Dmitry Orlov

So far, the West has imposed on Russia around 30 thousand sanctions. This is twice as many as all the sanctions imposed against other countries on the entire planet. But they didn’t work; and so now Trump is threatening to impose sanctions on Russia’s trading partners. China, India and Turkey would be the ones most affected — or not.

The sanctions imposed so far perhaps slowed the development of the Russian economy somewhat, but not enough to make sanction avoidance worth considering. On the other hand, they certainly boomeranged back on the Europeans, severely hampering industrial activity, producing record-high rates of bankruptcy, virtually killing the chemical and automobile industries, raising unemployment and causing public discontent and political instability.

The sanctions attempted to disconnect Russia from international (dollar and euro-based) payment infrastructure, to disrupt supply chains, and strike at key sectors of the economy. But something clearly went wrong with these plans. Russia’s economy has remained stable and has continued to grow while Russia’s trade relations with the rest of the world (other than the West) have continued to develop. This result may have befuddled the West’s intrepid sanctioneers, but it came as no surprise to careful Russia-watchers.

The reason the 30 thousand sanctions have failed, and the reason the next 30 thousand would fail just the same, is simple: Russia was ready for them. Starting around 2014, when the first sanctions, related to the the events around Crimea, were imposed, Russia has been working steadily to get rid of all the more important vulnerabilities and to achieve a remarkable level of self-sufficiency in all of the key indicators of state sustainability, including the following:

• Energy
• Nuclear energy (separately)
• Natural resources of every kind
• Education
• Fundamental science
• Industry
• Military-industrial complex
• The military
• Agriculture
• Health care

Although much of this basis is provided by Russia’s rich patrimony, including Soviet traditions of excellence in education, science and technology, the impetus for its development, in no small measure, came from the disciplining effect of the 30 thousand sanctions. Of course, Russia’s huge territory, holding a treasure trove of natural resources of every kind, is what made it all possible. No other country in the world has such a basis for self-sufficient development.

• China has severe international dependencies with regard to energy and natural resources.
• The US has many unsolved problems with nuclear energy, natural resources (it has, essentially, no oil left — just condensate from fracked wells) and there are many unanswered questions for its military-industrial complex and industrial base.
• Japan has problems with resources, energy, army, military-industrial complex and agriculture.
• Most other countries are even worse off.

Thus, Russia has the most stable economy on the entire planet and has all of the resources it needs to develop them independently.

Russia’s Achilles’ heel (or so Western sanctionistas like to imagine) is its dependence on revenues from oil and gas exports. They imagine that, deprived of hydrocarbon revenues, Russia would be unable to finance its military. In fact, as Russia’s economy continues to develop, this dependence becomes less and less severe. Currently, a quarter of government revenues comes from hydrocarbon exports. Thus, if hydrocarbon exports were shut down, Russia would lose this revenue and would be forced to raise the flat income tax rate from 13% to 16% — and that certainly wouldn’t be fatal.

But would this ever be necessary? The three largest buyers of Russian oil are China, India and Brazil, and none of them are at all likely to abandon this trade because of Western pressure. If the West imposed sanctions on the buyers of Russian energy, this energy would (on paper) stop being Russian. There is now an entire technology suite for circumventing Western sanctions. The most that happens is a temporary slowdown in trade following the imposition of new sanctions, while new ways of doing business are being worked out.

It turns out that imposing sanctions is the easy part while enforcing them is either difficult or impossible. The difficulty has to do with the inability to track transactions by which products move to and from Russia through third parties, especially if the intermediaries do not use dollars or euros for transacting with Russia. And the impossibility has to do with the West’s dwindling clout in imposing its will on large, powerful countries. China has already demonstrated its ability to fight and win trade wars with the US; India and Brazil are next.

It would make sense that at some point it will dawn on Western officials that anti-Russian sanctions are ineffective and self-defeating, but it is by no means certain that they would then find it in their power to lift these sanctions.

