Category Archives: Health Disease

Migrants in America Causing Collapse of Law Enforcement

Posted on by

These sanctuary governors and mayors are arguing the wrong point. It is not so much about where to house these people and re-shipping them to other locations, but rather the scandal should be to tell the entire illegal immigrant operation that there is nothing in America to come to that is better than what they left. Consider just how much money these people spend to come here and the deadly traveling just to get beyond our borders. Are these people coming to anything better in the long term than what they left? Do they really want to work in slaughter houses, work farms in disgusting living conditions? Do they really want to be trafficked in the sex trade industry?

Ah, but read on to see a Chicago police station and consider how it is in expensive hotels across the country where we have no idea of their names, ages or even their history, no visas, no passports and no documents at all. How can law enforcement even begin to deal with this considering all the other existing crime across the country….

A huge hat tip to Rebecca Brannon!

New footage shows a Chicago police station filled with mattresses and dozens of illegal migrants, as the city struggles to house the hundreds of border crossers arriving there each day.

Officials in Chicago have said they cannot afford to rent hotel rooms for the more than 8,000 migrants who have arrived in their city and have pushed for more federal funds to cover costs.

Due to the lack of available shelters, some migrants have turned to police stations for a safe place to sleep.

The migrant-housing crisis in Chicago follows last week’s end to the Trump-era COVID-19 border restriction known as Title 42, which allowed U.S. authorities to send migrants back to Mexico without giving them a chance to seek asylum.

Tens of thousands of people hurried to cross the border illegally into the U.S. before President Joe Biden implemented a strict new asylum policy to replace Title 42.

In the shocking footage posted by photojournalist Rebecca Brannon, dozens and dozens of migrants are seen sitting on and around mattresses in a Chicago police station.

Brannon reported that many of the migrants have slept and eaten on the floors, which has placed a strain on the law enforcement officers whose day-to-day jobs have been made more difficult by their presence.

Small children were seen running around and an alley sits full of trash produced by the migrants.

Chicago already has a serious violent crime problem, with its new influx of migrants likely to further strain budgets desperately-needed to try and make the city safer.

More than 8,000 migrants have arrived in Chicago since August, which is when southern states started to bus asylum seekers north. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott sent migrants to the Democrat-led cities to help ease the burden on border towns.

‘To provide much-needed relief to our overrun border communities, Texas began busing migrants to sanctuary cities such as your ‘Welcoming City,’ along with Washington, DC, New York City, and Philadelphia, with more to come. Until Biden secures the border to stop the inflow of mass migration, Texas will continue this necessary program,’ Abbott noted in a letter earlier this month.

Migrants been sent to cities such as Chicago, Philadelphia and New York. Migrants have also arrived in Washington, DC, with buses stopping outside the home of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Despite the Chicago’s obvious overcrowding issue, new Mayor Brandon Johnson, a progressive Democrat who assumed office Monday, said in his inauguration speech that in Chicago, ‘there’s enough room for everyone.’

Johnson’s affirmed commitment to welcoming migrants to Chicago follows his predecessor – Lori Lightfoot’s decision to declare a state of emergency earlier this month, calling migrant arrivals a ‘humanitarian crisis’ and pushing for increased federal aid.

Chicago officials have said they expect a $53 million shortfall without additional aid because of the cost from housing migrants.

‘We’re in May, and we haven’t received any funding from FEMA,’ Chicago budget director Susie Park recently told the City Council, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. ‘The need is great. A lot of requests are coming in. New York is probably asking for $1 billion. There is a lot of need.’

Civil Society Collapses with no Diesel Fuel

Posted on by

The Biden Green agenda will soon destroy the nation, there is no dispute. Having a war on fossil fuel is one thing but being so derelict when it comes to diesel is destructive beyond description. It is also evil and deadly to citizens, business and national security.

In 2021, the Biden White House published a trucking fact sheet endorsing the trucking industry. But it omits the real issues facing the industry and that includes regulations and the ridiculous high cost of diesel.

