crowd detection is a formidable technical problem, but researchers working on projects such as the Department of Homeland Security’s Biometric Optical Surveillance System (BOSS) are making rapid progress.
In addition, once your face, iris or DNA profile becomes a digital file, that file will be difficult to protect. As the recent nsa revelations have made clear, the boundary between commercial and government data is porous at best. Biometric identifiers could also be stolen. It’s easy to replace a swiped credit card, but good luck changing the patterns on your iris. Read more from this special report:Technology and the Emerging Post-Privacy Era
These days gathering biometric data generally requires the cooperation (or coercion) of the subject: for your iris to get into a database, you have to let someone take a close-up photograph of your eyeball. That will not be the case for long. Department of Defense–funded researchers at Carnegie Mellon University are perfecting a camera that can take rapid-fire, database-quality iris scans of every person in a crowd from a distance of 10 meters.
New technologies will also make it possible to extract far more information from the biometrics we are already collecting. While most law-enforcement DNA databases contain only snippets of the genome, agencies can keep the physical DNA samples in perpetuity, raising the question of what future genetic-analysis tools will be able to discern. “Once you have somebody’s DNA, you have all sorts of very personal info,” Lynch says. “There is a lot of fear that people are going to start testing samples to look for a link between genes and propensity for crime.”
Current law is not even remotely prepared to handle these developments. The legal status of most types of biometric data is unclear. No court has addressed whether law enforcement can collect biometric data without a person’s knowledge, and case law says nothing about facial recognition….
2009
Plan to Introduce Biometric IDs Stirs Privacy Debate
Move would require establishing centralized database with biometric data on every citizen, legal resident of Israel.
No other democracy has yet introduced biometric identity cards, which Israel recently decided to do, and the only nondemocracy to have done so is Hong Kong, according to a study by the Knesset’s research center.
One reason for this reluctance is that biometric identity cards require establishing a centralized database with biometric data on every citizen and legal resident of the country.
Biometric passports, in contrast, are becoming more common in the West. However because people can choose whether or not to obtain a passport, which is not true of ID cards, this is considered less problematic from the perspective of privacy.
The study was prepared in advance of last October’s Knesset debate on a bill to introduce biometric ID cards.
The Knesset passed it into law a few days before dissolving for the elections.
The law requires the state to take the fingerprints of both index fingers from every resident of the country, on top of the standard facial photographs.
Then interior minister Meir Sheetrit told the Knesset that current Israeli ID cards are very easily forged, and the law would make such forgeries harder.
Biometric cards would assist in “uprooting crime, foiling terror attacks and identifying victims,” he said.
He also noted that between 2003 and 2007, some 1,500 people requested a new identity card four times or more because theirs had been lost or stolen, and 12 people requested new cards more than 10 times.
Human rights groups fiercely oppose the law. “It’s not for nothing that no Western democracy has dared to institute such a dangerous database,” said attorney
Avner Pinchuk of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, adding that he feared the data would leak to the Internet.
However, the study found, a few European countries are now considering biometric IDs.
With regard to passports, the International Civil Aviation Organization has ordered all of its 190 member states to issue machine-readable IDs that include information about facial features by 2010, and 53 countries that account for some 80 percent of all passports worldwide had already done so by the end of last year.
The European Union has ordered all of its member states to introduce biometric passports that include fingerprints and facial features by this May.
The United States grants visa waivers only to countries that issue such passports.
2004
UK passport agency begins trial on biometric IDs
The UK Passport Service (UKPS) has launched its six month trial of biometric technology involving 10,000 volunteers, and at the…
The UK Passport Service (UKPS) has launched its six-month trial of biometric technology involving 10,000 volunteers, and at the same time, the UK government introduced its draft bill for biometric identity cards and a central database of all of its citizens.
ID cards will carry biometric identifiers in an embedded chip, which is then linked to a “secure national database” called the National Identity Register.
The database is expected to contain such information as name, address, date of birth, gender, immigration status and a confirmed biometric feature such as electronic fingerprint, a scan of the iris of the eye or of a full face.
The UKPS trial will test for all three biometrics traits: electronic fingerprint, a scan of the iris of the eye and a full face scan.
“This is the first time that three different biometric technologies from three different suppliers have been integrated into one solution,” said a spokeswoman for Atos Origin, the company running the trial for the government.
The technical challenges may also account for why the trial, launched at Globe House, the London Passport Office, is three months behind the original launch date.
Atos Origin will be responsible for the delivery and installation of the equipment and software for the trial, while NEC is supplying its Automated Fingerprint Identification System.
Identix will provide the fingerprint capture and facial matching technology and Iridian Technologies is responsible for the iris recognition technology. The survey research component of the project will be undertaken by London-based market research company MORI.
But the pandemic—that inescapable memento mori—serves as a frame and a catalyst rather than a subject.— Claire Messud, Harper’s Magazine , 4 Jan. 2022
Fighting Demons, his second posthumous album is a tortured but overall grateful memento mori from a talented artist who left us all too soon.— Will Dukes, Rolling Stone, 16 Dec. 2021
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
IF YOU’RE READING THIS, YOU’RE PROBABLY TARGETED BY A GOVERNMENT OR TWO. SO I MADE SOMETHING FOR YOU. SEE DETAILS / ORDER
Just a quick heads up as many people hurry to cry “victory!” after recent announcements from UK, France, Czech Republic and even Israel. I can’t fully be with you due to personal issues, but I don’t want to let you fall in another trap and later disappointment either.
We’re heading towards the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has disrupted lives and livelihoods across the planet and led to at least 5.5 million deaths around the world.
As the Omicron COVID-19 variant surges in many countries – and indeed saw the deferral of an in-person meeting in Davos – the pandemic has been front of mind for many at The Davos Agenda.
So, where is the virus headed? Here’s what speakers from different sectors have said so far this week.
Xi Jinping, President of the People’s Republic of China, opened this week by reminding us of the work that’s already been done.
“The international community has fought a tenacious battle,” he said.
The global vaccination drive has played a major role in the progress we’ve made so far, with Richard Hatchett, the CEO of CEPI, reminding us of the work of COVAX.
The vaccine-sharing facility, which CEPI co-leads alongside Gavi and the World Health Organization, delivered its one billionth dose of COVID-19 vaccines over the weekend.
The pandemic has impacted every aspect of our lives, though, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett reminded us – and that has driven the response in his country.
Endemic or pandemic?
The history of infectious diseases can tell us something about the next stages of the pandemic, Anthony Fauci, the Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, explained.
Endemicity would mean ‘a non-disruptive presence without elimination’, he said. Similar to other cold-weather upper respiratory infections or parainfluenzas, he explained.
Richard Hatchett said his long-term view is that we should anticipate COVID-19 will behave more like flu.
“It will continue to circulate, it will be around, people will get sick and there will be continual evolution of the virus.”
Mike Ryan, the Executive Director of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Programme, struck a cautionary tone though in the Meeting the Challenge of Vaccine Equity session.
“We won’t end the virus this year,” he said. “We may never end the virus. Pandemic viruses end up becoming part of the ecosystem. What we can end is the public health emergency.”
And, in terms of endemic versus pandemic, he was clear. “Endemic does not mean good,” he said, citing the examples of endemic malaria or endemic HIV which kill 100,000s of people. “Endemic just means it’s here forever.”
“What we need to do is get to low-levels of disease incidence, with maximum vaccination of our populations, so nobody has to die.” That’s the end of the emergency, that’s the end of the pandemic, he concluded.
….
And Svein Tore Holsether, President and Chief Executive Officer, Yara International ASA, told us that a move from shareholder to stakeholder capitalism isn’t just needed, it’s expected, he said.
And, sustainability and environmental concerns will remain paramount – particularly in light of COP26.
Our lifestyles and our throwaway culture have exacerbated the climate challenge, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Monday. It’s essential we move towards a circular economy, he explained.?
The next steps
The path is unlikely to be smooth though. Beyond the health challenges discussed above – vaccine equity, for example – hurdles need to be overcome in areas from trust to reform in global systems.
Sharan Burrow, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation, explained more about the issue of trust.
And she wasn’t alone. Speakers at the announcement of the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship’s Social Innovators of the Year 2022 award were also clear on the issue of trust.
The global community needs to work together, even more than it has already, speakers from across sessions agreed. This is particularly important to ensure the equitable distribution of vaccines, explained President Xi Jinping.
And reform is needed, whether of global financial systems, or the means by which we can equitably produce and distribute vaccines.
And there it goes… Climate-19 in full swing, as I predicted almost 2 years ago
Also have you seen this below? Well, consider their hopes for vaccination rates have bee crushed by our resistance, hence the delay and later desperation.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
I didn’t mean for this website to go as basic as this, quite the opposite, but apparently there’s still a huge need for basic stuff for basic people. And we can’t really advance much without covering the basics properly.
Not much else to add, besides our motto: “Don’t believe what we say, research what we say!”
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
“Pfizer Inc. deepened its commitment to the genetic approach to disease underpinning its Covid-19 vaccine on Monday, striking deals that will give access to three smaller companies’ technology in the area.”
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
They call it “neuro-evidence”. Planting memories, “de-biasing” people or refusing their parental rights because the machine read bad thoughts in their mind? These options are on the table too.
If you’re still naïve enough to think these talks at Davos remain inconsequential, read this:
“As neuroscientists decipher the workings of the brain, new questions will be raised about decoding memories, ascertaining intentions and defusing criminal behavior. What if neuro-evidence is invited into the courtroom? neural monitoring brain testify against you Join an in-depth discussion that explores the possible, plausible and probable impacts of neuroscience disrupting the justice system. This session was developed in partnership with TIME.” Recorded at Davos 2016 WEF reunion, published by the World Economic Forum on Jan 23, 2016
Speakers:
· Nita A. Farahany, Professor, Law and Philosophy, Duke University, USA.
· Jack Gallant, Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
· Brian Knutson, Associate Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience, Stanford University, USA.
· Sam Muller, Director, Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law, Netherlands.
Moderated by Rana Foroohar, Assistant Managing Editor, Business and Economics, Time Magazine, USA.
“Long the preserve of stage show performers and confidence tricksters, the ability to read minds has always fascinated humans. The possibility that our inner thoughts and feelings could be accessed by another is both thrilling and terrifying.
We are already at the point where some thoughts can be identified externally. So as neuroscientists decipher the workings of the brain, new questions are being raised about decoding memories and ascertaining intentions. This has obvious implications for criminal behaviour. What if neuro-evidence is invited into the courtroom?
At the moment the technology is in its infancy and has been primarily focused on aiding communication and movement for disabled people. But the fact that scientists can already identify some words that people are thinking is an extraordinary step.
Experts in the brain decoding field acknowledge that accurate interpretations of a person’s thoughts and memories remain a long way off but there is no doubt that technology in this area is advancing steadily.
If people’s inner worlds could be accessed it would have a profound effect. Who, if anyone, would we agree to share this world with? Under what circumstances would we countenance someone’s thoughts being accessed by force?
The courtroom is always confronting new technologies in the fight against crime. Fingerprinting, so-called lie detection technology and DNA profiling were all cutting edge when first presented in evidence. All have been used countless time to convict, and indeed acquit, suspects. And brain scans are already used in evidence, in one case to successfully argue that a suspect should be spared the death penalty.
But the courtroom setting presents many potential problems when it comes to reading people’s minds. Would coaching allow a suspect to fool the technology? Would reading minds be a form of self-incrimination, something many courts allow suspects to avoid doing? And what if someone mistakenly believes they may have committed a crime?
If your brain confesses but you insist on your innocence, who can the jury trust?”
BONUS
Davos 2016 – Life in 2030: Humankind and the Machine
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
I so wanted to start the year with some good news rather than more gloom and doom, like most of the data on my hard disks… And we’re damn lucky!
So yeah, Aaron Siri has just announced he won another case against the FDA, the judge correcting the previous abomination about the Pfizer data release. This is the announcement from his Substack:
INSTEAD OF FDA’S REQUESTED 500 PAGES PER MONTH, COURT ORDERS FDA TO PRODUCE PFIZER COVID-19 DATA AT RATE OF 55,000 PAGES PER MONTH!
A great win for transparency that removes a stranglehold “health” authorities have had on data independent scientists need to offer solutions and address serious issues with the vaccine program.
On behalf of a client, my firm requested that the FDA produce all the data submitted by Pfizer to license its Covid-19 vaccine. The FDA asked the Court for permission to only be required to produce at a rate of 500 pages per month, which would have taken over 75 years to produce all the documents.
I am pleased to report that a federal judge soundly rejected the FDA’s request and ordered the FDA to produce all the data at a clip of 55,000 pages per month!
This is a great win for transparency and removes one of the strangleholds federal “health” authorities have had on the data needed for independent scientists to offer solutions and address serious issues with the current vaccine program – issues which include waningimmunity, variants evading vaccine immunity, and, as the CDC has confirmed, that the vaccines do not prevent transmission.
No person should ever be coerced to engage in an unwanted medical procedure. And while it is bad enough the government violated this basic liberty right by mandating the Covid-19 vaccine, the government also wanted to hide the data by waiting to fully produce what it relied upon to license this product until almost every American alive today is dead. That form of governance is destructive to liberty and antithetical to the openness required in a democratic society.
In ordering the release of the documents in a timely manner, the Judge recognized that the release of this data is of paramount public importance and should be one of the FDA’s highest priorities. He then aptly quoted James Madison as saying a “popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy” and John F. Kennedy as explaining that a “nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
The following is the full text of the Judge’s order, a copy of which is also available here.
PHMPT, Plaintiff v. FDA, Defendant, No. 4:21-cv-1058-P
ORDER
This case involves the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”). Specifically, at issue is Plaintiff’s FOIA request seeking “[a]ll data and information for the Pfizer Vaccine enumerated in 21 C.F.R. § 601.51(e) with the exception of publicly available reports on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System” from the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”). See ECF No. 1. As has become standard, the Parties failed to agree to a mutually acceptable production schedule; instead, they submitted dueling production schedules for this Court’s consideration. Accordingly, the Court held a conference with the Parties to determine an appropriate production schedule.[1] See ECF Nos. 21, 34.
“Open government is fundamentally an American issue” – it is neither a Republican nor a Democrat issue.[2] As James Madison wrote, “[a] popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps, both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”[3] John F. Kennedy likewise recognized that “a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”[4] And, particularly appropriate in this case, John McCain (correctly) noted that “[e]xcessive administrative secrecy . . . feeds conspiracy theories and reduces the public’s confidence in the government.”[5]
Echoing these sentiments, “[t]he basic purpose of FOIA is to ensure an informed citizenry, [which is] vital to the functioning of a democratic society.” NLRB v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 437 U.S. 214, 242 (1977). “FOIA was [therefore] enacted to ‘pierce the veil of administrative secrecy and to open agency action to the light of public scrutiny.’” Batton v. Evers, 598 F.3d 169, 175 (5th Cir. 2010) (quoting Dep’t of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 361 (1976)). And “Congress has long recognized that ‘information is often useful only if it is timely’ and that, therefore ‘excessive delay by the agency in its response is often tantamount to denial.’” Open Soc’y Just. Initiative v. CIA, 399 F. Supp. 3d 161, 165 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (quoting H.R. REP. NO. 93-876, at 6271 (1974)). When needed, a court “may use its equitable powers to require an agency to process documents according to a court-imposed timeline.” Clemente v. FBI, 71 F. Supp. 3d 262, 269 (D.D.C. 2014).
Here, the Court recognizes the “unduly burdensome” challenges that this FOIA request may present to the FDA. See generally ECF Nos. 23, 30, 34. But, as expressed at the scheduling conference, there may not be a “more important issue at the Food and Drug Administration . . . than the pandemic, the Pfizer vaccine, getting every American vaccinated, [and] making sure that the American public is assured that this was not [] rush[ed] on behalf of the United States . . . .” ECF No. 34 at 46. Accordingly, the Court concludes that this FOIA request is of paramount public importance.
