Whisky Tango Texas

Across America, a silent collapse is unfolding behind closed car doors and storage unit walls. Millions of working people who once held apartments, careers, and stable lives are now sleeping in parking lots, cooking ramen in bathrooms, and calling Walmart lots “home.” This is not the homelessness America used to know. These are not the people America was taught to look away from. These are 19-year-olds with full-time jobs. These are college graduates who lost a parent and never recovered. These are content creators, instructors, and professionals who got hit by one bad month and never climbed back out.

In this video, we go inside the lives of Americans who are doing everything right and still ending up in their cars. We hear from a young woman cooking dinner in a storage unit bathroom because that is the only outlet she has. We hear from a man who slept in a Metro Transit Center for years, pretending to wait for a bus that was never coming. We hear from a 19-year-old in Salt Lake City who turned his Honda into a bedroom because rent prices made an apartment impossible. We hear the same sentence over and over again: I never thought this would happen to me.

The housing market broke. Wages did not move. Rent doubled. Groceries doubled. And the safety net that used to catch falling Americans has been quietly cut away, thread by thread. What you are watching is not a lifestyle trend. This is the new American reality, and it is spreading faster than anyone in Washington wants to admit.

Via https://whiskeytangotexas.com/2026/05/21/working-class-americans-living-homeless-to-survive/

Caitlin Johnstone
May 22, 2026

In a sign that the US is preparing for yet another evil war, Marco Rubio is now claiming that Cuba poses a “national security threat” to the United States, saying the likelihood of a peaceful agreement is “not high”.

“Cuba not only has weapons that they’ve acquired from Russia and China over the years, but they also host Russian and Chinese intelligence presence in their country — not far from where we’re standing right now,” Rubio told the press on Thursday. “So Cuba has always posed a national security threat to the United States. They, by the way, have been one of the leading sponsors of terrorism in the entire region.”

Rubio’s comments come as a US intelligence report laundered through Axios claims that Cuba may be preparing to launch a drone strike against US military forces. Havana said the Axios report misrepresents Cuba’s defensive measures as a preparation to attack, accusing the US of “fabricating pretexts, creating and spreading falsehoods, and distorting as extraordinary the logical preparation required to face a potential aggression.”

The US has also unsealed an indictment for Raul Castro, the 94 year-old brother of Fidel Castro, in a move that resembles the playbook used for the kidnapping of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro.

The excuses for military action are already being rolled out. This happens as US war machinery relocates to the Caribbean, and as Cuba flounders under a crushing US oil blockade that is already inflicting a severe humanitarian toll.

And everyone knows it’s all based on lies. You know it. I know it. Marco Rubio knows it. The war propagandists know it. The gusanos brigading social media begging for war know it. We all know it’s a sham.

Not one person sincerely believes Cuba poses a threat to the United States.

No one sincerely believes Cuba just coincidentally became an urgent menace to US national security all of a sudden right when the US began scrambling to consolidate geostrategic control in the middle east and the western hemisphere.

Nobody actually thinks that a tiny, impoverished island nation is preparing to launch a war of aggression against the United States.

This is a performance put on by warmongers and bootlickers. It insults our intelligence and robs us of dignity.

If things cool down with Iran, then it’s a safe bet they’re going in for the kill shot on Cuba. The US empire never makes peace, it just moves the crosshairs of its war machinery from nation to nation.

We see this over and over again.

Yay! The troops are leaving Afghanistan — oh, now they’re waging a proxy war in Ukraine.

Excellent, they’re deescalating against Yemen — whoa, now they’re kidnapping the president of Venezuela.

Oh hey, it looks like the mass slaughter in Gaza has slowed down — oh, now they’re going to war with Iran.

Look, they’re pulling thousands of troops out of Germany — oh, it’s so they can move them to Poland.

Hey these Iran negotiations are finally getting somewhere — ah man, now they’re invading Cuba.

Over and over and over and over again. As soon as the human butchery slows down in one place, it picks up somewhere else.

The US empire exists in a constant state of war. War is the glue that holds the empire together. If the wars stop, the empire stops.

That’s why the denizens of the empire are never allowed to vote for an end to wars. You can vote for candidates who will end abortions or trans rights or corporate regulations, but you can’t vote for a candidate who will actually end the wars. Peace is never on the ballot, because war is too critical for the functioning of the empire.