Since these sanctions have been beneficial to Russia in helping it achieve higher levels of self-sufficiency and in prompting it to cultivate fair trade relationships with non-Western partners around the world, wouldn’t Russia be interested in making sure that the sanctions remain in place — perhaps through a series of minor, judiciously chosen anti-Western escalations and provocations with the goal of making the lifting of sanctions politically impossible? It would seem that a new Berlin Wall has been built, except that this time it is the West that has built it.

Via https://boosty.to/cluborlov/posts/b280f785-6e9f-42cb-b2bf-69557e8724fa

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, M.D. Ph.D., Dr. Pierre Kory, M.D., (right) and Dr. Joel Wallskog, M.D. (left). Photo credit: Michael Pierce, D.O.

By James Lyons-Weiler

At a press conference at Florida State University in Tampa, Florida, Florida Surgeon General Dr Joseph Ladapo made an urgent call for the NIH program funding to help Americans injured by Covid-19 vaccines and expressed support for the May federal changes in the HHS’s restrictive Covid-19 vaccine recommendations.

On the Ground in Tampa: What Ladapo Really Said

I was invited to Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo’s press conference in Tampa on July 17, 2025. In contrast to how some mainstream outlets later portrayed it, the event centered on a call to recognize and research Covid-19 vaccine injuries, rather than a mere anti-vaccine screed. Dr. Ladapo – a physician and Florida’s top health official since 2021 – emphasized the urgent need to support those suffering adverse effects from mRNA Covid-19 shots.

He praised recent federal moves to scale back mRNA vaccine recommendations for certain groups, but went further by asserting that these products “should not be used in any human beings,” given their safety profile. From my front-row perspective, Dr. Ladapo’s tone was measured yet resolute. He recounted how unusual it is, in his experience, to encounter so many post-vaccination issues. “When was the last time that you had a vaccine that literally almost every single person knows someone who had a bad reaction from it?” Ladapo asked pointedly.

[…]

Dr. Ladapo’s Call to Action: Fund Research and Care for the Vaccine-Injured

Rather than simply condemning the vaccines, Dr. Ladapo dedicated much of his speech to advocating for the victims of vaccine injury. He applauded Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s May announcement removing mRNA Covid-19 shots from recommended use in healthy kids and pregnant women – a policy Florida itself adopted earlier.

But crucially, Dr. Ladapo said this must be followed by concrete support for those already harmed. He called on federal agencies, especially the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to expand their research into vaccine injuries and long-term post-vaccine complications.

“Today, I want to call on the federal government, [on] NIH, to expand the work that they are doing in long Covid to genuinely and wholly include vaccine-injured people – specifically, people who have been injured by mRNA Covid-19 vaccines,” Dr. Ladapo urged.

[…]

“We need to study this better,” he insisted, “We need to fund physicians who are caring for these patients clinically and who are doing scientific work in this area.”

[…]

Real-world observation aligns with reports from other doctors now specializing in Covid vaccine injury. This formed the basis of his argument that federal health agencies must take action: the scale of the issue appears unprecedented and thus demands urgent attention. Key points from Dr. Ladapo’s address:

mRNA Vaccine Guidance: He praised the revised federal guidance (announced by RFK, Jr. at HHS) that no longer recommends mRNA Covid-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women, noting Florida led on this policy years prior.

Dr. Ladapo expressed hope that this would lead to even broader caution. “These products…should not be going into human beings,” he said bluntly.

[…]

Support for Patients and Doctors: Dr. Ladapo emphasized the need to fund physicians and clinics caring for vaccine-injured patients, as well as basic research. In practice, this could mean grant programs for studying treatments (for example, therapies to mitigate spike protein-related pathology) and establishing specialized centers of excellence for post-vaccine injury care.

[…]

Media Spin vs. What Was Actually Said

Despite the substance of Dr. Ladapo’s remarks focusing on research and patient welfare, coverage in many mainstream media outlets largely framed the press conference as Florida doubling down on an “anti-vaccine” stance.

[…]

However, some outlets swiftly countered his statements with commentary from other experts and cast them as dubious. In an NPR-affiliated report, a representative of the American Academy of Pediatrics condemned Ladapo’s message, saying “we are not going to just throw out decades of science and research…just because of one person or a group of people…spreading conspiracy theories about the danger [of vaccines].”