“[S]tale information is of little value.” Payne Enters., Inc. v. United States, 837 F.2d 486, 494 (D.C. Cir. 1988). The Court, agreeing with this truism, therefore concludes that the expeditious completion of Plaintiff’s request is not only practicable, but necessary. See Bloomberg, L.P. v. FDA, 500 F. Supp. 2d 371, 378 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2007) (“[I]t is the compelling need for such public understanding that drives the urgency of the request.”). To that end, the Court further concludes that the production rate, as detailed below, appropriately balances the need for unprecedented urgency in processing this request with the FDA’s concerns regarding the burdens of production. See Halpern v. FBI, 181 F.3d 279, 284–85 (2nd Cir. 1991) (“[FOIA] emphasizes a preference for the fullest possible agency disclosure of such information consistent with a responsible balancing of competing concerns . . . .”).
Accordingly, having considered the Parties’ arguments, filings in support, and the applicable law, the Court ORDERS that:
1. The FDA shall produce the “more than 12,000 pages” articulated in its own proposal, see ECF No. 29 at 24, on or before January 31, 2022.
2. The FDA shall produce the remaining documents at a rate of 55,000 pages every 30 days, with the first production being due on or before March 1, 2022, until production is complete.
3. To the extent the FDA asserts any privilege, exemption, or exclusion as to any responsive record or portion thereof, FDA shall, concurrent with each production required by this Order, produce a redacted version of the record, redacting only those portions as to which privilege, exemption, or exclusion is asserted.
4. The Parties shall submit a Joint Status Report detailing the progress of the rolling production by April 1, 2022, and every 90 days thereafter.[6]
SO ORDERED on this 6th day of January, 2022.
[1] Surprisingly, the FDA did not send an agency representative to the scheduling conference.
[2] 151 CONG. REC. S1521 (daily ed. Feb. 16, 2005) (statement of Sen. John Cornyn).
[3] Letter from James Madison to W.T. Barry (August 4, 1822), in 9 WRITINGS OF JAMES MADISON 103 (S. Hunt ed., 1910).
[4] John F. Kennedy, Remarks on the 20th Anniversary of the Voice of America (Feb. 26, 1962).
[5] America After 9/11: Freedom Preserved or Freedom Lost?: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on the Judiciary, 108th Cong. 302 (2003).
[6] Although the Court does not decide whether the FDA correctly denied Plaintiff’s request for expedited processing, the issue is not moot. Should the Parties seek to file motions for summary judgment, the Court will take up the issue then.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Allow me to break the norm and recommend something that sounds familiar and yet so different. I held back on a lot of depressing news these days so you can breathe a bit this holiday season, we’ll get back to them shortly, but until then, I have some serious fun for you. I hope it finds you timely, I missed a lot of sleep to make it so.
HAPPY NEW AWAKENING! Keep checking out of the Matrix, or Woketrix, in its 2020’s manifestation!
Made in the SILVIEW.media labs
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
That is all (for now), please resume your activities as if everything in media, schools and people’s minds may be fake. ‘Cuz it may, unless you can and know how to verify it.
UPDATE: TALKING ABOUT VERIFYING – THE STUDIOUS ARE IN THE HOSPITAL
Truth be told. Does that take away from the fact that Biden is on more movie sets than all the Baldwin family together and almost every human interaction he has is on a et and scripted? I’m not going to suggest any answer, I leave it to you, here’s the full facts, I beg you pardon for not checking this before publishing the post. I didn’t feel it’s relevant to my point where the studios are or other such details, I still don’t, but I let you be the judge.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Given the conditions, I mean… I hope I didn’t raise your expectations too much. However, this has the potential to bring a jack load of unity, maaan! If anyone cares anymore to unite with societal cancer. I’m more of a societal oncologist.
YouTube AIs and admins must be doing a lot of head-scratching these minutes
UPDATE: We already have reactions to the announcement!
UPDATE 2: LIBTARD MEDIA SCRAMBLING TO DO SOME DAMAGE CONTROL
The Winter of Death starts off rather funnily, I wish you to go through all of it no less amused than you are now!
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Remember past spring when magnetic ferritin in Covid bioweapons was a conspiracy theory and we were getting our YouTube channels and socials wiped out for exposing it? That was fun*! (* not)
THE VERY SHORT COURSE, LET’S SEE HOW LONG DOES THIS SURVIVE ON YOUTUBE THIS TIME
The spike ferritin nanoparticle (SpFN) vaccine was designed as a ferritin-fusion recombinant protein for expression as a nanoparticle, and has been described in detail previously (20). Briefly, the spike protein sequence was derived from the Wuhan-Hu-1 genome sequence (GenBank accession number: MN908947.3)
The present invention provides methods and compositions for the remote control of cell function based on the use of radiofrequency waves to excite nanoparticles targeted to specific cell types. The nanoparticles may be applied to the target cell extracellularly and/or expressed intracellularly. The cell type of interest expresses a temperature sensitive channel wherein excitation of the nanoparticles results in a localized temperature increase that is transduced into a cellular response. Such cellular responses may include, for example, increases in gene expression resulting in production of one or more physiologically active proteins. The expression of such proteins can be used to treat a variety of different inherited or acquired diseases or disorders in a subject. Accordingly, the invention provides a generic approach for treatment of any disease associated with a protein deficiency. – SOURCE
And, coincidentally, of course:
In patients with severe COVID-19 disease, decreased hemoglobin along with elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin [62], serum ferritin [63], and low oxygen saturation [64] provide additional support for this hypothesis.
“The spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 is quite large, so scientists often formulate abridged versions that are simpler to make and easier to use. After closely examining the spike, Kim and his team chose to remove a section near the bottom.
To complete their vaccine, they combined this shortened spike with nanoparticles of ferritin – an iron-containing protein – which has been previously tested in humans. Before the pandemic, Powell had been working with these nanoparticles to develop an Ebola vaccine. Together with scientists at the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, the researchers used cryo-electron microscopy to get a 3D image of the spike ferritin nanoparticles in order to confirm that they had the proper structure.
For the mouse tests, the researchers compared their shortened spike nanoparticles to four other potentially useful variations: nanoparticles with full spikes, full spikes or partial spikes without nanoparticles, and a vaccine containing just the section of the spike that binds to cells during infection. Testing the effectiveness of these vaccines against actual SARS-CoV-2 virus would have required the work to be done in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, so the researchers instead used a safer pseudo-coronavirus that was modified to carry SARS-CoV-2’s spikes.”
What a “GenBank accession number” looks like: characters on a server.
So they took a code from a server, like all the other vaccine makers (see link above), they took a nanoparticle that was ‘illegal’ to discuss on TheirTubes and they did what?
US Army Creates Single Vaccine Against All COVID & SARS Variants, Researchers Say
Within weeks, Walter Reed researchers expect to announce that human trials show success against Omicron—and even future strains.
BY TARA COPP, SENIOR PENTAGON REPORTER, DEFENSE ONE DECEMBER 21, 2021, Updated on Dec. 22
Within weeks, scientists at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research expect to announce that they have developed a vaccine that is effective against COVID-19 and all its variants, even Omicron, as well as previous SARS-origin viruses that have killed millions of people worldwide.
The achievement is the result of almost two years of work on the virus. The Army lab received its first DNA sequencing of the COVID-19 virus in early 2020. Very early on, Walter Reed’s infectious diseases branch decided to focus on making a vaccine that would work against not just the existing strain but all of its potential variants as well.
Walter Reed’s Spike Ferritin Nanoparticle COVID-19 vaccine, or SpFN, completed animal trials earlier this year with positive results. Phase 1 of human trials, wrapped up this month, again with positive results that are undergoing final review, Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad, director of Walter Reed’s infectious diseases branch, said in an exclusive interview with Defense One on Tuesday. The new vaccine will still need to undergo phase 2 and phase 3 trials.
A schematic visualization of the ferritin nanoparticle with shortened coronavirus spike proteins, which is the basis of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate from Stanford. (SOURCE)
“We’re testing our vaccine against all the different variants, including Omicron,” Modjarrad said.
On Wednesday, Walter Reed officials said in a statement that its vaccine “was not tested on the Omicron variant,“ but later clarified in an email to Defense One that while the recently discovered variant was not part of the animal studies, it is being tested in the lab against clinical human trial samples. These “neutralization assays” test whether antibodies can inhibit the growth of a virus.
“We want to wait for those clinical data to be able to kind of make the full public announcements, but so far everything has been moving along exactly as we had hoped,” Modjarrad said.
Unlike existing vaccines, Walter Reed’s SpFN uses a soccer ball-shaped protein with 24 faces for its vaccine, which allows scientists to attach the spikes of multiple coronavirus strains on different faces of the protein.
“It’s very exciting to get to this point for our entire team and I think for the entire Army as well,” Modjarrad said.
That moment when US Army announces ferritin-based vaccines in December, and my reports about it were getting deleted by LibtardTech last summer:
Produced May 2021
These ferritin nanoparticles are rapidly drained to lymph nodes and target dendritic cells, especially CD8α+ population, upon subcutaneous immunization.
SILVER SPRING, Md. – A series of recently published preclinical study results show that the Spike Ferritin Nanoparticle (SpFN) COVID-19 vaccine developed by researchers at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR) not only elicits a potent immune response but may also provide broad protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern as well as other coronaviruses.
Scientists in WRAIR’s Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch (EIDB) developed the SpFN nanoparticle vaccine, based on a ferritin platform, as part of a forward-thinking “pan-SARS” strategy that aims to address the current pandemic and acts as a first line of defense against variants of concern and similar viruses that could emerge in the future.
“The accelerating emergence of human coronaviruses throughout the past two decades and the rise of SARS-CoV-2 variants, including most recently Omicron, underscore the continued need for next-generation preemptive vaccines that confer broad protection against coronavirus diseases,” said Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad, Director of the Emerging Infectious Diseases Branch at WRAIR, co-inventor of the vaccine and the U.S. Army lead for SpFN. “Our strategy has been to develop a ‘pan-coronavirus’ vaccine technology that could potentially offer safe, effective and durable protection against multiple coronavirus strains and species.”
Pre-clinical studies published today in Science Translational Medicine indicate that the SpFN vaccine protects non-human primates from disease caused by the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 and induces highly-potent and broadly-neutralizing antibody responses against major SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern including the SARS-CoV-1 virus that emerged in 2002.
SpFN entered Phase 1 human trials in April 2021. Early analyses, expected to conclude this month, will provide insights into whether SpFN’s potency and breadth, as demonstrated in preclinical trials, will carry over into humans. The data will also allow researchers to compare SpFN’s immune profile to that of other COVID-19 vaccines already authorized for emergency use.
“This vaccine stands out in the COVID-19 vaccine landscape,” Modjarrad said. “The repetitive and ordered display of the coronavirus spike protein on a multi-faced nanoparticle may stimulate immunity in such a way as to translate into significantly broader protection.”
WRAIR developed a secondary candidate vaccine, a SARS-CoV-2 Spike Receptor-Binding Domain Ferritin Nanoparticle (RFN) vaccine, which targets a smaller part of the coronavirus Spike protein than the SpFN vaccine. Results from a study, published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, show that this vaccine potentially offers similar protection against an array of SARS-CoV-2 variants and SARS-CoV-1.
“The RFN vaccine candidate is more compact and has some natural advantages as we try to increase the immune response against multiple coronaviruses using a single vaccine platform, so it is still under consideration as part of our pan-coronavirus vaccine development pipeline,” said WRAIR structural biologist and vaccine co-inventor, Dr. Gordon Joyce.
“The threat from COVID-19 continues as it evolves, and eventually there will be other emerging disease threats,” said Dr. Nelson Michael, Director of the Center for Infectious Diseases Research at WRAIR. “Our investment in developing a next generation vaccine is an important step towards getting ahead of COVID-19 and future disease threats.”
A SARS-CoV-2 spike ferritin nanoparticle vaccine protects against heterologous challenge with B.1.1.7 and B.1.351 virus variants in Syrian golden hamsters
We’ve already published some of that literature past spring.. With what occasion? Everything will become round again if you (re)visit this pivotal moment in independent journalism that will keep rocking the official narrative:
Those poor people sticking forks and cellphones on their foreheads seem to be the lab rats for this new escalation in the Fourth Industrial Revolution by the World Psychopaths Forum.
CAN YOU DO ‘MAGNETIC TRANSCRANIAL STIMULATION” WITHOUT FERRITIN OR GRAPHENE AMPING YOUR BRAIN?
And if you want an even larger context, what better evidence that Pharmafia, Big Tech and the Military are not separate entities, they’re rather arms of a common enterprise I like to call “The Military BioTech Complex”.
If you can steal a few moments of peace and warmth with the dearest ones, take good advantage, for me too, I can’t, and these may be our last days before the war on us escalates from psychological and biochemical to kinetic. Then arm up to hold your positions and make it through the Darkest Winter! Happy holidays!
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
You can get your third booster today, legally you’re still filed unvaxxed two more weeks. In this interval they can roll a new booster and downgrade you back to unvaxxed. Whatever happens to you in the months between these boosters goes in the unvaccinated statistics. And if they keep the pace, you can have an unlimited number of shots without ever officially appearing in vaccinated stats and files. It’s a perfect crime, but only as long as it’s not investigated. Now consider all the random deaths falsely labeled as covid deaths in 2020-2021, and flu and pneumonia almost disappearing. These are two years of vital health statistics rendered useless. And that impacts all the larger studies that include these years. Imagine you started a five years study in 2016-2019 in which flu stats are paramount. Buh-bye study!
Medicine has been fatally compromised and we have to start a new one almost from scratch.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
“In 2003, 04, 05, I was investigating this story. Children in an NYC orphanage (and the foster care system) used in clinical trials. The Associated Press took it national and found it going on in seven or more states. “Some states declined to participate in medical experiments. Tennessee said its foster care rules generally prohibit enlisting children in such trials. California requires a judge’s order. And Wisconsin “has absolutely never allowed, nor would we even consider, any clinical experiments with the children in our foster care system,” spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis said. Officials estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent of the 13,878 children enrolled in pediatric AIDS studies funded by NIH since the late 1980s were in foster care. More than two dozen Illinois foster children remain in studies today. ” No medical records were ever made available to official investigators. You make up your own mind.”
– Liam Scheff
A National Scandal: AIDS Drug Experiments on Foster Care Children – Associated Press
On March 10, 2004, The Alliance for Human Research Protection filed a complaint with the FDA and the federal Office of Human Research Protection about a series of AIDS drug experiments conducted on New York City children in foster care. That complaint prompted two separate investigations by the FDA and OHRP which are still on-going.
Articles in The New York Post and a documentary by BBC raised the alarm among the African-American and Latino community in NY-some of who have been protesting weekly in front of Incarnation Children’s Center, the site of some of the drug experiments.
The Associated Press AP has just released its investigative report: the problem is a national scandal–the experiments were conducted in “at least seven states — Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Colorado and Texas — and involved more than four dozen different studies.
AP’s investigation found that 13,878 children had been enrolled in pediatric AIDS studies funded by the government since the late 1980s. Of these, officials estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent were in foster care. Their age ranged from infants to late teens.
“More than two dozen Illinois foster children remain in studies today.”
Those who conducted the experiments in violation of federal regulations, are supported by taxpayers – thus they have a public responsibility which they violated. The children who were targeted to serve as human drug testing subjects – mostly poor children of color – were not afforded the protection of a personal advocate – as is mandated by federal regulations. (45 Code of Federal Regulations 46.409)
The institutional culture of arrogance is demonstrably in evidence at both medical research centers and government agencies: “Our position is that advocates weren’t needed,” said Marilyn Castaldi, spokeswoman for Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center in New York.