Which is why it’s so important for us all to stand against the war machine. If we can end the wars, we can end the empire. Not until then will we have a shot at building a healthy world.

[…]

Via https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2026/05/22/nobody-sincerely-believes-cuba-threatens-the-united-states/

China is emerging as the silent, indispensable diplomatic power in the region

Nothing is confirmed and finalized yet, and the spoilers should not be underestimated, but lots of activity that points in the direction of a deal.

A few things stand out:

1. The role of China in the background is essential. Without having its fingerprints on the deal, and by that, avoiding any responsibility if it fails, China is emerging as the silent, indispensable diplomatic power in the region. (While Pakistan’s Asim Munir is traveling to Tehran, the Pakistani Prime Minister will be departing for Beijing shortly)

2. The regional involvement in the mediation is astounding: Pakistan, Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi and Oman are all or have all been playing an instrumental role in moving things forward. If a deal is reached, it will have regional buy-in (save from Israel and the UAE) at levels far beyond the JCPOA.

3. Regional diplomats and intel folks have been shuttling in and out of Tehran for weeks now. Qatar’s role, in particular, is noteworthy.

4. Europe’s absence is noticeable but not felt, as its irrelevance is becoming normalized.

5. More ships have been passing through the Strait of Hormuz. Whether these were mainly tankers going to China, and whether China paid a fee, is unclear at this point. But it is noteworthy that the ships are passing through both the Iranian AND the American “blockades.”

6. Though some distance remains to reaching a deal, my own conversation with folks on both sides has left me slightly more optimistic, primarily because of the flexibility I am detecting on the Iranian side regarding the stockpile (despite the Reuters story from yesterday). Ideas that were categorically rejected two weeks ago are now being genuinely considered.

7. If a deal is secured, Trump will face a lot of criticism from the Blob and the pro-Israel crowd in DC, but he will be in a very good position to sell the deal to the American public, whose concerns are very different from those of the Blob…

[…]

Via https://tritaparsi.substack.com/p/are-we-on-the-verge-of-a-us-iran

By Alex Ksjadz

The May 2026 local elections became for the United Kingdom not just another electoral cycle, but a moment of political rupture. A country that for decades lived within the logic of confrontation between two major parties — Labour and the Conservatives — has effectively entered an era of fragmented multiparty politics. The main winner of the elections was Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, which until recently was perceived as a marginal protest force, but has now transformed into one of the key players in British politics.

The voting results proved shocking even for the British elites themselves.

Reform UK gained around 1,450 seats in local councils and took control of 14 councils, making an unprecedented leap practically from zero. Labour lost nearly 1,500 seats and lost control of 23 councils — one of the party’s worst results in the modern history of local elections. The Conservatives also continued their decline, losing ground both to Labour and to Farage. At the same time, the Greens achieved the best result in their history, significantly strengthening their position in London and major cities.

Labour’s losses in traditional working-class regions that had for decades been considered the party’s impregnable strongholds were especially painful. Reform UK achieved serious successes in Sunderland, Barnsley, and Hartlepool — cities where Labour had dominated for decades. Labour’s significant losses in Birmingham, one of Europe’s largest municipalities, also became a symbolic blow.

Britain is effectively repeating processes that the United States and a number of European countries have already experienced: the traditional working class is gradually turning away from center-left parties and moving toward right-wing populists. It is precisely on this fracture that Nigel Farage is building his strategy.

The success of Reform UK is directly connected to several factors.

The first is migration. Despite the change of power in 2024, Keir Starmer’s government failed to convince a significant part of society that it was capable of controlling migration flows and solving the crisis of illegal crossings across the English Channel.

The second factor is economic stagnation and the feeling of being “forgotten” among residents of small towns and industrial areas.

The third is general distrust toward the political establishment, which Farage is successfully converting into protest voting.

At the same time, Reform UK managed to do what British right-wing populists had long failed to achieve: move beyond being solely a “Brexit party.” While UKIP was primarily an instrument of pressure on the issue of leaving the EU, Reform UK is now claiming the role of a полноценной national force capable of competing for power.