There was to be some kind of a listening session. In part: DOL and DOT will kick off listening sessions with drivers, industry and labor leaders, and advocates to hear their perspectives, profile promising practices, and source scalable solutions to retention and job quality issues for truckers. The first events in this series are happening today in South Carolina with Secretary Buttigieg, Deputy Administrator Joshi, and representatives from DOL and at the White House co-chaired by Secretary Buttigieg, Secretary Walsh, and National Economic Council Director Deese.

Now, facing November with the midterm elections and the coming holidays….the White House is flat-footed on the diesel crisis.

The Biden administration says it is keeping a close watch on diesel inventories and working to boost supplies following news that reserves have been depleted and could run out in less than a month if not replenished, sparking fears of shortages and rising prices.
The Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported this week that, as of Oct. 14, the U.S. had only 25 days of reserve diesel supply, a low not seen since 2008. National Economic Council Director Brian Deese acknowledged to Bloomberg that the level is “unacceptably low,” and “all options are on the table” to address the situation.
The EIA also said that distillate fuel includes heating oil inventories and is about 20% below the five-year average for this time of year. But areas in the Northeast are already rationing heating oil as temperatures drop, driving concerns that energy costs will surge further. source

Diesel fuel is used for many tasks

Diesel engines in trucks, trains, boats, and barges help transport nearly all products people consume. Diesel fuel is commonly used in public buses and school buses.

Diesel fuel powers most of the farm and construction equipment in the United States. The construction industry also depends on the power diesel fuel provides. Diesel engines can do demanding construction work, such as lifting steel beams, digging foundations and trenches, drilling wells, paving roads, and moving soil safely and efficiently.

The U.S. military uses diesel fuel in tanks and trucks because diesel fuel is less flammable and less explosive than other fuels. Diesel engines are also less likely to stall than gasoline-fueled engines.

Diesel fuel is also used in diesel engine generators to generate electricity. Many industrial facilities, large buildings, institutional facilities, hospitals, and electric utilities have diesel generators for backup and emergency power supply. Most remote villages in Alaska use diesel generators as the primary source of electricity. source

The US economy cannot run and sustain itself without the essential work of truck drivers. Their deliveries affect every industry we depend on like food, construction, medicine, fuel, and retail. Apart from day-to-day needs, truck drivers ensure first responders and healthcare workers have the tools they need to save lives. more here

Details Related to the Pathogen Facilities in Ukraine

Posted on by

Hat tip to Senator Marco Rubio for bringing attention to this matter during a hearing with Victoria Nuland as the witness affirming the existence of several questionable locations in Ukraine. However, it has now brought media globally into the matter especially Russia where Moscow is accusing the United States of using chemical weapons in this Russia/Ukraine military conflict. (remember Syria)

Additionally, Russia has a nefarious history with deadly agents as noted below in part:

Alexey Navalny, an opposition leader in Russia, was hospitalized in August after being purportedly poisoned by a substance that German officials later determined to be the Novichok nerve agent. The same substance was implicated in the poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the U.K in 2018, the same year the Russian Defense Ministry issued claims that the U.S. was running a secret biological weapons program at the Richard G. Lugar Center for Public Health Research in Tbilisi, Georgia, another former Soviet state with a history of conflict with Russia and facing Moscow-aligned separatists along the border.

The knowledge and operations in Ukraine relating to bio-weapons is not a new condition. In fact, it has under the management of the U.S. Department of Defense since 2005. Found on the U.S. State Department website is the agreement between Ukraine and the United States to protect and mitigate any threat of bio-weapons and anything related to infectious diseases. Read the document here.

US 'concerned' Russia wants to seize Ukraine bio-research

Then in 2010, there was more attention on those facilities:

U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar applauded the opening of the Interim Central Reference Laboratory in Odessa, Ukraine, this week, announcing that it will be instrumental in researching dangerous pathogens used by bioterrorists.

The level-3 bio-safety lab, which is the first built under the expanded authority of the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program, will be used to study anthrax, tularemia and Q fever as well as other dangerous pathogens.

“The continuing cooperation of Nunn-Lugar partners has improved safety for all people against weapons of mass destruction and potential terrorist use, in addition to advancements in the prevention of pandemics and public health consequences,” Lugar said.