And officials of NYC Administration of Child Services “defend the decision to enlist foster children en masse, saying there was a crisis in the early 1990s and research provided the best treatment possibilities.”
The children are reported to have suffered painful side effects “such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells as they tested antiretroviral drugs to suppress AIDS or other medicines to treat secondary infections.”
In one study testing the drug dapsone, “at least 10 children died from a variety of causes, including four from blood poisoning, and researchers said they were unable to determine a safe, useful dosage. They said the deaths didn’t appear to be “directly attributable” to dapsone but nonetheless were “disturbing.”
“overall mortality while receiving the study drug was significantly higher in the daily dapsone group. This finding remains unexplained,” the researchers concluded.
“Another study involving foster children in the 1990s treated children with different combinations of adult antiretroviral drugs. Among 52 children, there were 26 moderate to severe reactions — nearly all in infants. The side effects included rash, fever and a major drop in infection-fighting white blood cells.
At least three states declined to use children in foster care in medical experiments: Tennessee said its foster care rules generally prohibit enlisting children in such trials. California requires a judge’s order. And Wisconsin “has absolutely never allowed, nor would we even consider, any clinical experiments with the children in our foster care system,” spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis said.
Not addressed in the AP report is the amount of money that these trials generated for the institutions involved in the experiments.
***The NYC Council, general welfare committee is holding a hearing about the unethical experiments conducted in NYC. The hearing will take place at City Hall at 11:15.
For information and to register to speak, call: Ms. Jackie Sherman at 212-788-7015
Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav 212-595-8974
Researchers Tested AIDS Drugs on Children – Associated Press
By JOHN SOLOMON 11:08 AM PDT, May 4, 2005
WASHINGTON – Government-funded researchers tested AIDS drugs on hundreds of foster children over the past two decades, often without providing them a basic protection afforded in federal law and required by some states, an Associated Press review has found.
The research funded by the National Institutes of Health spanned the country. It was most widespread in the 1990s as foster care agencies sought treatments for their HIV-infected children that weren’t yet available in the marketplace.
The practice ensured that foster children — mostly poor or minority — received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown.
The research was conducted in at least seven states — Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Colorado and Texas — and involved more than four dozen different studies. The foster children ranged from infants to late teens, according to interviews and government records.
Several studies that enlisted foster children reported patients suffered side effects such as rashes, vomiting and sharp drops in infection-fighting blood cells as they tested antiretroviral drugs to suppress AIDS or other medicines to treat secondary infections.
In one study, researchers reported a “disturbing” higher death rate among children who took higher doses of a drug. That study was unable to determine a safe and effective dosage.
The government provided special protections for child wards in 1983. They required researchers and their oversight boards to appoint independent advocates for any foster child enrolled in a narrow class of studies that involved greater than minimal risk and lacked the promise of direct benefit. Some foster agencies required the protection regardless of risks and benefits.
Advocates must be independent of the foster care and research agencies, have some understanding of medical issues and “act in the best interests of the child” for the entirety of the research, the law states.
However, researchers and foster agencies told AP that foster children in AIDS drug trials often weren’t given such advocates even though research institutions many times promised to do so to gain access to the children.
Illinois officials believe none of their nearly 200 foster children in AIDS studies got independent monitors even though researchers signed a document guaranteeing “the appointment of an advocate for each individual ward participating in the respective medical research.”
New York City could find records showing 142 — less than a third — of the 465 foster children in AIDS drug trials got such monitors even though city policy required them. The city has asked an outside firm to investigate.
Likewise, research facilities including Chicago’s Children’s Memorial Hospital and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore said they concluded they didn’t provide advocates for foster kids.
Some states declined to participate in medical experiments. Tennessee said its foster care rules generally prohibit enlisting children in such trials. California requires a judge’s order. And Wisconsin “has absolutely never allowed, nor would we even consider, any clinical experiments with the children in our foster care system,” spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis said.
Officials estimated that 5 percent to 10 percent of the 13,878 children enrolled in pediatric AIDS studies funded by NIH since the late 1980s were in foster care. More than two dozen Illinois foster children remain in studies today.
Some foster children died during studies, but state or city agencies said they could find no records that any deaths were directly caused by experimental treatments.
Researchers typically secured permission to enroll foster children through city or state agencies. And they frequently exempted themselves from appointing advocates by concluding the research carried minimal risk and the child would directly benefit because the drugs had already been tried in adults.
“Our position is that advocates weren’t needed,” said Marilyn Castaldi, spokeswoman for Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center in New York.
If they decline to appoint advocates under the federal law, researchers and their oversight boards must conclude that the experimental treatment affords the same or better risk-benefit possibilities than alternate treatments already in the marketplace. They also must abide by any additional protections required by state and local authorities.
Many of the studies that enrolled foster children occurred after 1990 when the government approved using the drug AZT — an effective AIDS treatment — for children.
Arthur Caplan, head of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania, said advocates should have been appointed for all foster children because researchers felt the pressure of a medical crisis and knew there was great uncertainty as to how children would react to AIDS medications that were often toxic for adults.
“It is exactly that set of circumstances that made it absolutely mandatory to get those kids those advocates,” Caplan said. “It is inexcusable that they wouldn’t have an advocate for each one of those children.
“When you have the most vulnerable subjects imaginable — kids without parents — you really do have to come in with someone independent, who doesn’t have a dog in this fight,” he said.
Those who made the decisions say the research gave foster kids access to drugs they otherwise couldn’t get. And they say they protected the children’s interest by carefully explaining risks and benefits to state guardians, foster parents and the children themselves.
“I understand the ethical dilemma surrounding the introduction of foster children into trials,” said Dr. Mark Kline, a pediatric AIDS expert at Baylor College of Medicine. He enrolled some Texas foster kids in his studies, and doesn’t recall appointing advocates for them.
“To say as a group that foster children should be excluded from clinical trials would have meant excluding these children from the best available therapies at the time,” he said. “From an ethical perspective, I never thought that was a stand I could take.”
Illinois officials directly credit the decision to enroll HIV-positive foster kids with bringing about a decline in deaths — from 40 between 1989 and 1995 to only 19 since.
NIH, the government health research agency that funded the studies, did not track researchers to determine if they appointed advocates. Instead, the decision was left to medical review boards made up of volunteers at each study site.
A recent Institute of Medicine study concluded those Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) were often overwhelmed, dominated by scientists and not focused enough on patient protections. An ethicist who served 22 years on such boards said they lack the resources to ensure the safety of foster children.
“Over the last half century, IRBs have basically broken under the strain of some of the structural changes in research,” said Gregory E. Pence, a University of Alabama-Birmingham bioethicist.
The U.S. Office for Human Research Protections, created to protect research participants after the infamous Tuskegee syphilis studies on black men, is investigating the use of foster children in AIDS research. The office declined to discuss the probe.
NIH said it considers patient safety its top priority and awaits the outcome of the investigation. “If we find that patient protections need further strengthening, we will take action to do so,” spokesman John Burklow said.
AP’s review found that if children were old enough — usually between 5 and 10 — they also were educated about the risks and asked to consent. Sometimes, foster parents or biological parents were consulted; other times not.
“Our policy was to try and contact the (biological) parents because it was fairly common when we got done the foster kid would go back to the parents,” said Dr. Ross McKinney, a pediatrics AIDS expert at Duke University.
Research and foster agencies declined to make foster parents or children in the drug trials available for interviews, or to provide information about individual drug dosages, side effects or deaths, citing medical privacy laws.
Other families who participated in the same drug trials told AP their children mostly benefited but parents needed to carefully monitor potential side effects. Foster children, they said, need the added protection of an independent advocate.
“I don’t believe a foster care parent can do it,” said Vinnie DiPoalo, a New Jersey woman whose 10-year-old adopted son has participated in three AIDS drug trials. “There are informed consents that have to be signed. There are follow-up blood appointments.
“I think that’s the role the advocate should take, because a foster parent may only have this child for three months and then the child moves on and someone needs to be watching all the time,” she said.
Many studies that enlisted foster children involved early Phase I and Phase II research — the riskiest — to determine side effects and safe dosages so children could begin taking adult “cocktails,” the powerful drug combinations that suppress AIDS but can cause bad reactions like rashes and organ damage.
Some of those drugs were approved ultimately for children, such as stavudine and zidovudine. Other medicines were not.
Illinois officials confirmed two or three foster children were approved to participate in a mid-1990s study of dapsone. Researchers hoped the drug would prevent a pneumonia that afflicts AIDS patients.
Researchers reported some children had to be taken off the drug because of “serious toxicity,” others developed rashes, and the rates of death and blood toxicity were significantly higher in children who took the medicine daily, rather than weekly.
At least 10 children died from a variety of causes, including four from blood poisoning, and researchers said they were unable to determine a safe, useful dosage. They said the deaths didn’t appear to be “directly attributable” to dapsone but nonetheless were “disturbing.”
“An unexpected finding in our study was that overall mortality while receiving the study drug was significantly higher in the daily dapsone group. This finding remains unexplained,” the researchers concluded.
Another study involving foster children in the 1990s treated children with different combinations of adult antiretroviral drugs. Among 52 children, there were 26 moderate to severe reactions — nearly all in infants. The side effects included rash, fever and a major drop in infection-fighting white blood cells.
New York City officials defend the decision to enlist foster children en masse, saying there was a crisis in the early 1990s and research provided the best treatment possibilities. Nonetheless, they are changing their policy so they no longer give blanket permission to enroll children in preapproved studies.
“We learned some things from our experience,” said Elizabeth Roberts, assistant commissioner for child and family health at the Administration for Children’s Services. “It is a more individualized review we will be conducting.”
Researchers likewise defend their work, saying they often sat with foster families to explain the risks and benefits, and provided them literature and 24-hour phone numbers.
“We talk about it. Then they come the next time. There is no rush,” explained Dr. Ram Yogev, the chief pediatric AIDS researcher in Chicago whose patients include a large number of foster children.
Kline, the Texas researcher, added: “I never wanted a parent or guardian to ever say ‘yes’ simply because they thought that it was what I wanted them to do. I wanted it to be the right choice for them. I think there is not any single right answer for any family.”
* __
Researcher Rachel Landau in Washington and reporter Carla K. Johnson in Chicago contributed to this story. On the Net:
Documents associated with this story are available at:
Fauci tested harsh chemotherapy drugs on orphan children in order to determine its use for AIDS treatments in the 1980s
Fauci got control of foster homes in 7 states
Children were tortured to death
Children were denied guardians and any kind of legal protector
Children who refused to take Fauci’s drugs had feeding tubes installed so drug companies could administer the drugs even when the kids fought back
Most of the children did not have HIV/AIDS, they were just used as guinea pigs to see if they could survive the harsh drug regimen
At least 85 kids died as part of these experiments
The graveyard where these children were thrown into a pit, filled with hundreds of coffins sometimes stuffed with multiple children, is buried under an astroturf pit in New York. These are the victims of Fauci’s crimes, says Kennedy.
The Gateway Pundit was able to locate this memorial to the orphan children killed by Dr. Fauci and the NIH in New York State.
The orphans are not forgotten. There are toys and flowers left at the memorial.
The names of the orphans are listed on the memorial wall.
And an angel holds a stuffed Teddy Bear.
These photos were taken from Google maps
RFK Jr.: Reporter Found Monument to Dead Orphans Tortured and Killed by Monster Fauci (VIDEO)
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. joined The High Wire recently to discuss his best-selling book on monster Dr. Tony Fauci.
During the discussion, RFK Jr. revealed that reporter Cecelia Farber went to the cemetery in New York state where the tortured orphan children were buried. These victims were Fauci’s experimental patients.
Fauci has a long history of mass death, barbarism and lies.
In 2004 Dr. Fauci’s NIH was also caught funding experiments on AIDS orphans at a New York City hospital. The Gateway Pundit reported on this dark Fauci chapter in October.
The Fauci NIH approved experiments on hundreds of New York City orphans. Government agencies and pharmaceutical companies used the orphans in deadly AIDS drug trials.
In 2005, the city of New York hired the VERA Institute to form a final report on the drug trials. VERA was given no access to medical records for any of the children used in trials. Their report was published in 2008.
They reported that twenty-five children died during the drug studies, that an additional fifty-five children died following the studies (in foster care), and, according to Tim Ross, Director of the Child Welfare program at VERA (as of 2009), 29% of the remaining 417 children who were used in drug studies had died (out of a total 532 children that are admitted to have been used). [LINK]
The WIKIPEDIA writers cover up all details, as is expected.
No payment or compensation has been paid to any of the children used in the trials, or to their families.
A hospital nurse later spoke out to reporters about the testing. She reported that children would immediately get sick, break out or throw up during the testing. They were orphans at the Incarnation Children’s Center in New York City.https://www.youtube.com/embed/cyJLYPh9pxY?start=1471
On Tuesday The Gateway Pundit reported on Dr. Fauci’s torture and medical murder of at least 85 orphan minority children in New York, children who were vulnerable, could not consent, and who would not be missed.
Ann Rosen at LifeSiteNews wrote a good recap of Fauci’s crimes against children earlier this month.
Advertisement – story continues below
These children were buried in mass graves at the Gate of Heaven Cemetery in Hawthorne, NY in Westchester County and otherwise forgotten.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says that Anthony Fauci is America’s Joseph Mengele for what he did to poor orphan minority kids in the 1980’s.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Stupidity leads to inflated ego, which leads to bragging and ruining months and months of brainwashing efforts from The Great Reset Politburo.
UPDATE: THIS VIDEO LED TO THE DELETION OF OUR THIRD YOUTUBE CHANNEL, EVEN THOUGH IT’S SOURCED FROM YOUTUBE AND THEIR TOP AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES!
ORIGINAL 2H VIDEO:
We all knew this, but it’s good to have it on video from this inbred horse’s mouth. The funny part is that the Covidiocracy is already in panic mode, writing the most inane ‘debunks’, which can be, for the largest part, summed up as “you didn’t hear what you’ve just heard, you heard what we tell you you heard”. They’re literally trying to do Jedi mind tricks on us and I bet there’s weakminded Pharma-junkies out there that will fall for their potato-grade hypnosis.
I can’t stress enough that 95% figure and how easy it was to crash it.
Stefan Oelrich, president of Bayer’s Pharmaceuticals Division and membr of the Bayer/Monsanto board, made these statements at the 2021 World Health Summit in Berlin. on October 24th.
Informed consent had the fate of an Epstein sex slave buried on his island. No one is even looking for it. Without it, the whole Covidiocracy is just genocide and war crimes, covidiots’ masks are soaked in blood, and their survival now depends entirely on the mass ignorance. While ours depends on mass-enlightenment.
Silview ‘SILVIEW’ Costinescu
There’s not much to add, if you want to learn more about Bayer’s dark past, suffice to say they made Zyklon-B, the gas allegedly used in the nazi camps, and more recently have acquired Monsanto. After that, they’ve become more discrete, but they still have their hands in everything that feeds you and everything that treats the diseases you got from their food and their pesticides. And, of course, they’re top tier members of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum, at the forefront of transhumanism and The Fourth Industrial Revolution. But here’s more info:
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Funny to watch the boss of Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Stefan Oelrich, scrambling and sweating as if he was realizing what he says only after he said it.
So yeah, they’re fine and dandy and back to killing off… I mean ‘managing the growth’ of poorer populations. If they’ve ever taken a break from it. Watch this!
Stefan Oelrich, president of Bayer’s Pharmaceuticals Division, made this statement at 2021’s World Health Summit, held in Berlin from October 24-26. But what if I told you this is not even his greatest gaffe in that speech alone?! Incoming, stay tuned! 😉
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
I feel this is not getting the deserved attention and I will rectify the situation. Because, traditionally, drills precede a false flag, which is organized by the same people who did the drill.