This kind of response, featured prominently in mainstream coverage, suggests that Dr. Ladapo’s concerns were portrayed as fringe or unfounded, rather than as legitimate calls for investigation.

It is important to clarify that Dr. Ladapo did not merely tell Floridians “don’t get vaccinated” and walk off. In fact, much of his briefing was forward-looking: he wants the federal government to acknowledge injuries and help devise solutions.

[…]

The debate over vaccine risk/benefit thus looms in the background. But regardless of where one stands on that issue, the Surgeon General’s appeal for research funding to study those who have been injured is a concrete policy ask – one that, notably, does not undermine vaccination campaigns, but rather seeks to help a minority of patients in need. This distinction was largely muddied by the way mainstream reports filtered his remarks.

Echoes from Dr. Pierre Kory and Frontline Physicians

Dr. Ladapo is not alone in raising these concerns. Other physicians known for treating Covid vaccine injuries have been making similar appeals for recognition and resources. One prominent voice is Dr. Pierre Kory, a critical care specialist. Dr. Kory was at the Tampa press conference, and his work directly intersects with Dr. Ladapo’s points. After early advocacy for Covid treatments, Dr. Kory in recent years has focused on patients suffering lingering complications after vaccination. He co-founded a practice in early 2022 dedicated to evaluating and treating vaccine injury syndrome and long Covid.

The volume of patients they’ve seen underscores the prevalence Ladapo alluded to. “Scott [Marsland] and I have now seen well over 900 patients who are chronically ill after receiving the Covid-19 mRNA injections or suffering with Long Haul Covid,” Dr. Kory reported in late 2023, noting roughly 70% of their cases are post-vaccine injury (“Long Vax”) versus 30% Long Covid.

This ratio, he says, has grown in favor of vaccine-injury cases over time as more people seek help. Such figures suggest that thousands of Americans may be experiencing serious post-vaccination health issues, even if exact incidence rates are still unknown. Dr. Kory has publicly echoed Dr. Ladapo’s sentiment that these patients are being overlooked. He has been outspoken about the lack of support from mainstream medical institutions. In one commentary, Dr. Kory shared a chilling report: a neurologist at a respected hospital privately admitted to a vaccine-injured patient that “our whole practice is full of vaccine injuries but we are not allowed to talk about it.”

This underscores a climate in which many doctors observe the phenomenon yet feel constrained from speaking out or coding these cases as vaccine-related. Dr. Kory and others in the medical community who do not deny vaccine injury argue that this culture of silence further harms patients, who are often dismissed or misdiagnosed (frequently written off with “functional” disorders) rather than given proper care. Indeed, Dr. Kory describes many of his patients being gaslighted by physicians before finding his clinic.

In the wake of HHS Secretary RFK, Jr.’s policy changes and Dr. Ladapo’s statements, Dr. Kory has applauded efforts to bring vaccine injuries to light. On social media, he recently praised Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for “killing Big Pharma’s grift” piece by piece – implying that exposing vaccine safety problems and adjusting policy accordingly is a blow to pharmaceutical interests.

While a strongly worded take, it aligns with Dr. Ladapo’s implication that there has been a systematic downplaying of vaccine harms. Both Dr. Ladapo and Dr. Kory assert that acknowledging injuries is not only a matter of scientific honesty but also a step toward remedies. Dr. Kory has called the suffering of vaccine-injured patients “one of the most dispiriting aspects” of the pandemic era for clinicians, noting that many were previously healthy, high-functioning individuals now left disabled.

The resonance between their messages is significant. One, a state public health official, and the other, a private physician and Covid treatment pioneer, are both shining a light on the human toll of adverse vaccine reactions. They converge on a key point: officialdom must not ignore these medical conditions. Whether one views their stance as controversial or prescient, their calls raise questions about how health authorities like the NIH allocate attention and funds. Notably, in the same press conference, Ladapo mentioned, “long Covid” research has received substantial federal funding, and he argues vaccine injuries should be studied under a similar framework.

Dr. Kory and colleagues, for their part, have been compiling case series and publishing treatment guidance for post-vaccine syndrome, but much of this work is happening outside of mainstream research channels.