It is revealing that the party is achieving success not only in traditionally Eurosceptic areas, but also in former Labour strongholds. In some districts, turnout even increased — a rare phenomenon for local elections in Britain. This suggests that Reform is not merely taking votes from competitors, but is also mobilizing those who previously did not participate in politics at all.

For Starmer, the results became an extremely serious blow. Discussions about a possible change of leadership have already begun within Labour. Some MPs and party activists accuse the leadership of losing its own identity. Critics believe that Starmer’s attempt to shift Labour toward the center led to a double failure: the left-liberal urban electorate began drifting toward the Greens, while the working class moved toward Reform UK.

The situation for the Conservatives remains no less difficult. Kemi Badenoch’s party formally retained some positions, but the main problem for the Tories lies elsewhere — they are rapidly losing their monopoly over the right-wing electorate. Reform UK is already overtaking the Conservatives in several national ratings, while Farage openly claims leadership of the entire right-wing camp.

The most alarming signal for the British political system was not even Reform’s victory, but the overall fragmentation of the electoral field. Following the elections, five parties received double-digit support levels. This effectively means the end of the stable two-party model that had dominated Britain for more than a century.

Against this backdrop, regional processes are also intensifying. In Scotland, the SNP once again emerged victorious, maintaining its course toward strengthening the autonomy agenda. In Wales, Labour’s positions weakened noticeably, while Plaid Cymru strengthened its influence. Thus, the crisis affects not only individual parties, but the entire former architecture of British politics.

The key question now is whether Reform UK can maintain its current momentum until the next parliamentary elections. So far, the party faces the typical problems of rapidly growing populist movements — a shortage of experienced personnel and the absence of a stable managerial structure. However, even if part of its current success proves temporary, British politics is unlikely to return to its previous model.

The May 2026 elections became the moment when Britain’s old system finally cracked. And now the main struggle will no longer take place between Labour and the Conservatives, but around who will manage to rebuild a country fractured by economic problems, the migration crisis, and deep distrust toward traditional elites.

Crisis of Britain’s Two-Party System

International lawyer and Director of the Center for European Information Nikolai Topornin believes that forecasts regarding the elections in Britain proved accurate: practically everyone expected Labour’s defeat, the only question was the scale of the losses. In the end, the party lost more than 1,200 seats.

In his opinion, this defeat raised the issue of confidence in the current Labour leadership headed by Starmer. The expert notes that many are already speaking about the beginning of a crisis in Britain’s two-party system, where Labour and the Conservatives had dominated for more than a century.

The elections were won by Reform UK under Nigel Farage’s leadership, gaining more than 1,400 seats. If local election results were extrapolated to parliamentary elections, Farage’s party could receive around 220–240 seats and become the largest force in parliament, pushing aside both Labour and the Conservatives.

The main question now is whether Reform UK can maintain its current level of support until the 2029 parliamentary elections.

“And essentially, that is when the breakdown of this still-functioning two-party system at the state level would truly occur,” Topornin noted.

Professor Stanislav Tkachenko of Saint Petersburg State University, in turn, pointed out that Britain’s traditional two-party system, dating back to the 17th century, had already experienced periods of crisis in its history, the sharpest of which occurred after the First World War and led to the Liberal Party (the former Whigs) being pushed beyond the two-party model.

Labour replaced them for almost an entire century. And although in practically every election held during this time there was a party claiming to destroy the model of the two “big parties,” only the current situation in Britain allows a forecast that the party-political system that existed in the state for an entire century may now be destroyed.

Moreover, there is no guarantee that Reform UK will replace one of the two “big parties,” namely the Conservatives or Labour, the expert believes.

“I would venture to suggest that we are on the threshold of a complete reformatting of Britain’s party system, because besides Nigel Farage’s ‘reformists,’ the Greens and the major parties of Scotland and Wales are also claiming a place within the ruling elite, without whom governing coalitions in the British parliament may soon become impossible,” he said.

Why Reform UK Has Strengthened

The success of Reform UK was not sudden. Nigel Farage has long been active in politics and previously created UKIP — the United Kingdom Independence Party — although at that time it was less successful, Topornin pointed out.

In his opinion, Farage primarily bet on the migration agenda. Europe’s liberal migration policy led to an increase in the number of migrants, which began provoking irritation among part of society. Against this background, more and more voters began supporting right-wing parties — from Alternative for Germany to Marine Le Pen’s National Rally.