The official press release of the event, basically, published yesterday by Reuters and sent out to every mainstream news outlet out there:
EXCLUSIVE IMF, 10 countries simulate cyberattack on global financial system
<<Israel financial-cyber officials take part in a simulation of a major cyber attack on the global financial system with 9 other countries, the World Bank and IMF at the Finance Ministry in Jerusalem.
JERUSALEM, Dec 9 (Reuters) – Israel on Thursday led a 10-country simulation of a major cyberattack on the global financial system in an attempt to increase cooperation that could help to minimise any potential damage to financial markets and banks.
The simulated “war game”, as Israel’s Finance Ministry called it and planned over the past year, evolved over 10 days, with sensitive data emerging on the Dark Web. The simulation also used fake news reports that in the scenario caused chaos in global markets and a run on banks.
The simulation — likely caused by what officials called “sophisticated” players — featured several types of attacks that impacted global foreign exchange and bond markets, liquidity, integrity of data and transactions between importers and exporters.
“These events are creating havoc in the financial markets,” said a narrator of a film shown to the participants as part of the simulation and seen by Reuters.
Israeli government officials said that such threats are possible in the wake of the many high-profile cyberattacks on large companies, and that the only way to contain any damage is through global cooperation since current cyber security is not always strong enough.
“Attackers are 10 steps ahead of the defender,” Micha Weis, financial cyber manager at Israel’s Finance Ministry, told Reuters.
Participants in the initiative, called “Collective Strength”, included treasury officials from Israel, the United States, the United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, Austria, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Thailand, as well as representatives from the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Bank of International Settlements.
The narrator of the film in the simulation said governments were under pressure to clarify the impact of the attack, which was paralysing the global financial system.
“The banks are appealing for emergency liquidity assistance in a multitude of currencies to put a halt to the chaos as counterparties withdraw their funds and limit access to liquidity, leaving the banks in disarray and ruin,” the narrator said.
The participants discussed multilateral policies to respond to the crisis, including a coordinated bank holiday, debt repayment grace periods, SWAP/REPO agreements and coordinated delinking from major currencies.
Rahav Shalom-Revivo, head of Israel’s financial cyber engagements, said international collaboration between finance ministries and international organizations “is key for the resilience of the financial eco-system.”
The simulation was originally scheduled to take place at the Dubai World Expo but it was moved to Jerusalem due to the Omicron variant of COVID-19, with officials participating over video conference.>>
Now please tell me which countries spearheaded restrictions and the Great Reset the most. Australia and Canada belong to the British Crown and need to be assimilated with UK.
And this is the view from Israel, as per Times of Israel:
Israel leads 10-country simulation of major cyberattack on world markets
10-day drill led by Finance Ministry aims to boost international cooperation against hacker threat to global financial systems
An illustrative image of computer popup box screen warning of a system being hacked; hackers, cybersecurity attack. (solarseven; iStock by Getty Images)
Israel led a 10-country, 10-day-long simulation of a major cyberattack on the world’s financial system by “sophisticated” players, with the goal of minimizing the damage to banks and financial markets, the Finance Ministry said on Thursday.
The Finance Ministry led the scenario with help from the Foreign Ministry, and said the “war game” was the first of its kind.
The exercise simulated several scenarios, including sensitive data surfacing on the dark web alongside fake news, leading to global financial chaos.
Participants included representatives from the US, UK, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Thailand, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The Finance Ministry’s chief economist, Shira Greenberg, headed the Israeli team. The exercise was “further evidence of Israel’s global leadership” in the field of financial cyber defense, she said.Get The Times of Israel’s Daily Editionby email and never miss our top storiesNewsletter email addressGET ITBy signing up, you agree to the terms
“The unique and groundbreaking exercise held today showed the importance of coordinated global action by governments together with central banks in the face of financial cyber threats,” Greenberg said.
The simulation “featured several types of attacks that impacted global foreign exchange and bond markets, liquidity, integrity of data and transactions between importers and exporters,” Reuters reported.
Israeli officials said international cooperation was the only way to counter the threat of major cyberattacks.
“Attackers are 10 steps ahead of the defender,” said Micha Weis, financial cyber manager at the Finance Ministry.
In October, the National Cyber Directorate issued a general warning to Israeli businesses to be aware of potential cyberattacks, as the country faced an uptick in hacking attempts.Prime Minister Naftali Bennett speaks at the annual Cyber Week, at Tel Aviv University, on July 21, 2021. (Miriam Alster/FLASH90)
The warning came after an Israeli hospital faced a major ransomware cyberattack that crippled systems, and from which it could take several months to recover.
On Wednesday, Israel’s National Insurance Institute said that its website had been hacked, causing it to go offline for several hours.
In July, cybersecurity firm Check Point reported that Israeli institutions are targeted by about twice as many cyberattacks as is average in other countries around the world, particularly the country’s health sector, which experiences an average of 1,443 attacks a week.
The most targeted sectors around the world, including in Israel, are education and research, followed by government and security organizations, and then health institutions, Check Point said.
The report found that, on average, one in every 60 Israeli organizations or firms is targeted every week with ransomware attacks, an increase of 30 percent over the rate in 2020.Hospital staff at Hillel Yaffe Medical Center log patient details with pen and paper, following a ransomware cyberattack, October 13, 2021. (Hillel Yaffe Medical Center)
Last month, the Black Shadow hacking group released what it said was the full database of personal user information from the Atraf website, an Israeli LGBTQ dating service and nightlife index.
The group also uploaded personal medical information for patients of Israel’s Machon Mor medical institute, including medical records of some 290,000 patients.
The two attacks amounted to one of Israel’s largest-ever privacy breaches.
Black Shadow is a group of Iran-linked hackers who use cyberattacks for criminal ends, according to Hebrew media reports.
Very interesting report from ToI, as opposed to Reuters, isn’t it? Now let’s zoom out a little, for more context
The Centre for Cybersecurity is leading the global response to address systemic cybersecurity challenges and improve digital trust.
As technological advances and global interconnectivity accelerate exponentially in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, unprecedented systemic security risks and threats are undermining trust and growth.
The World Economic Forum’s Centre for Cybersecurity is an independent and impartial global platform committed to fostering international dialogues and collaboration between the global cybersecurity community both in the public and private sectors. We bridge the gap between cybersecurity experts and decision makers at the highest levels to reinforce the importance of cybersecurity as a key strategic priority.
Our Community has identified the following three key priorities:
Building Cyber Resilience – enhance cyber resilience by developing and scaling forward-looking solutions and promoting effective practices across digital ecosystems.
Strengthening Global Cooperation – increase global cooperation between public and private stakeholders by fostering a collective response to cybercrime, and jointly addressing key security challenges.
Understanding Future Networks and Technology – identify future cybersecurity challenges and opportunities related to Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies and envision solutions which help build trust.
Among the speakers we also find the CyberPeace Institute, a Geneva-based company that describes itself as “citizens who seek peace and justice in cyberspace,” funded by Microsoft, Facebook, Mastercard, and the Hewlett Foundation.
I’m still feeling I’m looking at pictures from the same wedding party. Can we find more? Aplenty, but let’s zoom out even more:
Remember IMF / Worls Bank are official partners of the World Economic Forum. I didn’t mention them in the headline below, but they are a key factor there too:
On June 28, 2017, The World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) launched specialized bonds aimed at providing financial support to the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF), a facility created by the World Bank to channel surge funding to developing countries facing the risk of a pandemic.
“This marks the first time that World Bank bonds are being used to finance efforts against infectious diseases, and the first time that pandemic risk in low-income countries is being transferred to the financial markets.”
FOR MY FINAL BULLETPOINT: WHICH COUNTRY DO YOU THINK IT HAS BEST CYBERATTACK CAPABILITIES, IN TERMS OF KNOW-HOW AND TECHNOLOGY?
Israeli Military trains and ‘privatizes’ some of the world’s best hackers
Where I’m getting at:
We’ve isolated the virus here, in its many variants.
It’s the same small core of culprits running both the defense and the attack, with the same old tactics. They’ve already coopted or allied everyone that could pose a threat, except Iran. Similarly to how Epstein’s customers sit on both benches in Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial.
I mean, who attacks “the global financial system”, aliens? I know some people who have been attacking it for centuries now. They’re largely the same ones doing this ‘defense’ exercise. Noticed all militaries are ran by “defense” ministries? There’s no Land and Resources Grabbing Ministry or industry.
If you prefer sports analogies better, think all the teams involved in this pandemic / Great Reset were football teams, and this reveals once again the board of the International Football Association that organizes the World Cup. They don’t care that much who wins as long as the show meets the profitability targets and doesn’t threaten their control positions.
They make money off the ‘rivalry’ and the show, not teams.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
We gave up on our profit shares from masks, if you want to help us, please use the donation button! We think frequent mask use, even short term use can be bad for you, but if you have no way around them, at least send a message of consciousness. Get it here!
Best part: the admission comes from a court trial that has recently been concluded, then put a lid on. I discovered this accidentally, while following other leads.
Please contemplate this most spectacular paragraph and then I’ll give you all the background info you need:
Regarding factual material within the document, the court finds that “[t]he CDC does not . . . justify its withholding based on inextricable intertwining of facts and opinions.” “Rather, it defends the withholding because the facts about COVID-19 were changing frequently, and therefore any facts in the Media Strategy are ‘no more than . . . hypotheses advanced but later revised or rejected altogether.’” “The CDC states that releasing such ‘seemingly factual statements’ would ’cause damage both to the agency – by contradicting and/or undercutting the more reliable information that it ultimately released – and to the public, by creating confusion and potentially sowing mistrust in the guidance provided by the CDC and other Federal agencies.’” The court finds that “Defendants cite no law for the validity of such a justification under FOIA . . . and the Court is aware of none.” Moreover, the deliberative process privilege focuses on whether disclosure would ‘expose an agency’s decisionmaking process in such a way as to discourage candid discussion within the agency and thereby undermine the agency’s ability to perform its functions.‘” “The CDC does not argue that disclosure of the facts would chill the CDC’s internal discussion.” “Therefore, the Court rejects the agency’s justification for withholding the factual portions of the document.”
The reason I call it a “boomerang throw” is because the case was obviously a politicized attack on Trump admin’s alleged dictatorial oversight on science. They meant to show CDC wants to do better and OrangeManBad is keeping them on a leash, preventing transparency. But the solution to it blew up in Biden’s lap, exposing more of CDC’s foul plays when they least needed another public image blow. I mean, could’ve blown up, if anyone made a fuss about this.
Below is how Deep State University aka Harvard presented the case in April 2020:
CDC Sued to Disclose Restrictions on Scientists’ Right to Speak
By Adam Toobin – Edited by Genie Gorbonosov
April 16, 2020
<< Complaint for Injunctive Relief, Knight Institute v. CDC (S.D.N.Y Apr. 2, 2020) (No. 20-2761), complaint hosted by the Knight Institute.
Demanding the Trump Administration make public any restrictions on when employees of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may speak to the public or the press, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University is suing to force compliance with an unanswered Freedom of Information Act request they filed on March 19.
The complaint follows an extended controversy over whether and to what extent governments may restrict public employees from speaking to the press on their personal views. Laden with free speech concerns, the issue demands heightened urgency in the context of a worldwide pandemic that has killed tens of thousands and sparked fierce debate about the role of political leaders and scientists in responding to the crisis.
Motivating the Knight Institute’s concern in this instance is a record of severe restrictions on the rights of government scientists to speak freely to the press. In 2017, Axios published an email from Jeffrey Lancashire, a public affairs officer, to the National Center for Health Statistics, announcing that for every employee of the CDC “any and all correspondence with any member of the news media, regardless of the nature of the inquiry, must be cleared through CDC’s Atlanta Communications Office.”
This policy may exacerbate fears that the White House has politicized the nation’s response to the pandemic and inhibited the voicing of alternate views that could shed light on the extent of the crisis, according to the Knight Institute’s complaint.
“According to recent news stories, scientists and health officials at the CDC must now coordinate with the Office of Vice President Mike Pence before speaking with members of the press or public about the pandemic,” the complaint reads. “These stories have raised concerns that public health experts who know most about the risks to the public are not being permitted to speak candidly and that the information the government is now conveying may be incomplete, inaccurate, or misleading.”
This lawsuit follows recent litigation that has raised questions about the current constitutional status of rights of public employees to speak to the press without official oversight. In 2006, the Supreme Court held in Garcetti v. Ceballos that speech by public employees should only receive First Amendment protection when they are communicating in their capacity as private individuals. However, in the 2014 case of Lane v. Franks, the Court held that “the mere fact that a citizen’s speech concerns information acquired by virtue of his public employment does not transform that speech into employee—rather than citizen—speech.”
Rather than facing doctrinal hurdles in overturning government restrictions on the right of public employees to speak, a recent law review article by Frank LoMonte, head of the Brechner Center for Freedom of Information, identifies the fact that public employees have had to put their careers and employment relationship in jeopardy in order to bring suit. LoMonte suggests that journalists and news organizations should have standing to challenge overbroad restrictions on the right of public employees to speak.
While still untested, the prospect suggests a new line of attack on the type of rules the CDC may be enforcing against its employees. The Knight Institute’s lawsuit may then be seen as the first step in raising a more fundamental question about the constitutionality of these restrictions.
On the alternative side, public health officials have also emphasized the importance of clear and trustworthy information reaching the public during a period of such acute national and international challenges. The spread of misinformation online has drawn particular concern and forced some social media platforms to take unprecedented steps to control what their users can see and share, including partnering with organizations like the CDC and the World Health Organization to verify the information blitzing around their sites. Multiple conflicting messages from government officials — not bound by tight central controls — could contribute to the public’s confusion.
Ultimately, the Knight Institute’s lawsuit focuses on a much more narrow question: Whether the government should be permitted to keep secret its rules for when government scientists may speak publicly. As the coronavirus pandemic enters a new month, long since having banished facets of everyday life once taken for granted, the issue takes on the weight of all those who worry everyday about the information they receive from the government and the media.>>
Fantastic presentation, Harvard! Now, you know what’s way more stunning? Let’s have a look at the full court decision on this!
Friday, September 17, 2021
Knight First Amendment Inst. at Columbia Univ. v. CDC, No. 20-2761, 2021 WL 4253299 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 17, 2021) (Torres, J.)
Re: Request for certain records concerning coronavirus or Coronavirus Task Force, as well as records concerning communication with news media and public policies
Disposition: Denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment; granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment
Litigation Considerations, Adequacy of Search: “The Court concludes that the CDC’s search for documents responsive to requests one and two was not reasonably likely to uncover all responsive documents.” First, the court finds that “the CDC improperly narrowed the scope of [its] search, and shall reconduct it in light of this order.” “Here, the plain language of the requests indicate that they encompass more than the CDC’s interpretation.” “Requests one and two seek records ‘relating to’ policies and procedures, and so are broader than merely the policies themselves.” Responding to plaintiff’s argument, the court finds that “courts have rejected the idea that including a specific request invalidates an overlapping broader request.” Second, the court finds that “‘FOIA requests are not a game of Battleship.’” “‘The requester should not have to score a direct hit on the records sought based on the precise phrasing of his request.’” The court explains that “an agency must search for synonyms or common variants of a term used in the request that are likely to be used in responsive documents, unless it can reasonably justify declining to use them.” “[T]he agency justifies its limitation of search terms as a means of ‘strik[ing] a balance between fully and completely capturing emails dealing with the subject matter of Plaintiff’s requests and eliminating the large number of nonresponsive emails captured by the first search.’” “But, an agency’s duty under FOIA is not to strike such a balance; it is to conduct a search reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents, unless such a search would be an undue burden.” Additionally, the court finds that “Plaintiff correctly observes that the agency’s affidavit does not give sufficient detail about how the search was conducted.” “[I]t does not specify how Boolean searches were used: for instance, if it searched for the two-word terms like ‘covid communication’ in quotes (producing only documents containing those two words in sequence), or not (producing documents with either one of those words anywhere in the document).” “Without such detail, the Court cannot conclude that the agency demonstrated that the search terms were reasonably calculated to uncover responsive documents.” Finally, the court finds that “CDC has given no reason it did not search the inboxes of the individuals identified by Plaintiff, which Plaintiff reasonably contends may contain responsive documents.” “Therefore, it was unreasonable of the CDC to omit those individuals likely to have responsive documents from the search.” Of specific note, the court finds that “Defendants . . . argue that the CDC’s search was reasonable despite the omission of [one individual], because the produced records demonstrate that her supervisor . . . ‘was included in all correspondence to or from [the omitted individual] concerning items 1 and 2 of Plaintiff’s request.’” “However, this logic does not hold: [the supervisor’s] inclusion on the emails uncovered by a search of her email inbox does not mean that [the omitted individual] did not send or receive other responsive emails which did not include [her supervisor].” “Therefore, it is reasonably likely that [the omitted individual] has other, undiscovered responsive documents, and must be included in a reasonable search.”