Greater NIH involvement could lend resources and credibility to understanding these phenomena.

The NIH’s Responsibility and Path Forward

A summary-level takeaway from the Tampa event is a pointed question: What is the responsibility of agencies like the NIH when it comes to vaccine injuries? Dr. Ladapo explicitly placed the onus on the federal health establishment to “genuinely and wholly include” the vaccine-injured in its research programs.

This is a call for inclusion – treating those patients as worthy of study, care, and compassion. For the NIH, this could mean funding dedicated studies on post-vaccination myocarditis, neurological complications, autoimmune reactions, and recovery strategies. It could mean creating registries for those with suspected vaccine injury and following their outcomes, just as long Covid cohorts are tracked. Essentially, Dr. Ladapo is urging the NIH not to leave this subset of patients behind, especially as the federal government has invested billions in vaccine deployment; a fraction of that investment, he argues, should now go toward mitigation and treatment of any unintended effects. From a medical ethics standpoint, many would agree that if even a small minority of people are hurt by a public health intervention, there is an ethical duty to understand and address that.

Vaccine injuries may be statistically rare (exact rates are debated), but they are no less real for those afflicted. Dr. Ladapo’s appeal, backed by voices like Dr. Kory’s, is that public health authorities must actively care for those individuals, not marginalize them. This doesn’t require abandoning vaccination programs for the majority; it requires a parallel effort to make whole those who drew the short straw on the risk curve. In practical terms, that could involve specialized treatment clinics, research into therapies (from immunosuppressants to novel drugs that might neutralize lingering spike protein, for example), and proper acknowledgement of vaccine injury syndromes in medical literature and education.

As of this writing, it remains to be seen how the NIH and federal government will respond. Will they expand long-Covid studies to explicitly incorporate vaccine-adverse events, as Florida’s Surgeon General demands? Early signs are mixed. The Health and Human Services leadership under RFK, Jr. has already signaled a more skeptical stance on mRNA vaccines for low-risk groups, suggesting some openness to evaluating safety signals anew.

However, institutional inertia and fear of fueling vaccine hesitancy have made agencies cautious about prominently investigating harms.

In Tampa, Dr. Joseph Ladapo delivered a message that the mainstream narratives largely sidelined: that caring for the vaccine-injured is now an urgent public health priority. Those of us who were present heard not just criticism of vaccines, but a compassionate plea to help people who “did the right thing” per societal guidance, yet ended up with lasting health issues. “We need to fund physicians…and do scientific work in this area,” he reported, effectively asking the country’s medical establishment to step up. Time will tell if that call is heeded. For now, Ladapo’s stance – controversial as it may be – shines a spotlight on patients who often suffer in the shadows. And as Dr. Pierre Kory and others affirm, shining that spotlight is the first step toward bringing those patients the understanding, treatments, and hopefully recovery that they desperately need. 

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/florida-surgeon-general-highlights-vaccine-injuries-calls-on-nih-to-act/

Image credit: Vaulted Deep

By Jowi Morales

July 20, 2025

Microsoft wants to bury poop deep underground to counter all the pollution that its data centers generate.Microsoft has just signed a deal with Vaulted Deep, paying it to remove 4.9 million metric tons of waste over 12 years sourced from manure, sewage, and agricultural byproducts for injection deep underground.

According to Inc., the current cost of CO2 removal with the company is $350 per ton. If you multiply that by Microsoft’s contract, that makes it worth more than $1.7 billion. However, neither entity has disclosed the actual terms of the deal, and CEO Julia Reichelstein says the company expects its costs to drop over time, and that thThis isn’t the first time Redmond has paid another company to help offset its greenhouse gas emissions; Microsoft signed a deal with AtmosClear in April of this year to sequester 6.75 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. However, Vaulted’s technique is unique — instead of extracting carbon dioxide from the air or electricity production, it collects organic waste.