Lugar said plans for the facility began in 2005 when he and then Senator Barack Obama entered a partnership with Ukrainian officials. Lugar and Obama also helped coordinate efforts between the U.S and Ukrainian researchers that year in an effort to study and help prevent avian flu.

The Nunn-Lugar Act, which established the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, was established in 1991. Since that time it has provided funding and assistance to help the former Soviet Union dismantle and safeguard large stockpiles of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The program has also been responsible for destroying chemical weapons in Albania, Lugar said.

U.S. cooperation with Ukraine under the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program was expanded Aug. 29 with an agreement to use U.S. CTR funds to improve security for pathogens stored at biological research and health facilities in the former Soviet republic.

Under the agreement, CTR funds will for the first time flow directly to projects aimed at securing pathogen strains and sensitive biological knowledge within Ukraine. The United States also will work to improve Ukrainian capabilities to detect, diagnose, and treat outbreaks of infectious diseases, as well as determine whether outbreaks are natural or the result of bioterrorism.

The agreement was signed during the visit to Kiev of a high-level U.S. delegation led by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Among the facilities in Ukraine intended to receive security upgrades are those once linked to the Soviet-era anti-plague network, which continue to store libraries of naturally occuring pathogens for the purposes of research and public health. Andy Fisher, spokesperson for Lugar, told Arms Control Today on Sept. 15 the anti-plague facilities “were threats and they are threats,” given the risk that poor security could allow terrorists access to pathogens. Fisher also cited the possibility that outdated operating procedures and equipment could result in the unintentional leakage of pathogens from these facilities, endangering the public health of the region.

Cooperation under the new agreement will not be limited to physical security over pathogens. Funds also will be available for the peaceful employment of scientists whose skills and financial insecurity could render them potential targets for states or independent groups looking to acquire bioweapons capabilities. In addition, the agreement includes provisions for cooperation between U.S. and Ukrainian epidemiological laboratories in diagnosing disease outbreaks. Toward that end, pathogens from Ukrainian health and research facilities will be shared with U.S. partner laboratories. Under a CTR agreement with Azerbaijan, the United States last month also received a transfer of pathogens from similar facilities in that former Soviet republic.

As a first step toward implementation of the agreement, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) will conduct an assessment of biological facilities in Ukraine to determine what sites will receive assistance. Funds within the current DTRA budget will cover the assessment phase; additional implementation funds could be appropriated in fiscal year 2007 and beyond. As the Aug. 29 agreement falls under the established CTR framework, neither Congress nor the Ukrainian Rada will need to provide further authorization before implementation begins.

Negotiations on the Aug. 29 agreement spanned more than a year. One administration official who requested anonymity told Arms Control Today that inter-Ukrainian political and bureaucratic hurdles were surmounted by a combination of strong U.S.-Ukrainian relations and the presence of the high-level U.S. delegation. A press release from Lugar’s office specifically credited then-Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko with breaking a “log jam within Ukrainian government bureaucracy.”

The Great Lockdown Lie

Posted on by

It is almost being admitted by the CDC and the Biden administration that Covid and Omicron is over. Hospital vacancy is in a good place and those affected by any type of variant are being treated by countless therapeutics with recorded success. Meanwhile, the lockdown and mask policies across the country is finally being evaluated and rightly so. But the mainstream media just refuses to publish new truths and statistics.

NR: The authors of a new paper on the impact of Covid-19 lockdown measures may also have to go into hiding, for revealing their true impact on everyday people. The paper from Johns Hopkins University, “A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality,” compares several dozen studies of the impact of lockdown measures in the early part of the pandemic. The authors conclude that “lockdowns have had little or no effect on COVID-19 mortality.” This review of basically all the relevant studies demolishes the elites’ entire justification for ruinous lockdowns.

The authors, hailing from Denmark, Sweden, and the U.S. (the American, Steve Hanke, is a contributor to this publication) sifted through thousands of studies to focus on 34 that met their search criteria, looking at lockdowns all around the world. They then compared the data and conclusions.

The paper starts by noting that “an often cited model simulation study by researchers at the Imperial College London (Ferguson et al. (2020)) predicted that a suppression strategy based on a lockdown would reduce COVID-19 mortality by up to 98%.” The Imperial College simulation was among the sources used by public-health authorities to justify the earliest lockdowns. It turned out to be more than 98 percent wrong.