For a long time, Britons treated Farage cautiously, but the situation changed in recent years. Voters became disappointed in the promises of traditional parties, while Starmer’s government reforms, including in migration policy, failed to produce noticeable results, Topornin notes.

An additional factor was the worsening socio-economic situation.

“Voters shifted to the right and support Farage because they are tired of the promises of traditional parties that are not backed up in practice,” he noted.

Tkachenko, meanwhile, believes that the main reason for the rapid growth in popularity of Reform UK lies in the crisis state of Britain’s socio-economic system.

He identifies the causes of this crisis as growing deindustrialization, the inability to compete with products from China and other Global South countries, as well as failed policy toward Russia, which deprived the City of London of access to a rapidly growing and profitable market.

“For outside observers, the main cause of the crisis that lifted Farage to the top of the ratings is migration policy, which has changed electoral dynamics in many parts of England and Scotland,” he noted.

In his opinion, British business, which traditionally played an active role in shaping the country’s party system, became disillusioned with the old parties, seeing their inability and unwillingness to stop the poorly controlled influx of migrants.

British society is tired of waiting for change and no longer believes that the desired results can be achieved through the evolutionary path advocated by both Labour and the Conservatives.

“In today’s British political system, only Farage and the political leaders oriented toward him promise decisive anti-migration measures,” the expert noted.

Why Labour Is Losing Support

Topornin argues that Britons today are most irritated by unresolved migration problems and the worsening socio-economic situation. Despite promises of reform, Starmer’s government failed to demonstrate noticeable results either in the economy or in migration policy.

At the same time, in his opinion, Britain’s traditional working class has changed significantly. A substantial portion of workers today are migrants who do not possess British citizenship or voting rights. As a result, Labour’s former support base among the working class is gradually eroding.

At the same time, part of the liberal urban electorate is shifting toward the Liberal Democrats and the Greens, who offer a more radical liberal and environmental agenda.

All this has led to a sharp drop in Labour’s ratings, the expert believes.

“And so it turns out that Labour’s base is eroding, plus uncertain policy, plus scandals within the government,” he emphasized.

Tkachenko, meanwhile, pointed out that Labour’s triumphant rise to power in the July 4, 2024 elections was itself explained by the crisis of the Conservatives, who had governed Britain for 14 years.

“It was not that Labour was strong in these elections, but that the Conservatives had turned from the solid party of David Cameron’s era into a nationwide laughingstock because of leaders unfit for the kingdom’s highest governmental post — Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak — as well as failures in combating the pandemic, the energy crisis, and adventurist foreign policy,” he believes.

During the campaign period, Starmer promised to overcome all these shortcomings, and voters believed him, thanks to which Labour achieved one of the best results in its party history in the previous elections, the expert recalled.

Now, according to him, it has become obvious that Labour’s potential in state governance is no different from that of the Conservatives. That is why the average British voter wants to see completely different people in top parliamentary and governmental positions — people not connected to the old ruling establishment.

Today Labour views its typical voter as an urban resident, not necessarily connected with industry. They have no concrete “message” for poorer segments of the population.

“Today this party claims the center of the country’s political spectrum, it expresses social-democratic values and easily finds common language with business associations, including large global business. For traditional Labour, such a situation would have been simply impossible,” Tkachenko explained.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/britain-farage-breaking-old-system/5926944

Ron Clutz

2025 ended with a steadily declining rate of rising CO2 in the atmosphere following a 20 month cooling since April 2024, peak of an unusual and unexplained warming spike.  That rate declined further in the first four months of 2026. Historical records show that around 1875 was the coldest time in the last 10,000 years.  That was the end of the Little Ice Age (LIA), and since then temperatures have warmed at an average rate of about 0.5C per century.  The recovery of the biosphere and ocean warming resulted in rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.

At times, there are warming spikes, in the 1930s and 40s for example, and the rate of rising CO2 goes up. At other times, such as 1950s and 60s, temperatures cool, and rising CO2 slows down. More recently, in 2023 and 24, we saw  temperatures spike up before falling back down in 2025 and now in 2026. [Note: A study of ocean biochemistry processes confirms that since the end of the LIA rising temperatures have been accompanied by rising CO2 at a rate of ~2 ppm per year. [ See: Slam Dunk: Δtemp Drives Δco2, Ocean Biochemistry at Work ]

Furthermore, going back to previous warmings prior to the satellite record shows that the entire rise of 0.8C since 1947 is due to oceanic, not human activity.