It combines it into a thick slurry, which is then injected about 5,000 feet underground. This prevents it from being dumped at a waste disposal site, where it would eventually decompose and release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

“Generally, what happens to these wastes today is they go to a landfill, they get dumped in a waterway, or they’re just spread on land for the purpose of disposal. In all of those cases, they’re decomposing into CO2 and methane,” said Reichelstein to Inc. “That’s contributing to climate change. And then oftentimes, especially when it’s spread on land, all those pathogens are going directly into people’s groundwater.”

Projects such as these enable Microsoft and other tech giants to offset the massive amounts of carbon emissions produced by data centers, particularly as they consume a significant amount of electrical power, often generated from fossil fuels. For example, Musk is facing legal action in Memphis, Tennessee, after his company, xAI, is accused of polluting the air by using under-reported power generators at the Colossus Supercomputer. Aside from that, many companies, including Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Oracle, and others, are investing in small modular reactor research to establish their clean energy sources for their expanding data center businesses.

[…]

Via https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/microsoft-buys-more-than-a-billion-dollars-worth-of-excrement-including-human-poop-company-will-pump-waste-underground-to-offset-ai-carbon-emissions

Medicating Normal

ENDEVR (2024)

Film Review

This films documents the growing problem with psychiatrists dispensing psychotropic medications without informing patients about severe withdrawal effects if they try to stop them.

Among the patients interviewed are

• A career naval officer with two MIT masters degrees who was forced to retire on medical disability owing to his inability to taper and discontinue his lorazepam. Describing himself as an anxious, driven high achiever with relationship problems, he was given Zoloft and lorazepam. Despite initial relief, after eight months, he was much worse with low mood, sexual dysfunction and weird cogniitve effects. However every time he tried to discontinue the medication he was unable to get out of bed.
• The parents of a 13-year-old distressed over moving to a new school. After she failed to improve Zoloft, her psychiatrist changed her to Prozac and she began having visual and auditory hallucinations telling her to hurt herself. This necessitated seven psychiatric hospitalization and being started on antipsychotic and side effect pills.
• A waitress unable to sleep owing to night shift work was given 2 mg lorazepam twice a day and ended up taking it for six years because she couldn’t function if she tried to stop it.
• A female sergeant was medevaced from Iraq after developing nosebleeds, fainting spells and 40 pound weight loss from severe PTSD. Forced to take medical retirement, she went to the VA where she was given multiple cocktails. At one point she was on 16 medications and owing to severe withdrawals it took her 10 years to get.

An Army psychologist is also interviewed at length. It’s her view that PTSD is grief that has been medicalized. She explains that most medications work really well short term. Nevertheless unless severe mental illness is present, there are few justifications for taking psychotropic medication longterm.

In a vignette near the end journalist Robert Whitaker describes how pharmaceutical companies rig psychotropic studies through cozy financial relationships with the psychiatrists who perform them and the medical journals that publish them. According to Whitaker, Big Pharma never funds long term studies. Despite clear short term relief from anxiety-related symptom, symptom nearly always worsen with long term use.

Xanax is a good example. In the very first Xanax trial, patients were better at 4 weeks but worse than placebo patients at 8 weeks. The way the company dealt with this was to only publish results up to 4 weeks.

Likewise Germany refused to approve Prozac owing to patient deterioration after two months. In the US they only published the first month of data to win FDA approval.

Deaths in drug trials are never published. Drug companies prefer to pay fines and law suit settlements because it’s cheaper than being honest – which could hurt profits.

By Dr. Peter McCullough

The COVID-19 vaccine safety debacle has contributed to erosion in vaccine confidence. Additionally, the ever-increasing burden of vaccines coinciding with exploding rates of autism spectrum disorder are prompting parents to do their own research.

A report from Vasudevan et al from a survey performed among expecting and young parents found shocking results. Less than 40% expected to follow the full vaccine schedule. Conversely 60% were going to delay, refuse, or were undecided on routine childhood vaccinations.