Exemption 5, Other Privileges: The court holds that “Defendants have not met their burden of demonstrating that the presidential communications privilege covers [two documents], given the scope of dissemination of those documents.” The court relates that the two documents are “a February 25, 2020 email authored by . . . President Donald J. Trump’s then-acting White House Chief of Staff[] and sent to ‘Senior Government Officials,’ described as a ‘[p]roposed coordinated media communication strategy for COVID-19 with designated speakers for various issues/topics,’” and “a February 25 and 27, 2020 email chain involving [the then-acting White House Chief of Staff], described as an ‘[u]pdate and elaboration of proposed coordinated media communication strategy for COVID-19.’” The court relates that “Plaintiff no longer disputes that these documents were properly authored by a member of the President’s staff.” “However, Plaintiff disputes whether these documents were kept sufficiently confidential for the privilege to apply.” The court finds that “[d]isclosure of the documents would not prevent the President from operating effectively.” “The media strategy of an executive agency is not a quintessential presidential power like the removal power; it is and was performed without presidential input.” “Nor would disclosing the documents undermine future presidential decision-making; as discussed below, the policies appear to have been forward-looking plans to coordinate strategy.” “And finally, because the policies were distributed to more than just the President’s closest advisors, his ability to communicate his final decisions privately was not implicated.” “Moreover, the documents were not treated as confidential for purposes of the privilege.” “The documents were also distributed throughout the Executive Branch, including to individuals whom Defendants have not established are covered by this privilege.” “Though Defendants state that the majority of the recipients were in the EOP, not all individuals in the EOP are within the narrow circle of the presidential communications privilege.” “Finally, the documents appear to have been distributed to some of the recipients for a non-advisory purpose.”
Exemption 5, Deliberative Process Privilege & Other Considerations: The court denies defendants’ motion for summary judgment regarding “a ’02/25 – 02/26/2020 Division of Global Migration and Quarantine email chain . . .’ and the information withheld within them[,] [specifically,] ‘[d]iscussion of how to apply 02/25/2020 EOP email to Senior Government Officials.’” The court finds that that material consists of “discussions of how to apply a binding policy, rather than conferring about developing that policy.” “Therefore, any discussion of its application was post-decisional, and outside the scope of the privilege.” The court relates that “Defendants . . . argue that [some of that material] was not an operative policy because on [a later date], a new email was sent, erasing the [earlier] framework.” “However, although the Document 9 policy may have been temporaru, it is still a final decision while in effect.” “In addition, the CDC has not sufficiently articulated a harm associated with disclosing [that material].” “Defendants merely assert that disclosure of some of the documents withheld under the deliberative process privilege ‘could cause harm by chilling future free exchange of ideas and opinions by agency leadership on similarly sensitive matters.’” “[T]his assertion is not specific enough to meet the FOIA requirements.”
Exemption 5, Deliberative Process Privilege & Litigation Considerations, “Reasonably Segregable” Requrements: Separately, the court considers a “a number of iterations of a document titled ‘CDC Communication and Media Strategy for the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Response.’” The court relates that “the CDC avers that [one of these iterations, the only one plaintiff still challenges,] was ‘revised and circulated to help frame ongoing deliberative discussions within CDC for anticipated consideration by CDC decisionmakers,’ but that no Media Strategy was ultimately decided upon.” “Plaintiff has identified a number of features of [the document] that suggest it is, at least, the closest to final version of the Media Strategy produced.” Additionally, the court notes that “[p]roduced documents discussing the Media Strategy also indicate that the goal was ‘to finalize the first iteration of this strategy document,’ . . . which indicates that the CDC intended to create an operative version, even if that version was to be updated.” Also, the court finds that “[t]he CDC also does not describe, specifically for Document 12, the author, its recipient, or those individuals’ relationships to each other and the decision-making process, details which have been considered ‘critical’ to a court’s analysis under the deliberative process privilege.” The court also relates that “Plaintiff argues that [the document] should not be withheld because it is a ‘messaging’ document.” “Though courts in this district are split over how to handle messaging documents, . . . the Court agrees that when considering documents ‘about how the agency should communicate its policies to people outside the agency,’ it must focus on ‘whether the drafts or communications reflect deliberations about what “message” should be delivered to the public about an already-decided policy decision, or whether the communications are of a nature that they would reveal the deliberative process underlying a not-yet-finalized policy decision.’” “On this record, the Court cannot determine if [the document at issue] is merely articulating how to discuss agency policy, or if it is itself an expression of the CDC’s ‘essential policymaking role.’” “Accordingly, the Court cannot yet decide whether [this document] falls into the deliberative process privilege.”
Regarding factual material within the document, the court finds that “[t]he CDC does not . . . justify its withholding based on inextricable intertwining of facts and opinions.” “Rather, it defends the withholding because the facts about COVID-19 were changing frequently, and therefore any facts in the Media Strategy are ‘no more than . . . hypotheses advanced but later revised or rejected altogether.’” “The CDC states that releasing such ‘seemingly factual statements’ would ’cause damage both to the agency – by contradicting and/or undercutting the more reliable information that it ultimately released – and to the public, by creating confusion and potentially sowing mistrust in the guidance provided by the CDC and other Federal agencies.’” The court finds that “Defendants cite no law for the validity of such a justification under FOIA . . . and the Court is aware of none.” Moreover, the deliberative process privilege focuses on whether disclosure would ‘expose an agency’s decisionmaking process in such a way as to discourage candid discussion within the agency and thereby undermine the agency’s ability to perform its functions.’” “The CDC does not argue that disclosure of the facts would chill the CDC’s internal discussion.” “Therefore, the Court rejects the agency’s justification for withholding the factual portions of the document.”
Updated November 4, 2021
You could start the Comedy Central Roast of CDC with that material. Hey, Rand Paul, where art thou?
“Science will win”.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Sometimes my memes are 3D. And you can own them. Or send them to someone. You can even eat some of them. CLICK HERE
It’s here, it’s solid, it’s backed by tons more science. I’m just making sure you see this and I have it archived, without feeling I need to add my comments.
Evidence for a connection between coronavirus disease-19 and exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless communications including 5G
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) public health policy has focused on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and its effects on human health while environmental factors have been largely ignored. In considering the epidemiological triad (agent-host-environment) applicable to all disease, we investigated a possible environmental factor in the COVID-19 pandemic: ambient radiofrequency radiation from wireless communication systems including microwaves and millimeter waves. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, surfaced in Wuhan, China shortly after the implementation of city-wide (fifth generation [5G] of wireless communications radiation [WCR]), and rapidly spread globally, initially demonstrating a statistical correlation to international communities with recently established 5G networks. In this study, we examined the peer-reviewed scientific literature on the detrimental bioeffects of WCR and identified several mechanisms by which WCR may have contributed to the COVID-19 pandemic as a toxic environmental cofactor. By crossing boundaries between the disciplines of biophysics and pathophysiology, we present evidence that WCR may: (1) cause morphologic changes in erythrocytes including echinocyte and rouleaux formation that can contribute to hypercoagulation; (2) impair microcirculation and reduce erythrocyte and hemoglobin levels exacerbating hypoxia; (3) amplify immune system dysfunction, including immunosuppression, autoimmunity, and hyperinflammation; (4) increase cellular oxidative stress and the production of free radicals resulting in vascular injury and organ damage; (5) increase intracellular Ca2+ essential for viral entry, replication, and release, in addition to promoting pro-inflammatory pathways; and (6) worsen heart arrhythmias and cardiac disorders.
Relevance for Patients:
In short, WCR has become a ubiquitous environmental stressor that we propose may have contributed to adverse health outcomes of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 and increased the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we recommend that all people, particularly those suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection, reduce their exposure to WCR as much as reasonably achievable until further research better clarifies the systemic health effects associated with chronic WCR exposure.
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been the focus of international public health policy since 2020. Despite unprecedented public health protocols to quell the pandemic, the number of COVID-19 cases continues to rise. We propose a reassessment of our public health strategies.
According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the simplest model of disease causation is the epidemiological triad consisting of three interactive factors: the agent (pathogen), the environment, and the health status of the host [1]. Extensive research is being done on the agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Risk factors that make a host more likely to succumb to the disease have been elucidated. However, environmental factors have not been sufficiently explored. In this paper, we investigated the role of wireless communication radiation (WCR), a widespread environmental stressor.
We explore the scientific evidence suggesting a possible relationship between COVID-19 and radiofrequency radiation related to wireless communications technology including fifth generation (5G) of wireless communications technology, henceforth referred to as WCR. WCR has already been recognized as a form of environmental pollution and physiological stressor [2]. Assessing the potentially detrimental health effects of WCR may be crucial to develop an effective, rational public health policy that may help expedite eradication of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, because we are on the verge of worldwide 5G deployment, it is critical to consider the possible damaging health effects of WCR before the public is potentially harmed.
5G is a protocol that will use high frequency bands and extensive bandwidths of the electromagnetic spectrum in the vast radiofrequency range from 600 MHz to nearly 100 GHz, which includes millimeter waves (>20 GHz), in addition to the currently used third generation (3G) and fourth generation (4G) long-term evolution (LTE) microwave bands. 5G frequency spectrum allocations differ from country to country. Focused pulsed beams of radiation will emit from new base stations and phased array antennas placed close to buildings whenever persons access the 5G network. Because these high frequencies are strongly absorbed by the atmosphere and especially during rain, a transmitter’s range is limited to 300 meters. Therefore, 5G requires base stations and antennas to be much more closely spaced than previous generations. Plus, satellites in space will emit 5G bands globally to create a wireless worldwide web. The new system therefore requires significant densification of 4G infrastructure as well as new 5G antennas that may dramatically increase the population’s WCR exposure both inside structures and outdoors. Approximately 100,000 emitting satellites are planned to be launched into orbit. This infrastructure will significantly alter the world’s electromagnetic environment to unprecedented levels and may cause unknown consequences to the entire biosphere, including humans. The new infrastructure will service the new 5G devices, including 5G mobile phones, routers, computers, tablets, self-driving vehicles, machine-to-machine communications, and the Internet of Things.
The global industry standard for 5G is set by the 3G Partnership Project (3GPP), which is an umbrella term for several organizations developing standard protocols for mobile telecommunications. The 5G standard specifies all key aspects of the technology, including frequency spectrum allocation, beam-forming, beam steering, multiplexing multiple in, multiple out schemes, as well as modulation schemes, among others. 5G will utilize from 64 to 256 antennas at short distances to serve virtually simultaneously a large number of devices within a cell. The latest finalized 5G standard, Release 16, is codified in the 3GPP published Technical Report TR 21.916 and may be downloaded from the 3GPP server at https://www.3gpp.org/specifications. Engineers claim that 5G will offer performance up to 10 times that of current 4G networks [3].
COVID-19 began in Wuhan, China in December 2019, shortly after city-wide 5G had “gone live,” that is, become an operational system, on October 31, 2019. COVID-19 outbreaks soon followed in other areas where 5G had also been at least partially implemented, including South Korea, Northern Italy, New York City, Seattle, and Southern California. In May 2020, Mordachev [4] reported a statistically significant correlation between the intensity of radiofrequency radiation and the mortality from SARS-CoV-2 in 31 countries throughout the world. During the first pandemic wave in the United States, COVID-19 attributed cases and deaths were statistically higher in states and major cities with 5G infrastructure as compared with states and cities that did not yet have this technology [5].
There is a large body of peer reviewed literature, since before World War II, on the biological effects of WCR that impact many aspects of our health. In examining this literature, we found intersections between the pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 and detrimental bioeffects of WCR exposure. Here, we present the evidence suggesting that WCR has been a possible contributing factor exacerbating COVID-19.
1.2. Overview on COVID-19
The clinical presentation of COVID-19 has proven to be highly variable, with a wide range of symptoms and variability from case to case. According to the CDC, early disease symptoms may include sore throat, headache, fever, cough, chills, among others. More severe symptoms including shortness of breath, high fever, and severe fatigue may occur in a later stage. The neurological sequela of taste and smell loss has also been described.
Ing et al. [6] determined 80% of those affected have mild symptoms or none, but older populations and those with comorbidities, such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity, have a greater risk for severe disease [7]. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) can rapidly occur [8] and cause severe shortness of breath as endothelial cells lining blood vessels and epithelial cells lining airways lose their integrity, and protein rich fluid leaks into adjacent air sacs. COVID-19 can cause insufficient oxygen levels (hypoxia) that have been seen in up to 80% of intensive care unit (ICU) patients [9] exhibiting respiratory distress. Decreased oxygenation and elevated carbon dioxide levels in patients’ blood have been observed, although the etiology for these findings remains unclear.
Massive oxidative damage to the lungs has been observed in areas of airspace opacification documented on chest radiographs and computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia [10]. This cellular stress may indicate a biochemical rather than a viral etiology [11].
Because disseminated virus can attach itself to cells containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor; it can spread and damage organs and soft tissues throughout the body, including the lungs, heart, intestines, kidneys, blood vessels, fat, testes, and ovaries, among others. The disease can increase systemic inflammation and induce a hypercoagulable state. Without anticoagulation, intravascular blood clots can be devastating [12].
In COVID-19 patients referred to as “long-haulers,” symptoms can wax and wane for months [13]. Shortness of breath, fatigue, joint pain, and chest pain can become persistent symptoms. Post-infectious brain fog, cardiac arrhythmia, and new onset hypertension have also been described. Long-term chronic complications of COVID-19 are being defined as epidemiological data are collected over time.
As our understanding of COVID-19 continues to evolve, environmental factors, particularly those of wireless communication electromagnetic fields, remain unexplored variables that may be contributing to the disease including its severity in some patients. Next, we summarize the bioeffects of WCR exposure from the peer reviewed scientific literature published over decades.
1.3. Overview on bioeffects of WCR exposure
Organisms are electrochemical beings. Low-level WCR from devices, including mobile telephony base antennas, wireless network protocols utilized for the local networking of devices and internet access, trademarked as Wi-Fi (officially IEEE 802.11b Direct Sequence protocol; IEEE, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) by the Wi-Fi alliance, and mobile phones, among others, may disrupt regulation of numerous physiological functions. Non-thermal bioeffects (below the power density that causes tissue heating) from very low-level WCR exposure have been reported in numerous peer-reviewed scientific publications at power densities below the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) exposure guidelines [14]. Low-level WCR has been found to impact the organism at all levels of organization, from the molecular to the cellular, physiological, behavioral, and psychological levels. Moreover, it has been shown to cause systemic detrimental health effects including increased cancer risk [15], endocrine changes [16], increased free radical production [17], deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage [18], changes to the reproductive system [19], learning and memory defects [20], and neurological disorders [21]. Having evolved within Earth’s extremely low-level natural radiofrequency background, organisms lack the ability to adapt to heightened levels of unnatural radiation of wireless communications technology with digital modulation that includes short intense pulses (bursts).