Importantly, the theory of human-caused global warming asserts that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere changes the baseline and causes systemic warming in our climate.  On the contrary, all of the warming since 1947 was episodic, coming from three brief events associated with oceanic cycles. And in 2024 we saw an amazing episode with a temperature spike driven by ocean air warming in all regions, along with rising NH land temperatures, now dropping well below its peak.

Previously I have demonstrated that changes in atmospheric CO2 levels follow changes in Global Mean Temperatures (GMT) as shown by satellite measurements from University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH). A  link to that background post is provided later below.

This post updates the analysis with the most current observations, testing the premise that temperature changes are predictive of changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.  The chart at the top shows the two monthly datasets: CO2 levels in blue reported at Mauna Loa, and Global temperature anomalies in purple reported by UAHv6.1, both through April 2026. Would such a sharp increase in temperature be reflected in rising CO2 levels, according to the successful mathematical forecasting model? Would CO2 levels decline as temperatures dropped following the peak?

The answer is yes: that temperature spike resulted
in a corresponding CO2 spike as expected.
And lower CO2 levels followed the temperature decline.

Above are UAH temperature anomalies compared to CO2 monthly changes year over year.

Changes in monthly CO2 synchronize with temperature fluctuations, which for UAH are anomalies referenced to the 1991-2020 period. CO2 differentials are calculated for the present month by subtracting the value for the same month in the previous year (for example April 2026 minus April 2025).  Temp anomalies are calculated by comparing the present month with the baseline month. Note the recent CO2 upward spike and drop following the temperature spike and drop.

The table below shows clearly the pattern of observed temperatures declining along with declining rates of rising observed CO2. The CO2 rate peaked at 4.41 ppm, then declined over the next 25 months to 1.48 ppm, nearly the baseline rate since the LIA. There are fluctuations in the CO2 monthly response since the differential is influenced by the previous year as well as current year.  By 2026/4, the rate of 1.48 ppm was one-third of the peak rate of 4.41 ppm.

The final proof that CO2 follows temperature due to stimulation of natural CO2 reservoirs is demonstrated by the ability to calculate CO2 levels since 1979 with a simple mathematical formula:

For each subsequent year, the CO2 level for each month was generated

CO2  _{this month this year} = a + b × Temp _{this month this year}  + CO2 _{this month last year}

The values for a and b are constants applied to all monthly temps, and are chosen to scale the forecasted CO2 level for comparison with the observed value. Here is the result of those calculations.

In the chart calculated CO2 levels correlate with observed CO2 levels at 0.9988 out of 1.0000.  This mathematical generation of CO2 atmospheric levels is only possible if they are driven by temperature-dependent natural sources, and not by human emissions which are small in comparison, rise steadily and monotonically.  For a more detailed look at the recent fluxes, here are the results since 2015, an ENSO neutral year.

For this recent period, the calculated CO2 values match well the annual highs, while some annual generated values of CO2 are slightly higher or lower than observed at other months of the year. Still the correlation for this period is 0.9946.

Key Point

Changes in CO2 follow changes in global temperatures on all time scales, from last month’s observations to ice core datasets spanning millennia. Since CO2 is the lagging variable, it cannot logically be the cause of temperature, the leading variable. It is folly to imagine that by reducing human emissions of CO2, we can change global temperatures, which are obviously driven by other factors.

[…]

Via https://rclutz.com/2026/05/20/april-2026-cooling-temperatures-lead-to-co2-rate-decline/

The betrayal of Alex Saab is a betrayal of Chavismo

Joe Emersberger

Nicolas Maduro’s government mobilized people in Venezuela and around the world to support Alex Saab. He was a special envoy (a diplomat) for Maduro who helped Venezuela avoid murderous U.S. sanctions. Despite being subjected to torture in Cape Verde (where he was illegally detained) then extradited to the U.S. where he was subjected to its notoriously sadistic prison system, Saab did not betray Maduro. Indeed Saab was made a minister in Maduro’s government after he returned to Venezuela through a prisoner exchange that was negotiated with Biden.