This represents a giant shift from the >95% ACIP vaccine schedule acceptance from pre-pandemic years. Independent media and scholarship on the harms of vaccination can be credited with improved awareness.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/under-40-expecting-young-parents-plan-fully-immunize-children/5895304

Representatives of over 30 states from Africa, Asia, Europe, as well as North America and South America met at the Emergency Conference of The Hague Group in Bogota, Colombia on July 15 and 15, 2025. (Photo: Progressive International)<

By María F. Fitzgerald July 17, 2025 20

Meeting in Bogotá, Colombia, representatives of Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Iraq, Libya, Malaysia, Namibia, Nicaragua, Oman, and South Africa announced sanctions against Israel to cut the flow of weapons facilitating genocide and war crimes in Gaza.

Speaking about Palestine is speaking about resistance in the heart of horror. That is how Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, summed it up at an emergency conference in Bogotá, Colombia. The same Albanese who is currently facing sanctions imposed by the U.S. government for, according to them, making antisemitic remarks, after repeatedly denouncing the brutalities committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.

Despite these accusations, Albanese remains firm in her denunciations. She reiterated on several occasions that we must not allow these actions to distract us from what truly matters: the genocide that, for the past twenty months, has escalated against the people of Gaza, and the massive human rights violations taking place across Palestine, which have left more than 60,000 people dead, most of them women and children.

“The global majority [also known as the Global South] has been the driving force behind actions against Israel’s genocide, with South Africa and Colombia playing key roles in this process,” she told Mondoweiss during a press conference on the first day of the Emergency Conference for Gaza, convened by the governments of Colombia and South Africa. “These actions have led to the creation of spaces for sanctions and resistance. What we’ve been insisting on all along is that more and more countries must join these efforts.”

The Hague Group coordinated this Emergency Conference, which brought together representatives from over 30 states, including China, Brazil, Spain, Mexico, Turkey, and Qatar. Initially formed by Colombia and South Africa, the group seeks to establish specific sanctions against Israel that, according to Colombia’s Vice Minister for Multilateral Affairs, Mauricio Jaramillo Jassir, aim to move beyond discourse and into action.

Heads of state and their representatives emphasized that these sanctions are not retaliatory but are in full compliance with international humanitarian law. They are part of the international community’s commitment to ending the genocide. One of the central calls made was for more nations to join this effort and uphold their duty to defend human rights.

All 30 participating states unanimously agreed that “the era of impunity must end— and that international law must be enforced.” To begin this effort, 12 states from across the world — Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Indonesia, Iraq, Libya, Malaysia, Namibia, Nicaragua, Oman, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and South Africa — committed to implementing six key points:

1. Prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel, as appropriate, to ensure that our industry does not contribute the tools to enable or facilitate genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of international law.

2. Prevent the transit, docking, and servicing of vessels at any port, if applicable, within our territorial jurisdiction, while being fully compliant with applicable international law, including UNCLOS, in all cases where there is a clear risk of the vessel being used to carry arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel, to ensure that our territorial waters and ports do not serve as conduits for activities that enable or facilitate genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other violations of international law.

3. Prevent the carriage of arms, munitions, military fuel, related military equipment, and dual-use items to Israel on vessels bearing our flag, while being fully compliant with applicable international law, including UNCLOS, ensuring full accountability, including de-flagging, for non-compliance with this prohibition, not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

4. Commence an urgent review of all public contracts, in order to prevent public institutions and public funds, where applicable, from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territory which may entrench its unlawful presence in the territory, to ensure that our nationals, and companies and entities under our jurisdiction, as well as our authorities, do not act in any way that would entail recognition or provide aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

5. Comply with our obligations to ensure accountability for the most serious crimes under international law through robust, impartial and independent investigations and prosecutions at national or international levels, in compliance with our obligation to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes.

6. Support universal jurisdiction mandates, as and where applicable in our legal constitutional frameworks and judiciaries, to ensure justice for all victims and the prevention of future crimes in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Both Jaramillo and Zane Dangor, Director-General of South Africa’s Department of International Relations and Cooperation, emphasized that these actions must not be seen as reprisals, but rather as part of an international effort to break the global silence that has enabled atrocities in Palestine.