The peer-reviewed world scientific literature has documented evidence for detrimental bioeffects from WCR exposure including 5G frequencies over several decades. The Soviet and Eastern European literature from 1960 to 1970s demonstrates significant biological effects, even at exposure levels more than 1000 times below 1 mW/cm2, the current guideline for maximum public exposure in the US. Eastern studies on animal and human subjects were performed at low exposure levels (<1 mW/cm2) for long durations (typically months). Adverse bioeffects from WCR exposure levels below 0.001 mW/cm2 have also been documented in the Western literature. Damage to human sperm viability including DNA fragmentation by internet-connected laptop computers at power densities from 0.0005 to 0.001 mW/cm2 has been reported [22]. Chronic human exposure to 0.000006 – 0.00001 mW/cm2 produced significant changes in human stress hormones following a mobile phone base station installation [23]. Human exposures to cell phone radiation at 0.00001 – 0.00005 mW/cm2 resulted in complaints of headache, neurological problems, sleep problems, and concentration problems, corresponding to “microwave sickness” [24,25]. The effects of WCR on prenatal development in mice placed near an “antenna park” exposed to power densities from 0.000168 to 0.001053 mW/cm2 showed a progressive decrease in the number of newborns and ended in irreversible infertility [26]. Most US research has been performed over short durations of weeks or less. In recent years, there have been few long-term studies on animals or humans.
Illness from WCR exposure has been documented since the early use of radar. Prolonged exposure to microwaves and millimeter waves from radar was associated with various disorders termed “radio-wave sickness” decades ago by Russian scientists. A wide variety of bioeffects from nonthermal power densities of WCR were reported by Soviet research groups since the 1960s. A bibliography of over 3700 references on the reported biological effects in the world scientific literature was published in 1972 (revised 1976) by the US Naval Medical Research Institute [27,28]. Several relevant Russian studies are summarized as follows. Research on Escherichia coli bacteria cultures show power density windows for microwave resonance effects for 51.755 GHz stimulation of bacterial growth, observed at extremely low power densities of 10−13 mW/cm2 [29], illustrating an extremely low level bioeffect. More recently Russian studies confirmed earlier results of Soviet research groups on the effects of 2.45 GHz at 0.5 mW/cm2 on rats (30 days exposure for 7 h/day), demonstrating the formation of antibodies to the brain (autoimmune response) and stress reactions [30]. In a long-term (1 – 4 year) study comparing children who use mobile phones to a control group, functional changes, including greater fatigue, decreased voluntary attention, and weakening of semantic memory, among other adverse psychophysiological changes, were reported [31]. Key Russian research reports that underlie the scientific basis for Soviet and Russian WCR exposure guidelines to protect the public, which are much lower than the US guidelines, have been summarized [32].
By comparison to the exposure levels employed in these studies, we measured the ambient level of WCR from 100 MHz to 8 GHz in downtown San Francisco, California in December, 2020, and found an average power density of 0.0002 mW/cm2. This level is from the superposition of multiple WCR devices. It is approximately 2 × 1010 times above the natural background.
Pulsed radio-frequency radiation such as WCR exhibits substantially different bioeffects, both qualitatively and quantitatively (generally more pronounced) compared to continuous waves at similar time-averaged power densities [33–36]. The specific interaction mechanisms are not well understood. All types of wireless communications employ extremely low frequency (ELFs) in the modulation of the radiofrequency carrier signals, typically pulses to increase the capacity of information transmitted. This combination of radiofrequency radiation with ELF modulation(s) is generally more bioactive, as it is surmised that organisms cannot readily adapt to such rapidly changing wave forms [37–40]. Therefore, the presence of ELF components of radiofrequency waves from pulsing or other modulations must be considered in studies on the bioeffects of WCR. Unfortunately, the reporting of such modulations has been unreliable, especially in older studies [41].
The BioInitiative Report [42], authored by 29 experts from ten countries, and updated in 2020, provides a scholarly contemporary summary of the literature on the bioeffects and health consequences from WCR exposure, including a compendium of supporting research. Recent reviews have been published [43–46]. Two comprehensive reviews on the bioeffects of millimeter waves report that even short-term exposures produce marked bioeffects [47,48].Go to:
2. Methods
An ongoing literature study of the unfolding pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 was performed. To investigate a possible connection to bioeffects from WCR exposure, we examined over 250 peer-reviewed research reports from 1969 to 2021, including reviews and studies on cells, animals, and humans. We included the world literature in English and Russian reports translated to English, on radio frequencies from 600 MHz to 90 GHz, the carrier wave spectrum of WCR (2G to 5G inclusive), with particular emphasis on nonthermal, low power densities (<1 mW/cm2), and long-term exposures. The following search terms were used in queries in MEDLINE® and the Defense Technical Information Center (https://discover.dtic.mil) to find relevant study reports: radiofrequency radiation, microwave, millimeter wave, radar, MHz, GHz, blood, red blood cell, erythrocyte, hemoglobin, hemodynamic, oxygen, hypoxia, vascular, inflammation, pro-inflammatory, immune, lymphocyte, T cell, cytokine, intracellular calcium, sympathetic function, arrhythmia, heart, cardiovascular, oxidative stress, glutathione, reactive oxygen species (ROS), COVID-19, virus, and SARS-CoV-2. Occupational studies on WCR exposed workers were included in the study. Our approach is akin to Literature-Related Discovery, in which two concepts that have heretofore not been linked are explored in the literature searches to look for linkage(s) to produce novel, interesting, plausible, and intelligible knowledge, that is, potential discovery [49]. From analysis of these studies in comparison with new information unfolding on the pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2, we identified several ways in which adverse bioeffects of WCR exposure intersect with COVID-19 manifestations and organized our findings into five categories.Go to:
3. Results
Table 1 lists the manifestations common to COVID-19 including disease progression and the corresponding adverse bioeffects from WCR exposure. Although these effects are delineated into categories — blood changes, oxidative stress, immune system disruption and activation, increased intracellular calcium (Ca2+), and cardiac effects — it must be emphasized that these effects are not independent of each other. For example, blood clotting and inflammation have overlapping mechanisms, and oxidative stress is implicated in erythrocyte morphological changes as well as in hypercoagulation, inflammation, and organ damage.
Table 1
Bioeffects of Wireless Communication Radiation (WCR) exposure in relation to COVID-19 manifestations and their progression
Oxidative stress Glutathione level decrease; free radicals and lipid peroxide increase; superoxide dismutase activity decrease; oxidative injury in tissues and organs
Oxidative stress Glutathione level decrease; free radical increase and damage; apoptosis→Oxidative injury; organ damage in severe disease
Immune system disruption and activation Immune suppression in some studies; immune hyperactivation in other studies Long-term: suppression of T-lymphocytes; inflammatory biomarkers increased; autoimmunity; organ injury
Immune system disruption and activation Decreased production of T-lymphocytes; elevated inflammatory biomarkers. →Immune hyperactivation and inflammation; cytokine storm in severe disease; cytokine-induced hypo-perfusion with resulting hypoxia; organ injury; organ failure
Increased intracellular calcium From activation of voltage-gated calcium channels on cell membranes, with numerous secondary effects
Increased intracellular calcium →Increased virus entry, replication, and release →Increased NF-κB, pro-inflammatory processes, coagulation, and thrombosis
Cardiac effects Up-regulation of sympathetic nervous system; palpitations and arrhythmias
Supportive evidence including study details and citations are provided in the text under each subject heading, i.e., blood changes, oxidative stress, etc.
3.1. Blood changes
WCR exposure can cause morphologic changes in blood readily seen through phase contrast or dark-field microscopy of live peripheral blood samples. In 2013, Havas observed erythrocyte aggregation including rouleaux (rolls of stacked red blood cells) in live peripheral blood samples following 10 min human exposure to a 2.4 GHz cordless phone [50]. Although not peer reviewed, one of us (Rubik) investigated the effect of 4G LTE mobile phone radiation on the peripheral blood of ten human subjects, each of whom had been exposed to cell phone radiation for two consecutive 45-min intervals [51]. Two types of effects were observed: increased stickiness and clumping of red blood cells with rouleaux formation, and subsequent formation of echinocytes (spiky red blood cells). Red blood cell clumping and aggregation are known to be actively involved in blood clotting [52]. The prevalence of this phenomenon on exposure to WCR in the human population has not yet been determined. Larger controlled studies should be performed to further investigate this phenomenon.
Similar red blood cell changes have been described in peripheral blood of COVID-19 patients [53]. Rouleaux formation has been observed in 1/3 of COVID-19 patients, whereas spherocytes and echinocyte formation is more variable. Spike protein engagement with ACE2 receptors on cells lining the blood vessels can lead to endothelial damage, even when isolated [54]. Rouleaux formation, particularly in the setting of underlying endothelial damage, can clog the microcirculation, impeding oxygen transport, contributing to hypoxia, and increasing the risk of thrombosis [52]. Thrombogenesis associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection may also be caused by direct viral binding to ACE2 receptors on platelets [55].
Additional blood effects have been observed in both humans and animals exposed to WCR. In 1977, a Russian study reported that rodents irradiated with 5 – 8 mm waves (60 – 37 GHz) at 1 mW/cm2 for 15 min/day over 60 days developed hemodynamic disorders, suppressed red blood cell formation, reduced hemoglobin, and an inhibition of oxygen utilization (oxidative phosphorylation by the mitochondria) [56]. In 1978, a 3-year Russian study on 72 engineers exposed to millimeter wave generators emitting at 1 mW/cm2 or less showed a decrease in their hemoglobin levels and red blood cell counts, and a tendency toward hypercoagulation, whereas a control group showed no changes [57]. Such deleterious hematologic effects from WCR exposure may also contribute to the development of hypoxia and blood clotting observed in COVID-19 patients.
It has been proposed that the SARS-CoV-2 virus attacks erythrocytes and causes degradation of hemoglobin [11]. Viral proteins may attack the 1-beta chain of hemoglobin and capture the porphyrin, along with other proteins from the virus catalyzing the dissociation of iron from heme [58]. In principle this would reduce the number of functional erythrocytes and cause the release of free iron ions that could cause oxidative stress, tissue damage, and hypoxia. With hemoglobin partially destroyed and lung tissue damaged by inflammation, patients would be less able to exchange carbon dioxide (CO2) and oxygen (O2), and would become oxygen depleted. In fact, some COVID-19 patients show reduced hemoglobin levels, measuring 7.1 g/L and even as low as 5.9 g/L in severe cases [59]. Clinical studies of almost 100 patients from Wuhan revealed that the hemoglobin levels in the blood of most patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are significantly lowered resulting in compromised delivery of oxygen to tissues and organs [60]. In a meta-analysis of four studies with a total of 1210 patients and 224 with severe disease, hemoglobin values were reduced in COVID-19 patients with severe disease compared to those with milder forms [59]. In another study on 601 COVID-19 patients, 14.7% of anemic COVID-19 ICU patients and 9% of non-ICU COVID-19 patients had autoimmune hemolytic anemia [61]. In patients with severe COVID-19 disease, decreased hemoglobin along with elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, albumin [62], serum ferritin [63], and low oxygen saturation [64] provide additional support for this hypothesis. In addition, packed red blood cell transfusion may promote recovery of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure [65].
In short, both WCR exposure and COVID-19 may cause deleterious effects on red blood cells and reduced hemoglobin levels contributing to hypoxia in COVID-19. Endothelial injury may further contribute to hypoxia and many of the vascular complications seen in COVID-19 [66] that are discussed in the next section.
3.2. Oxidative stress
Oxidative stress is a non-specific pathological condition reflecting an imbalance between an increased production of ROS and an inability of the organism to detoxify the ROS or to repair the damage they cause to biomolecules and tissues [67]. Oxidative stress can disrupt cell signaling, cause the formation of stress proteins, and generate highly reactive free radicals, which can cause DNA and cell membrane damage.
SARS-CoV-2 inhibits intrinsic pathways designed to reduce ROS levels, thereby increasing morbidity. Immune dysregulation, that is, the upregulation of interleukin (IL)-6 and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) [68] and suppression of interferon (IFN) α and IFN β [69] have been identified in the cytokine storm accompanying severe COVID-19 infections and generates oxidative stress [10]. Oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction may further perpetuate the cytokine storm, worsening tissue damage, and increasing the risk of severe illness and death.
Similarly low-level WCR generates ROS in cells that cause oxidative damage. In fact, oxidative stress is considered to be one of the primary mechanisms in which WCR exposure causes cellular damage. Among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies investigating oxidative effects of low-intensity WCR, 93 of these studies confirmed that WCR induces oxidative effects in biological systems [17]. WCR is an oxidative agent with a high pathogenic potential especially when exposure is continuous [70].
Oxidative stress is also an accepted mechanism causing endothelial damage [71]. This may manifest in patients with severe COVID-19 in addition to increasing the risk for blood clot formation and worsening hypoxemia [10]. Low levels of glutathione, the master antioxidant, have been observed in a small group of COVID-19 patients, with the lowest level found in the most severe cases [72]. The finding of low glutathione levels in these patients further supports oxidative stress as a component of this disease [72]. In fact, glutathione, the major source of sulfhydryl-based antioxidant activity in the human body, may be pivotal in COVID-19 [73]. Glutathione deficiency has been proposed as the most likely cause of serious manifestations in COVID-19 [72]. The most common co-morbidities, hypertension [74]; obesity [75]; diabetes [76]; and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [74] support the concept that pre-existing conditions causing low levels of glutathione may work synergistically to create the “perfect storm” for both the respiratory and vascular complications of severe infection. Another paper citing two cases of COVID-19 pneumonia treated successfully with intravenous glutathione also supports this hypothesis [77].
Many studies report oxidative stress in humans exposed to WCR. Peraica et al. [78] found diminished blood levels of glutathione in workers exposed to WCR from radar equipment (0.01 mW/cm2 – 10 mW/cm2; 1.5 – 10.9 GHz). Garaj-Vrhovac et al. [79] studied bioeffects following exposure to non-thermal pulsed microwaves from marine radar (3 GHz, 5.5 GHz, and 9.4 GHz) and reported reduced glutathione levels and increased malondialdehyde (marker for oxidative stress) in an occupationally exposed group [79]. Blood plasma of individuals residing near mobile phone base stations showed significantly reduced glutathione, catalase, and superoxide dismutase levels over unexposed controls [80]. In a study on human exposure to WCR from mobile phones, increased blood levels of lipid peroxide were reported, while enzymatic activities of superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase in the red blood cells decreased, indicating oxidative stress [81].
In a study on rats exposed to 2450 MHz (wireless router frequency), oxidative stress was implicated in causing red blood cell lysis (hemolysis) [82]. In another study, rats exposed to 945 MHz (base station frequency) at 0.367 mW/cm2 for 7 h/day, over 8 days, demonstrated low glutathione levels and increased malondialdehyde and superoxide dismutase enzyme activity, hallmarks for oxidative stress [83]. In a long-term controlled study on rats exposed to 900 MHz (mobile phone frequency) at 0.0782 mW/cm2 for 2 h/day for 10 months, there was a significant increase in malondialdehyde and total oxidant status over controls [84]. In another long-term controlled study on rats exposed to two mobile phone frequencies, 1800 MHz and 2100 MHz, at power densities 0.04 – 0.127 mW/cm2 for 2 h/day over 7 months, significant alterations in oxidant-antioxidant parameters, DNA strand breaks, and oxidative DNA damage were found [85].