Surrender not retreat

Delcy Rodriquez, became the acting president after Maduro was kidnapped by Trump in an attack on Caracas that massacred over a hundred people. Though dismayed by her policy of swallowing humiliation by Washington, I was convinced by comrades to see this a strategic retreat, to see it as Delcy waiting things out, avoiding the installation of U.S.-backed fascism under a genocidal lunatic like Maria Corina Machado, and avoiding a costly war against the US or its Venezuelan proxies.

I don’t regret being convinced of that. I don’t believe, as some people say, that it was obvious from the outset that Delcy was doing a surrender rather than a strategic retreat. Almost all governments in the world are small and weak compared to the U.S., so even the most anti-imperial ones endure humiliation at Washington’s hands to some extent. Chavez and Maduro certainly did with their tolerance of U.S. -backed subversives in Venezuela, and that was understandable. It was not necessarily wise, mind you, but it was understandable. Cuba has endured a U.S. torture camp on its own soil in Guantanamo. Even countries as strong as Russia and China have let the U.S. get away with things.

But shipping Alex Saab to the U.S. is as inexcusable as turning somebody over to Nazi Germany in the 1940s. It reveals that all morality and honour have been cast aside, and that the only consideration is appeasing Washington. Remarks made by Delcy and Diosdado Cabello defending their hand over of Saab to the U.S. have been risible.

An indirect betrayal of Maduro

Saab will now be tortured in the U.S. to help Trump prosecute Maduro. Saab will endure this hardship in a more desperate situation than the first time he was in the clutches of the U.S. Now he knows that the Venezuelan government he served has betrayed him while his former ally, Maduro, is also in jail. Maybe that will make Saab desperate enough to say what his U.S. captors want to hear. Maybe it won’t, in which case Saab will even further expose the depravity of Delcy handing him over.

It doesn’t wash anymore to say that defending Delcy counters defeatism. It’s the opposite. People who defend her now have to argue that nothing but surrender is possible. To be consistent, they’d have to depict all US vassals as blameless victims with no agency of their own.

Chavismo without anti-imperialism is not Chavismo

There is no excuse for any “Chavista” who stays silent or supports what Delcy has just done to Alex Saab. I put “Chavista” in quotes because Chavismo under the governments of Chavez and Maduro was fiercely anti-imperialist. Chavismo that is collaborationist with the U.S. is no longer Chavismo.

Was Delcy always this bad? Was Cabello? Were they dissembling all these years? I don’t think so. Rank opportunists and frauds tend to reveal themselves much earlier on. But relentless pressure from a superpower can eventually make people give up, rationalize betrayal as realism, and anti-imperial struggle as pointless.

Once you make a decision to avoid all confrontation with the genocidal U.S. dictatorship you will embrace complete moral collapse.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2026/05/21/delcy-has-overthrown-chavismo/

Well, what do we have here?

Not long ago I reported on how the vaccine maker Moderna had in fact begun development of an mRNA vaccine against hantavirus already in 2024.

What is also interesting is how they had a patent on a particular sequence that happened to also be in the covid virus. And this particular sequence is actually what made it unique and very infectious to humans. They got this patent years before the outbreak of covid.

SURPRISE: Moderna hantavirus mRNA vaccine project began in 2024

May 7

Read full story

Peter Imanuelsen

·

Now, guess what?

The WHO has just declared a global health emergency over the Ebola outbreak that has happened in Africa.

Now the mainstream media has gone into full panic mode over Ebola, and it seems like the previous fearmongering over hantavirus just disappeared almost overnight.

Guess what I found?

Turns out that just some months ago Moderna began development of a new mRNA vaccine against Ebola with $26.7 MILLION in funding from an organization called CEPI.

This together with Oxford University who is also creating an Ebola vaccine on the same platform as the AstraZeneca covid vaccine.

Guess who is a major backer of this CEPI organization?

Bill Gates of course.

So what is going on?

Oh, and AI will be used to help develop this new Ebola vaccine to trigger a strong immune response.

You probably won’t hear about this on the https://www.petersweden.org/p/surprise-moderna-began-work-on-ebolamedia, but I will give you all the details here in this latest article.

[…]

Via https://www.petersweden.org/p/surprise-moderna-began-work-on-ebola