This decision is aligned with Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s renewed order to halt all coal exports from Colombia to Israel: “My government was betrayed, and that betrayal, among other things, cast doubt on my order to stop exporting coal to Israel. We are the world’s fifth-largest coal exporter, which means the country of life is helping to kill humanity. Colombian coal is still being shipped to Israel. We prohibited it, and yet we are being tricked into violating that decision. We cannot allow Colombian coal to be turned into bombs that help Israel kill children.”

In his closing speech, Petro reaffirmed that Colombia would break all arms trade relations with Israel and would continue to support the Palestinian people’s right to resist.

The legitimacy of the Hague Group and these decisions has also been backed by several multilateral organizations that have denounced the genocide. As Varsha Gandikota-Nellutla, Executive Secretary of the Hague Group, stated: “The International Criminal Court (ICC) has already clearly denounced the genocide. The United Nations has stated that Gaza is the hungriest place on Earth. What we lack now is not clarity, it’s courage. We need the bravery to take the necessary actions”.

These words were echoed by Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Mansour, who emphasized that, together with the Madrid Group (a coalition of over 20 European and Arab countries also taking action against Israel and led by Spain), they could be the key to breaking Israel’s siege of horror: “This will not be an exercise in theatrical politics. The time has come for concrete, effective action to stop the crimes and end the profiteering from genocide. We will defeat these crimes against humanity and give the children who are still alive in Palestine a future full of promise, independence, and dignity. Recognizing Palestine is not a symbolic gesture, it is a concrete act of resistance against colonial expansion”.

His statement was followed by that of Palestinian-American doctor Thaer Ahmad, who worked in Nasser Hospital in Gaza and left the territory two months ago. In his testimony, he said he is certain that official death tolls do not even come close to reality, that Gaza is currently hell on Earth, and that every day the genocide continues brings devastating consequences for Palestinian children: “How can we look ourselves in the mirror? When this ends, if it ends, what will we say? ‘Sorry, we did everything we could’? They can’t afford to keep waiting for vague responses. They are surviving genocide every day. So now, how do we ensure that the effort to erase Palestinians from history does not succeed?”

Although the agreed-upon actions are significant, even the attending delegations acknowledge that their efforts will not be enough. Broader and more forceful measures are required. Yet, one day earlier, standing at the podium of Colombia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Francesca Albanese reaffirmed the historic importance of this event. She stated it could be: “A historical turning point that ends, with concrete measures, the genocide-based economy that has sustained Israel. I came to this meeting believing that the narrative is shifting. Hope must be a discipline that we all preserve.”

[…]

Via https://mondoweiss.net/2025/07/30-countries-announce-israel-sanctions-and-renewed-legal-action-to-end-gaza-genocide/

Mary Anne Demasi PhD

The US regulator quietly delays action on a petition calling for the suspension of mRNA injections—despite evidence of regulatory failure, DNA contamination, and a surge in cancers among young people.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has delayed its response to a formal petition demanding the suspension of the mRNA Covid-19 injections, citing “the existence of other FDA priorities.”

In a letter dated 17 July 2025, Dr Vinay Prasad—recently appointed Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)—acknowledged that the agency had “not yet reached resolution of the issues raised” in the petition.

Filed on 20 January 2025, the petition alleges that Pfizer’s Comirnaty and Moderna’s Spikevax were “unlawfully approved” in violation of federal regulatory requirements.

It calls for an immediate halt to the injections, independent testing of retained vials, and a full investigation into the approval process.

Fatal flaws in licensing mRNA products

Submitted by lawyer Katie Ashby-Koppens of PJ O’Brien & Associates, and spearheaded by former barrister Julian Gillespie, the petition argues that the mRNA injections were misclassified from the outset.

Although the products meet the FDA’s own definition of gene therapy, they were not regulated as such—sidestepping the heightened oversight normally required for gene-based interventions.

Under U.S. law, gene therapies must undergo ‘Environmental Assessments,’ be reviewed by specialised advisory committees, and face a more rigorous public transparency process.

But by labelling the mRNA injections as conventional ‘vaccines,’ regulators were able to fast-track their approval through a separate, less stringent pathway—bypassing critical safeguards.

The petition also raises alarm over synthetic DNA fragments found in the final products. Independent testing by multiple laboratories—including the FDA’s own facility—revealed DNA contamination far exceeding the safety limits.