According to the authors, the most-precise studies found no statistically significant effect of lockdowns on mortality. Looking at the 24 studies from which excess mortality rates could be calculated in comparison to a standardized metric for severity of lockdowns, the authors estimated that severe lockdowns may have reduced Covid-19 mortality by perhaps 2 percent. That amounts to perhaps 1/20th the number of people who die from the flu every year, and to save people from the flu, our public-health authorities resort to little beyond facilitating the provision of flu shots.

But on further investigation, the impact appears to have been even smaller than that. “Indeed, according to stringency index studies, lockdowns in Europe and the United States reduced only COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average.” In summary, “Based on the stringency index studies, we find little to no evidence that mandated lockdowns in Europe and the United States had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality rates.”

Some studies actually found that lockdowns increased Covid-19 mortality, particularly in the case of the most severe “shelter in place” lockdowns: “Although this appears to be counterintuitive, it could be the result of an (asymptomatic) infected person being isolated at home under a [shelter-in-place order] can infect family members with a higher viral load causing more severe illness.”

According to some studies, lockdowns that limit gatherings may have increased Covid-19 mortality by as much as 1.6 percent. The authors speculate that because lockdowns limited peoples’ access to safe outdoor places where they could gather without masks, the lockdowns pushed people to meet at less-safe (indoor) places privately. “Indeed, we do find some evidence that limiting gatherings was counterproductive and increased COVID-19 mortality.”

The authors found similar results for mask mandates, though the relevant studies were more contradictory, likely due to small sample sizes. (The study reviews lockdowns in the early pandemic, when mask mandates were not uniformly adopted). The much richer data set from other airborne influenzas found that “wearing a mask probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza compared to not wearing a mask.”

The authors did find that “only business closure consistently shows evidence of a negative relationship with COVID-19 mortality, but the variation in the estimated effect is large. Three studies find little to no effect, and three find large effects.” Moreover, the most effective business closures appear to be bar closures.

One of the study’s more depressing findings is that lockdowns appear to have been heavily driven by intergovernmental peer pressure. “In short,” the authors note, “it is not the severity of the pandemic that drives the adoption of lockdowns, but rather the propensity to copy policies initiated by neighboring countries.”

Further, the review uncovered a significant disconnect between the data and the conclusions drawn in several papers. “We base our interpretations solely on the empirical estimates and not on the authors’ own interpretation of their results,” the authors write.

Where the authors found significant impact on mortality was in people changing their own behavior as a result of relevant information about risks and mitigation. “What Bjork et al. (2021) find is that information and signaling is far more important than the strictness of the lockdown.” Milton Friedman must be smiling up above. According to the authors, “it should be clear that one important role for government authorities is to provide information so that citizens can voluntarily respond to the pandemic in a way that mitigates their exposure.”

The paper’s conclusion should close the book on all the lockdowns:

The use of lockdowns is a unique feature of the COVID-19 pandemic. Lockdowns have not been used to such a large extent during any of the pandemics of the past century. However, lockdowns during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic have had devastating effects. They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy. These costs to society must be compared to the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.

Other experts are starting to speak up along similar lines. Dr. Vinay Prasad of UC–San Francisco speculates in a series of tweets that the Biden administration is obsessed with pushing mandates on the low-risk population perhaps because it has few tools to push mandates on the high-risk population — nursing-home patients — but feels the need to do something. Driven to use the tools they have, the Biden administration has been forcing boosters on younger and younger children, even though we know that (a) they are at little risk of severe disease and virtually no risk if already vaccinated, (b) there is little evidence the boosters help young people at all, and (c) FDA officials are resigning in protest.

 

Dr. Prasad’s insight is strongly supported by another new study from a team of researchers spanning disciplines and institutions from University of Washington to Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and Oxford. The authors of the new study, “The Unintended Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccine Policy: Why Mandates, Passports, and Segregated Lockdowns May Cause more Harm than Good,” warn that heavy-handed mandates are not scientifically based, raise basic ethical and human-rights concerns, and are eroding trust in both scientific and public-health authorities:

While COVID-19 vaccines have had a profound impact on decreasing global morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current population-wide mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable, ethically problematic, and misguided. Such policies may lead to detrimental long-term impacts on uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines themselves as well as routine immunizations. Restricting people’s access to work, education, public transport, and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarization, and adversely affects health and wellbeing. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in scientific institutions.