There is a correlation between oxidative stress and thrombogenesis [86]. ROS can cause endothelial dysfunction and cellular damage. The endothelial lining of the vascular system contains ACE2 receptors that are targeted by SARS-CoV-2. The resulting endotheliitis can cause luminal narrowing and result in diminished blood flow to downstream structures. Thrombi in arterial structures can further obstruct blood flow causing ischemia and/or infarcts in involved organs, including pulmonary emboli and strokes. Abnormal blood coagulation leading to micro-emboli was a recognized complication early in the history of COVID-19 [87]. Out of 184 ICU COVID-19 patients, 31% showed thrombotic complications [88]. Cardiovascular clotting events are a common cause of COVID-19 deaths [12]. Pulmonary embolism, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), liver, cardiac, and renal failure have all been observed in COVID-19 patients [89].
Patients with the highest cardiovascular risk factors in COVID-19 includ males, the elderly, diabetics, and obese and hypertensive patients. However, increased incidence of strokes in younger patients with COVID-19 has also been described [90].
Oxidative stress is caused by WCR exposure and is known to be implicated in cardiovascular disease. Ubiquitous environmental exposure to WCR may contribute to cardiovascular disease by creating a chronic state of oxidative stress [91]. This would lead to oxidative damage to cellular constituents and alter signal transduction pathways. In addition, pulse-modulated WCR can cause oxidative injury in liver, lung, testis, and heart tissues mediated by lipid peroxidation, increased levels of nitric oxides, and suppression of the antioxidant defense mechanism [92].
In summary, oxidative stress is a major component in the pathophysiology of COVID-19 as well as in cellular damage caused by WCR exposure.
3.3. Immune system disruption and activation
When SARS-CoV-2 first infects the human body, it attacks cells lining the nose, throat, and upper airway harboring ACE2 receptors. Once the virus gains access to a host cell through one of its spike proteins, which are the multiple protuberances projecting from the viral envelope that bind to ACE2 receptors, it converts the cell into a virus self-replicating entity.
In response to COVID-19 infection, both an immediate systemic innate immune response as well as a delayed adaptive response has been shown to occur [93]. The virus can also cause a dysregulation of the immune response, particularly in the decreased production of T-lymphocytes. [94]. Severe cases tend to have lower lymphocyte counts, higher leukocyte counts and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratios, as well as lower percentages of monocytes, eosinophils, and basophils [94]. Severe cases of COVID-19 show the greatest impairment in T-lymphocytes.
In comparison, low-level WCR studies on laboratory animals also show impaired immune function [95]. Findings include physical alterations in immune cells, a degradation of immunological responses, inflammation, and tissue damage. Baranski [96] exposed guinea pigs and rabbits to continuous or pulse-modulated 3000 MHz microwaves at an average power density of 3.5 mW/cm2 for 3 h/day over 3 months and found nonthermal changes in lymphocyte counts, abnormalities in nuclear structure, and mitosis in the erythroblastic cell series in the bone marrow and in lymphoid cells in lymph nodes and spleen. Other investigators have shown diminished T-lymphocytes or suppressed immune function in animals exposed to WCR. Rabbits exposed to 2.1 GHz at 5mW/cm2 for 3 h/day, 6 days/week, for 3 months, showed suppression of T-lymphocytes [97]. Rats exposed to 2.45 GHz and 9.7 GHz for 2 h/day, 7 days/week, for 21 months showed a significant decrease in the levels of lymphocytes and an increase in mortality at 25 months in the irradiated group [98]. Lymphocytes harvested from rabbits irradiated with 2.45 GHz for 23 h/day for 6 months show a significant suppression in immune response to a mitogen [99].
In 2009, Johansson conducted a literature review, which included the 2007 Bioinitiative Report. He concluded that electromagnetic fields (EMF) exposure, including WCR, can disturb the immune system and cause allergic and inflammatory responses at exposure levels significantly less than current national and international safety limits and raise the risk for systemic disease [100]. A review conducted by Szmigielski in 2013 concluded that weak RF/microwave fields, such as those emitted by mobile phones, can affect various immune functions both in vitro and in vivo [101]. Although the effects are historically somewhat inconsistent, most research studies document alterations in the number and activity of immune cells from RF exposure. In general, short-term exposure to weak microwave radiation may temporarily stimulate an innate or adaptive immune response, but prolonged irradiation inhibits those same functions.
In the acute phase of COVID-19 infection, blood tests demonstrate elevated ESR, C-reactive protein, and other elevated inflammatory markers [102], typical of an innate immune response. Rapid viral replication can cause death of epithelial and endothelial cells and result in leaky blood vessels and pro-inflammatory cytokine release [103]. Cytokines, proteins, peptides, and proteoglycans that modulate the body’s immune response, are modestly elevated in patients with mild-to-moderate disease severity [104]. In those with severe disease, an uncontrolled release of pro-inflammatory cytokines–a cytokine storm–can occur. Cytokine storms originate from an imbalance in T-cell activation with dysregulated release of IL-6, IL-17, and other cytokines. Programmed cell death (apoptosis), ARDS, DIC, and multi-organ system failure can all result from a cytokine storm and increase the risk of mortality.
By comparison, Soviet researchers found in the 1970s that radiofrequency radiation can damage the immune system of animals. Shandala [105] exposed rats to 0.5 mW/cm2 microwaves for 1 month, 7 h/day, and found impaired immune competence and induction of autoimmune disease. Rats irradiated with 2.45 GHz at 0.5 mW/cm2 for 7 h daily for 30 days produced autoimmune reactions, and 0.1 – 0.5 mW/cm2 produced persistent pathological immune reactions [106]. Exposure to microwave radiation, even at low levels (0.1 – 0.5 mW/cm2), can impair immune function, causing physical alterations in the essential cells of the immune system and a degradation of immunologic responses [107]. Szabo et al. [108] examined the effects of 61.2 GHz exposure on epidermal keratinocytes and found an increase in IL-1b, a pro-inflammatory cytokine. Makar et al. [109] found that immunosuppressed mice irradiated 30 min/day for 3 days by 42.2 GHz showed increased levels of TNF-α, a cytokine produced by macrophages.
In short, COVID-19 can lead to immune dysregulation as well as cytokine storms. By comparison, exposure to low-level WCR as observed in animal studies can also compromise the immune system, with chronic daily exposure producing immunosuppression or immune dysregulation including hyperactivation.
3.4. Increased intracellular calcium
In 1992, Walleczek first suggested that ELF electromagnetic fields (<3000 Hz) may be affecting membrane-mediated Ca2+ signaling and lead to increased intracellular Ca2+ [110]. The mechanism of irregular gating of voltage-gated ion channels in cell membranes by polarized and coherent, oscillating electric or magnetic fields was first presented in 2000 and 2002 [40,111]. Pall [112] in his review of WCR-induced bioeffects combined with use of calcium channel blockers (CCB) noted that voltage-gated calcium channels play a major role in WCR bioeffects. Increased intracellular Ca+2 results from the activation of voltage-gated calcium channels, and this may be one of the primary mechanisms of action of WCR on organisms.
Intracellular Ca2+ is essential for virus entry, replication, and release. It has been reported that some viruses can manipulate voltage-gated calcium channels to increase intracellular Ca2+ thereby facilitating viral entry and replication [113]. Research has shown that the interaction between a virus and voltage-gated calcium channels promote virus entry at the virus-host cell fusion step [113]. Thus, after the virus binds to its receptor on a host cell and enters the cell through endocytosis, the virus takes over the host cell to manufacture its components. Certain viral proteins then manipulate calcium channels, thereby increasing intracellular Ca2+, which facilitates further viral replication.
Even though direct evidence has not been reported, there is indirect evidence that increased intracellular Ca2+ may be involved in COVID-19. In a recent study, elderly hospitalized COVID-19 patients treated with CCBs, amlodipine or nifedipine, were more likely to survive and less likely to require intubation or mechanical ventilation than controls [114]. Furthermore, CCBs strongly limit SARS-CoV-2 entry and infection in cultured epithelial lung cells [115]. CCBs also block the increase of intracellular Ca2+ caused by WCR exposure as well as exposure to other electromagnetic fields [112].
Intracellular Ca2+ is a ubiquitous second messenger relaying signals received by cell surface receptors to effector proteins involved in numerous biochemical processes. Increased intracellular Ca2+ is a significant factor in upregulation of transcription nuclear factor KB (NF-κB) [116], an important regulator of pro-inflammatory cytokine production as well as coagulation and thrombotic cascades. NF-κB is hypothesized to be a key factor underlying severe clinical manifestations of COVID-19 [117].
In short, WCR exposure, therefore, may enhance the infectivity of the virus by increasing intracellular Ca2+ that may also indirectly contribute to inflammatory processes and thrombosis.
3.5. Cardiac effects
Cardiac arrhythmias are more commonly encountered in critically ill patients with COVID-19 [118]. The cause for arrhythmia in COVID-19 patients is multifactorial and includes cardiac and extra-cardiac processes [119]. Direct infection of the heart muscle by SARS-CoV-19 causing myocarditis, myocardial ischemia caused by a variety of etiologies, and heart strain secondary to pulmonary or systemic hypertension can result in cardiac arrhythmia. Hypoxemia caused by diffuse pneumonia, ARDS, or extensive pulmonary emboli represent extra-cardiac causes of arrhythmia. Electrolyte imbalances, intravascular fluid imbalance, and side effects from pharmacologic regimens can also result in arrhythmias in COVID-19 patients. Patients admitted to ICUs have been shown to have a higher increase in cardiac arrhythmias, 16.5% in one study [120]. Although no correlation between EMFs and arrhythmia in COVID-19 patients has been described in the literature, many ICUs are equipped with wireless patient monitoring equipment and communication devices producing a wide range of EMF pollution [121].
COVID-19 patients commonly show increased levels of cardiac troponin, indicating damage to the heart muscle [122]. Cardiac damage has been associated with arrhythmias and increased mortality. Cardiac injury is thought to be more often secondary to pulmonary emboli and viral sepsis, but direct infection of the heart, that is, myocarditis, can occur through direct viral binding to ACE2 receptors on cardiac pericytes, affecting local, and regional cardiac blood flow [60].
Immune system activation along with alterations in the immune system may result in atherosclerotic plaque instability and vulnerability, that is, presenting an increased risk for thrombus formation, and contributing to development of acute coronary events and cardiovascular disease in COVID-19.
Regarding WCR exposure bioeffects, in 1969 Christopher Dodge of the Biosciences Division, U.S. Naval Observatory in Washington DC, reviewed 54 papers and reported that radiofrequency radiation can adversely affect all major systems of the body, including impeding blood circulation; altering blood pressure and heart rate; affecting electrocardiograph readings; and causing chest pain and heart palpitations [123]. In the 1970s Glaser reviewed more than 2000 publications on radiofrequency radiation exposure bioeffects and concluded that microwave radiation can alter the electrocardiogram, cause chest pain, hypercoagulation, thrombosis, and hypertension in addition to myocardial infarction [27,28]. Seizures, convulsions, and alteration of the autonomic nervous system response (increased sympathetic stress response) have also been observed.
Since then, many other researchers have concluded that WCR exposure can affect the cardiovascular system. Although the nature of the primary response to millimeter waves and consequent events are poorly understood, a possible role for receptor structures and neural pathways in the development of continuous millimeter wave-induced arrhythmia has been proposed [47]. In 1997, a review reported that some investigators discovered cardiovascular changes including arrhythmias in humans from long-term low-level exposure to WCR including microwaves [124]. However, the literature also shows some unconfirmed findings as well as some contradictory findings [125]. Havas et al. [126] reported that human subjects in a controlled, double-blinded study were hyper-reactive when exposed to 2.45 GHz, digitally pulsed (100 Hz) microwave radiation, developing either an arrhythmia or tachycardia and upregulation of the sympathetic nervous system, which is associated with the stress response. Saili et al. [127] found that exposure to Wi-Fi (2.45 GHz pulsed at 10 Hz) affects heart rhythm, blood pressure, and the efficacy of catecholamines on the cardiovascular system, indicating that WCR can act directly and/or indirectly on the cardiovascular system. Most recently, Bandara and Weller [91] present evidence that people who live near radar installations (millimeter waves: 5G frequencies) have a greater risk of developing cancer and experiencing heart attacks. Similarly, those occupationally exposed have a greater risk of coronary heart disease. Microwave radiation affects the heart, and some people are more vulnerable if they have an underlying heart abnormality [128]. More recent research suggests that millimeter waves may act directly on the pacemaker cells of the sinoatrial node of the heart to change the beat frequency, which may underlie arrhythmias and other cardiac issues [47].
In short, both COVID-19 and WCR exposure can affect the heart and cardiovascular system, directly and/or indirectly.Go to:
4. Discussion
Epidemiologists, including those at the CDC, consider multiple causal factors when evaluating the virulence of an agent and understanding its ability to spread and cause disease. Most importantly, these variables include environmental cofactors and the health status of the host. Evidence from the literature summarized here suggests a possible connection between several adverse health effects of WCR exposure and the clinical course of COVID-19 in that WCR may have worsened the COVID-19 pandemic by weakening the host and exacerbating COVID-19 disease. However, none of the observations discussed here prove this linkage. Specifically, the evidence does not confirm causation. Clearly COVID-19 occurs in regions with little wireless communication. Furthermore, the relative morbidity caused by WCR exposure in COVID-19 is unknown.
We recognize that many factors have influenced the pandemic’s course. Before restrictions were imposed, travel patterns facilitated the seeding of the virus, causing early rapid global spread. Population density, higher mean population age, and socioeconomic factors certainly influenced early viral spread. Air pollution, especially particulate matter PM2.5 (2.5 micro-particulates), likely increased symptoms in patients with COVID-19 lung disease [129].
We postulate that WCR possibly contributed to the early spread and severity of COVID-19. Once an agent becomes established in a community, its virulence increases [130]. This premise can be applied to the COVID-19 pandemic. We surmise that “hot spots” of the disease that initially spread around the world were perhaps seeded by air travel, which in some areas were associated with 5G implementation. However, once the disease became established in those communities, it was able to spread more easily to neighboring regions where populations were less exposed to WCR. Second and third waves of the pandemic disseminated widely throughout communities with and without WCR, as might be expected.
The COVID-19 pandemic has offered us an opportunity to delve further into the potential adverse effects of WCR exposure on human health. Human exposure to ambient WCR significantly increased in 2020 as a “side effect” to the pandemic. Stay-at-home measures designed to reduce the spread of COVID-19 inadvertently resulted in greater public exposure to WCR, as people conducted more business and school related activities through wireless communications. Telemedicine created another source of WCR exposure. Even hospital inpatients, particular ICU patients, experienced increased WCR exposure as new monitoring devices utilized wireless communication systems that may exacerbate health disorders. It would potentially provide valuable information to measure ambient WCR power densities in home and work environments when comparing disease severity in patient populations with similar risk factors.
The question of causation could be investigated in future studies. For example, a clinical study could be conducted in COVID-19 patient populations with similar risk factors, to measure the WCR daily dose in COVID-19 patients and look for a correlation with disease severity and progression over time. As wireless device carrier frequencies and modulations may differ, and the power densities of WCR fluctuate constantly at a given location, this study would require patients to wear personal microwave dosimeters (monitoring badges). In addition, controlled laboratory studies could be conducted on animals, for example, humanized mice infected with SARS-CoV-2, in which groups of animals exposed to minimal WCR (control group) as well as medium and high power densities of WCR could be compared for disease severity and progression.
A major strength of this paper is that the evidence rests on a large body of scientific literature reported by many scientists worldwide and over several decades–experimental evidence of adverse bioeffects of WCR exposure at nonthermal levels on humans, animals, and cells. The Bioinitiative Report [42], updated in 2020, summarizes hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific papers documenting evidence of nonthermal effects from exposures ≤1 mW/cm2. Even so, some laboratory studies on the adverse health effects of WCR have sometimes utilized power densities exceeding 1mW/cm2. In this paper, almost all of the studies that we reviewed included experimental data at power densities ≤1 mW/cm2.