Because the DNA is encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles, it can bypass normal immune defences, enter human cells, and in some cases integrate into the genome. The potential consequences, the petition warns, include genomic instability, cancer, and heritable genetic damage.

One of the most serious findings is the presence of SV40 promoter sequences in Pfizer’s injection—elements known to interfere with tumour-suppressing pathways such as p53.

The petition accuses Pfizer of withholding this information from the FDA in breach of disclosure laws.

Interim letter, no timeline

Under federal law, the FDA was required to respond to the petition within 180 days.

Just before the deadline, it issued a standard interim letter—acknowledging the petitioners’ main concerns but offering no timeline for a final decision.

Nor did the agency indicate that any investigation had begun. “We will respond to your petition as soon as we have reached a decision on your request,” wrote Prasad.

The agency’s delay is not uncommon—but critics say it reflects a deeper reluctance to confront the scientific and regulatory implications head-on.

Fully addressing the petition would require a sweeping and uncomfortable re-evaluation of how mRNA technologies were developed, approved, and marketed under the guise of conventional ‘vaccines.’

If the products were unlawfully licensed—mislabelled as vaccines to circumvent gene therapy regulations—the fallout would be unprecedented.

The admission alone could expose governments to extraordinary legal and financial liability—including product withdrawals, class actions, long-term health monitoring, injury compensation, and potential criminal investigations.

Petitioners speak out

Gillespie said the FDA is caught “between a rock and a hard place”—but that doesn’t excuse inaction. He believes the recent surge in cancers among young people demands urgent scrutiny.

“There’s been a tremendous and continuing rise in cancers across the United States commensurate with the rollout of these products,” he said. “Government officials have seen the data… and are refusing to address the elephant in the room.”

Dr Jessica Rose, a computational biologist and co-author of the petition, said the public was never given accurate information about the nature of the products.

“The public was not told what they were being injected with,” she said. “And still to this day, they are not.”

She described the failure to distinguish gene-based therapies from traditional vaccines as “an existential crisis,” warning that “more and more people—including children and infants—are being exposed to the harms of foreign DNA.”

Dr David Speicher, a virologist and co-signatory on the petition, said the FDA’s letter amounts to bureaucratic minimisation.

“The number of vaccine-injured people continues to grow, and we do not all know the long-term harms caused by these genetic products,” he said. “Yet the FDA states that ‘other priorities’ are more important.”

He called for “an independent scientific team to examine the regulatory process, as well as to provide funding to researchers to explore biological mechanisms such as genomic integration.”

Pharmacy consultant and petitioner Maria Gutschi said the mRNA products represent a new therapeutic category “with no previous knowledge to leverage in assessing safety and efficacy.”

She argued that, given the novelty and risks, “the bar to suspend and/or mandate ‘black box’ warnings must be higher than for any previous therapeutic agent.” Gutschi urged the FDA to treat this as “THE priority” going forward.

A tale of two gene therapies

Critics say the FDA’s handling of mRNA harms stands in stark contrast to its swift response to safety concerns involving other gene therapies.

Yesterday, the agency announced a halt to clinical trials for Sarepta Therapeutics’ investigational gene therapy after the company reported another patient death—bringing the total to three deaths across two separate gene therapy products.

The treatment, developed for limb girdle muscular dystrophy, prompted immediate regulatory action.

“Today, we’ve shown that this FDA takes swift action when patient safety is at risk,” said FDA Commissioner Marty Makary, declaring the agency is “not afraid to take immediate action when a serious safety signal emerges.”

In contrast, the FDA has remained inert on mRNA injections—which also deliver genetic material into human cells but were classified as “vaccines”—despite thousands of reported deaths and serious adverse events following administration.

According to the petitioners, the public was led to believe they were receiving a conventional vaccine—when in fact, they were being administered gene therapy.

By failing to recognise and regulate the products accordingly, the FDA violated public trust—bypassing transparency laws, concealing critical risks, and depriving individuals of the opportunity to make informed medical decisions.

[…]

Via https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/fda-stalls-decision-on-petition-to