It’s not just the mandates that are eroding trust in public institutions. On January 5, 2022, the State of California extended its indoor mask mandate through February 15. Violators face up to six months in jail.

That didn’t stop Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti, San Francisco mayor London Breed, and California governor Gavin Newsom from whooping it up with “Magic” Johnson at the NFC Championship game last weekend, in pictures that are still up on Twitter:

Needless to say, nobody was wearing a mask, despite the fact that Johnson is immunocompromised with HIV — a significant comorbidity of Covid-19. Mayor Garcetti later clarified that he was holding his breath.

As for the workers down below, they can keep holding their breath, too.

Gotta wonder what Australia is thinking and going to do next…

U.S. Govt Spent Over $2.3 Million Injecting Puppies With Cocaine

Posted on by

The experiment, revealed through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the White Coat Waste Project, follows previously unearthed studies funded by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Director Anthony Fauci that “debarked” beagle puppies.

Seven six-month-old Beagle puppies were forced to wear a drug-injecting jacket that allowed them to be dosed with cocaine again and again and again for months, along with an ‘experimental compound,’ to see how the two drugs interacted.

The year-long experiment, which began in September 2020, was filmed so research could evaluate the puppies’ adverse reactions” to the drugs. Prior to the drugs being administered, the puppies were forced to undergo surgery, where they were implanted with a “telemetry unit” to monitor their vital signs throughout the experiment.

  The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Institute on Drug Abuse and costed taxpayers of $2.3 million. More here.

But hold on…Dr. Fauci…Frankenstein was up to more disgusting funding….

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is funding $27 million in studies marked for use of fetal tissue, according to a new analysis.

The White Coat Waste Project (WCW), which opposes animal experimentation, looked through NIH data to uncover the scope of funding, which includes support for things like transplanting fetal lungs, liver and thymus into mice.

The majority of the reported funding – 79.6% – comes from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is run by White House Chief Medical Adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci. Overall, NIH expects to spend $88 million on this type of research in fiscal year (FY) 22.

NIH and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) did not respond to Fox News’ requests for comment.

Fauci’s institute has come under fire for research surrounding the coronavirus, among other things. More recently, WCW uncovered an experiment in which dogs were injected with cocaine. Other experiments involving humanized mice have surfaced.

One study involved humanizing mice through “reconstitution with human fetal liver (17 to 22 weeks of gestational age).” So far, that project has received funding through multiple NIAID grants, including one with more than $20 million between 2014-2018.

Another study, funded by the National Eye Institute, entailed studying fetal eye cells. That study says the eye cells were obtained from Advanced Biosciences Resources, which has come under fire for its connections to Planned Parenthood. Fetal lungs were also incorporated as part of federally funded research with the University of Wyoming and University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill.

The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch previously released documents showing that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sought “fresh” fetal organs from ABR. In one email, the FDA’s Dr. Kristina Howard tells ABR’s procurement manager Perrin Larton that her company “should be prepaid for $12K of tissue purchases.”

Exhibit from NIH-funded study utilizing fetal lungs, liver and thymus.

Exhibit from NIH-funded study utilizing fetal lungs, liver and thymus. (National Library of Medicine)

The issue will likely continue to gain political attention as legislators learn more about various research projects, including those involving human-animal hybrids. Last year, the Senate rejected an amendment geared toward criminalizing participation in research that created certain chimeras, or human-animal hybrids, in expectation that the federal government could lift a moratorium on funding for those projects.

“Dr. Fauci’s funding of research using aborted fetal tissue is disgusting and indefensible,” said Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich. “My Safe RESEARCH Act would ensure that scientists can continue important research so long as they’re not using fetal tissue from abortions.” More details here.

Gotta wonder how come not one person in the Biden administration has been critical of this abuse…but we certainly understand why so many loyal religious groups have filed lawsuits and pushed back. What about the Vatican….anyone???