A potential criticism of this paper is that adverse bioeffects from nonthermal exposures are not yet universally accepted in science. Moreover, they are not yet considered in establishing public health policy in many nations. Decades ago, Russians and Eastern Europeans compiled considerable data on nonthermal bioeffects, and subsequently set guidelines at lower radiofrequency radiation exposure limits than the US and Canada, that is, below levels where nonthermal effects are observed. However, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC, a US government entity) and ICNIRP guidelines operate on thermal limits based on outdated data from decades ago, allowing the public to be exposed to considerably higher radiofrequency radiation power densities. Regarding 5G, the telecommunication industry claims that it is safe because it complies with current radiofrequency radiation exposure guidelines of the FCC and ICNIRP. These guidelines were established in 1996 [131], are antiquated, and are not safety standards. Thus, there are no universally accepted safety standards for wireless communication radiation exposure. Recently international bodies, such as the EMF Working Group of the European Academy of Environmental Medicine, have proposed much lower guidelines, taking into account nonthermal bioeffects from WCR exposure in multiple sources [132].
Another weakness of this paper is that some of the bioeffects from WCR exposure are inconsistently reported in the literature. Replicated studies are often not true replications. Small differences in method, including unreported details, such as prior history of exposure of the organisms, non-uniform body exposure, and other variables can lead to inadvertent inconsistency. Moreover, not surprisingly, industry-sponsored studies tend to show less adverse bioeffects than studies conducted by independent researchers, suggesting industry bias [133]. Some experimental studies that are not industry-sponsored have also shown no evidence of harmful effects of WCR exposure. It is noteworthy, however, that studies employing real-life WCR exposures from commercially available devices have shown high consistency in revealing adverse effects [134].
WCR bioeffects depend on specific values of wave parameters including frequency, power density, polarization, exposure duration, modulation characteristics, as well as the cumulative history of exposure and background levels of electromagnetic, electric and magnetic fields. In laboratory studies, bioeffects observed also depend on genetic parameters and physiological parameters such as oxygen concentration [135]. The reproducibility of bioeffects of WCR exposure has sometimes been difficult due to failure to report and/or control all of these parameters. Similar to ionizing radiation, the bioeffects of WCR exposure can be subdivided into deterministic, that is, dose-dependent effects and stochastic effects that are seemingly random. Importantly, WCR bioeffects can also involve “response windows” of specific parameters whereby extremely low-level fields can have disproportionally detrimental effects [136]. This nonlinearity of WCR bioeffects can result in biphasic responses such as immune suppression from one range of parameters, and immune hyperactivation from another range of parameters, leading to variations that may appear inconsistent.
In gathering reports and examining existing data for this paper, we looked for outcomes providing evidence to support a proposed connection between the bioeffects of WCR exposure and COVID-19. We did not make an attempt to weigh the evidence. The radiofrequency radiation exposure literature is extensive and currently contains over 30,000 research reports dating back several decades. Inconsistencies in nomenclature, reporting of details, and cataloging of keywords make it difficult to navigate this enormous literature.
Another shortcoming of this paper is that we do not have access to experimental data on 5G exposures. In fact, little is known about population exposure from real-world WCR, which includes exposure to WCR infrastructure and the plethora of WCR emitting devices. In relation to this, it is difficult to accurately quantify the average power density at a given location, which varies greatly, depending on the time, specific location, time-averaging interval, frequency, and modulation scheme. For a specific municipality it depends on the antenna density, which network protocols are used, as, for example, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, Wi-Fi, WiMAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access), DECT (Digitally Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications), and RADAR (Radio Detection and Ranging). There is also WCR from ubiquitous radio wave transmitters, including antennas, base stations, smart meters, mobile phones, routers, satellites, and other wireless devices currently in use. All of these signals superimpose to yield the total average power density at a given location that typically fluctuates greatly over time. No experimental studies on adverse health effects or safety issues of 5G have been reported, and none are currently planned by the industry, although this is sorely needed.
Finally, there is an inherent complexity to WCR that makes it very difficult to fully characterize wireless signals in the real world that may be associated with adverse bioeffects. Real world digital communication signals, even from single wireless devices, have highly variable signals: variable power density, frequency, modulation, phase, and other parameters changing constantly and unpredictably each moment, as associated with the short, rapid pulsations used in digital wireless communication [137]. For example, in using a mobile phone during a typical phone conversation, the intensity of emitted radiation varies significantly each moment depending on signal reception, number of subscribers sharing the frequency band, location within the wireless infrastructure, presence of objects and metallic surfaces, and “speaking” versus “non-speaking” mode, among others. Such variations may reach 100% of the average signal intensity. The carrier radiofrequency constantly changes between different values within the available frequency band. The greater the amount of information (text, speech, internet, video, etc.), the more complex the communication signals become. Therefore, we cannot estimate accurately the values of these signal parameters including ELF components or predict their variability over time. Thus, studies on the bioeffects of WCR in the laboratory can only be representative of real-world exposures [137].
This paper points to the need for further research on nonthermal WCR exposure and its potential role in COVID-19. Moreover, some of the WCR exposure bioeffects that we discuss here — oxidative stress, inflammation, and immune system disruption — are common to many chronic diseases, including autoimmune disease and diabetes. Thus, we hypothesize that WCR exposure may also be a potential contributing factor in many chronic diseases.
When a course of action raises threats of harm to human health, precautionary measures should be taken, even if clear causal relationships are not yet fully established. Therefore, we must apply the Precautionary Principle [138] regarding wireless 5G. The authors urge policymakers to execute an immediate worldwide moratorium on wireless 5G infrastructure until its safety can be assured.
Several unresolved safety issues should be addressed before wireless 5G is further implemented. Questions have been raised about 60 GHz, a key 5G frequency planned for extensive use, which is a resonant frequency of the oxygen molecule [139]. It is possible that adverse bioeffects might ensue from oxygen absorption of 60 GHz. In addition, water shows broad absorption in the GHz spectral region along with resonance peaks, for example, strong absorption at 2.45 GHz that is used in 4G Wi-Fi routers. This raises safety issues about GHz exposure of the biosphere, since organisms are comprised of mostly water, and changes in the structure of water due to GHz absorption have been reported that affect organisms [140]. Bioeffects from prolonged WCR exposure of the whole body need to be investigated in animal and human studies, and long-term exposure guidelines need to be considered. Independent scientists in particular should conduct concerted research to determine the biological effects of real-world exposure to WCR frequencies with digital modulation from the multiplicity of wireless communication devices. Testing could also include real-life exposures to multiple toxins (chemical and biological) [141], because multiple toxins may lead to synergistic effects. Environmental impact assessments are also needed. Once the long-term biological effects of wireless 5G are understood, we can set clear safety standards of public exposure limits and design an appropriate strategy for safe deployment.Go to:
5. Conclusion
There is a substantial overlap in pathobiology between COVID-19 and WCR exposure. The evidence presented here indicates that mechanisms involved in the clinical progression of COVID-19 could also be generated, according to experimental data, by WCR exposure. Therefore, we propose a link between adverse bioeffects of WCR exposure from wireless devices and COVID-19.
Specifically, evidence presented here supports a premise that WCR and, in particular, 5G, which involves densification of 4G, may have exacerbated the COVID-19 pandemic by weakening host immunity and increasing SARS-CoV-2 virulence by (1) causing morphologic changes in erythrocytes including echinocyte and rouleaux formation that may be contributing to hypercoagulation; (2) impairing microcirculation and reducing erythrocyte and hemoglobin levels exacerbating hypoxia; (3) amplifying immune dysfunction, including immunosuppression, autoimmunity, and hyperinflammation; (4) increasing cellular oxidative stress and the production of free radicals exacerbating vascular injury and organ damage; (5) increasing intracellular Ca2+ essential for viral entry, replication, and release, in addition to promoting pro-inflammatory pathways; and (6) worsening heart arrhythmias and cardiac disorders.
WCR exposure is a widespread, yet often neglected, environmental stressor that can produce a wide range of adverse bioeffects. For decades, independent research scientists worldwide have emphasized the health risks and cumulative damage caused by WCR [42,45]. The evidence presented here is consistent with a large body of established research. Healthcare workers and policymakers should consider WCR a potentially toxic environmental stressor. Methods for reducing WCR exposure should be provided to all patients and the general population.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge small contributions to early versions of this paper by Magda Havas and Lyn Patrick. We are grateful to Susan Clarke for helpful discussions and suggested edits of early drafts of the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest in preparing and publishing this manuscript. No competing financial interests exist.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Sometimes my memes are 3D. And you can own them. Or send them to someone. You can even eat some of them. CLICK HERE
“ALL LICENSED BAR ATTORNEYS – ATTORNERS – IN THE U.S. OWE THEIR ALLEGIANCE AND GIVE THEIR SOLEMN OATH IN PLEDGE TO THE CROWN TEMPLE, REALIZING THIS OR NOT.
This is simply due to the fact that all Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the international Bar Association located at the Inns of Court at Crown Temple. Although they vehemently deny it, all Bar Associations in the U.S., such as the American Bar Association, the Florida Bar, or California Bar Association, are franchises to the Crown.
The Inns of Court to the Crown Temple use the Banking and Judicial system of the City of London – a sovereign and independent territory which is not a part of Great Britain (just as Washington City, as DC was called in the 1800s, is not a part of the north American states, nor is it a state) to defraud, coerce, and manipulate the American people. These Fleet Street bankers and lawyers are committing crimes in America under the guise and color of law. They are known collectively as the “Crown.” Their lawyers are actually Templar Bar Attornies, not lawyers.” – Source
Everyone knows Alison Natahn was appointed by Obama and previously served as associate White House counsel for President Barack Obama. What else?
“In 2004, Nathan served as Associate National Counsel for Kerry-Edwards 2004. She also served as the voter protection coordinator in several primary elections on behalf of the Obama campaign and continues to advise the campaign on election law and voter protection issues and was a fellow at NYU Law School and a visting Professor at Fordham University Law School until assuming her post as White House Assc. Counsel. In February of 2011, Senator Chuck Schumer of New York nominated Alison to become a Federal Judge for the Southern District of New York.”
On November 17, 2021, President Joe Biden announced his intent to nominate Nathan to serve as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; her nomination was sent to the Senate the following day. President Biden nominated Nathan to the seat being vacated by Judge Rosemary S. Pooler, who will take senior status upon confirmation of her successor.Her nomination is pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
At Cornell, she was a member of the Quill and Dagger secret society
“This senior honor society formed in Cornell University is considered one of the most prominent of all societies, up there with Yale’s Skull and Bones. Even the New York Times wrote that it was seriously hard to get into, back in 1929, calling it “The highest non-scholastic honor within reach of undergraduates.” Names of all newly tapped members are published in The Cornell Daily Sun every semester, while meetings and activities remain closed.
Many members of the university’s staff are alumni of the society, and two sons, a grandson and grandson-in-law of the university’s president Jacob Gould Schurman were members. Between the years of 1913-1984, one former Quill and Dagger member could be found in the US congress every year. There are currently members in the Obama administration including Deputy Secretary of Labor Seth Harris and Associate Counsel to the President Alison J. Nathan. It’s rumored that hotelier Andre Balias (who has been linked to high profile stars including Salma Hayek) is a Quill and Dagger alumni.” – The Richest Magazine, 2014
The meetings and proceedings of Quill and Dagger are closed, and the society’s contributions and activities on campus are typically concealed. Membership remained secret for a brief period after its founding, but the names of newly tapped members are now published in The Cornell Daily Sun each semester.
Thomas W. Jones[31] (1969) – Chairman and CEO of Citigroup‘s Global Investment Management (1999–2004); President and COO of TIAA-CREF (1993–1997); created the James A. Perkins Prize for Interracial Understanding and Harmony at Cornell University; spokesman for students in the Willard Straight Hall takeover in 1969; Cornell University trustee
Walter C. Teagle[2] (1900) – President (1917–1937) and Chairman (1937–1942) of Standard Oil [Rockefeller]; namesake and donor of Cornell University’s Teagle Hall; Cornell University trustee
James J. Cosgrove[72] (1909) – General Counsel (1929–1948) and Chairman (1948–1952) of Continental Oil
George M. Schurman[14] (1913) – son of Jacob Gould Schurman, Cornell University’s third president and U.S. Ambassador to China and Germany
Jacob Gould Schurman, Jr.[16] (1917) – Chief Magistrate of New York City; Cornell University trustee; son of Jacob Gould Schurman, Cornell University’s third president and U.S. Ambassador to China and Germany
CORNELL’S War Memorial
From Wikipedia:
Beginning in 1925, Quill and Dagger members spearheaded the erection of a permanent memorial to Cornellians who served in the First World War. Based on the suggestion of F. Ellis Jackson, a Quill and Dagger member, the architectural plan for West Campus was modified to include the War Memorial structure. Funds for its construction were raised from alumni by a committee chaired by Robert E. Treman, also a society member. The War Memorial was dedicated on May 23, 1931 with a national radio address by President Herbert Hoover. It was erected in remembrance of the 264 Cornellian casualties and nearly 9,000 Cornellians who served during the war. It is the largest of several tributes to military service and sacrifice at Cornell University.
Because of Quill and Dagger’s contributions to the War Memorial’s construction, the society was granted exclusive use of the top floors of the northern tower.[27] The inscription above the entrance to the building reads, “This tower is a memorial to the men of Quill and Dagger who in giving their lives for their country were true to Cornell traditions.” The mural in the first floor War Memorial Shrine also depicts a quill and a dagger prominently, although official descriptions discuss their meaning as a palm and sword.[25]
The War Memorial structure is filled with symbolism relevant to the society and its ideals. For example, six symbols appear on shields around the top of the Quill and Dagger Tower.[citation needed] The east and west sides of the Tower depict four historic variations of a cross: the Latin cross, Saint Andrew’s Cross, swastika, and Maltese cross. These four symbols have varying heraldic, religious, and secular meanings including loyalty, piety, bravery, martyrdom, humility, and sacrifice. They also are connected with historic chivalric orders such as the Knights Hospitaller and Knights Templar. The south side of the tower depicts an ankh, which symbolizes life or the power to give and sustain life. Next to the ankh is a menorah, whose light has traditionally represented knowledge or enlightenment.
1. THE CO-DEFENDANTS
What leftoids and media won’t tell you is that Ghislaine is actually not sitting alone on that bench. So the web of interests is even more gigantic than we previously thought.
“It doesn’t seem right that only Maxwell is in the dock. There were others who facilitated the abuse and this makes it seem like it was only her”, one woman, who wished to remain anonymous, told The Telegraph.
“Ghislaine continues to have many friends. I know this because we receive mail, emails, letters and so forth from her friends, but we live in a world where people are cancelled for friendships of this type.”
BONUS: The Comeys. Or should I say “US Government”?
US Government should be a co-defendant in this trial, and, instead, it mocks the investigator, prosecutor and judge. What are the chances this turns out well?
This came up later, and surely there are plenty more items that can be added to a list such as this. Should I change the title to 4.5? Maybe not, as that’s about enough to make the point. But for what it’s worth, also contemplate this (and who knows what else I might add in the future).
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Sometimes my memes are 3D. And you can own them. Or send them to someone. You can even eat some of them. CLICK HERE
No comment, I’m just making sure you get the chance to learn what I’ve learned. Very Important Lists instalment #5
“The Jerusalem Post is proud to present its 2020 list of the 50 Most Influential Jews. Many people influence the world we live in and impact our daily lives. This year, we strived to create a list showcasing the diversity of the Jewish nation while highlighting people from all walks of life – government, art, medicine, literature and science.”
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
SILVIEW.media 
