By Ruth Hill, of RNZ
More than 8000 unvaccinated or partly vaccinated health workers were allowed to keep working during the Covid-19 pandemic because critical services could not function without them.Data released to RNZ under the Official Information Act, shows health providers – including district health boards, GP clinics and home-help agencies — made 516 applications for exemptions to avoid Significant Service Disruptions of which 102 were granted.
Of the 8051 healthworkers covered by these exemptions between October 2021 and September 2022, more than 5000 were employed by district health boards.Nearly half, 3935, were care and support workers — but the total also included 352 doctors (out of nearly 19,000 registered), 992 administration workers, 788 allied health professionals and 1984 nurses and midwives.
The Nurses Organisation, which represents 60,000 plus nurses and midwives, noted those exempted were a tiny minority of the total health workforce.
Kaiwhakahaere Kerri Nuku said the union was not given a lot of information about the reasons for exemptions at the time.
“And that’s why these figures are quite alarming to us, because we just don’t know what sits behind that.”
Given it was a public health emergency, it was essential to get as many people vaccinated as possible, Nuku said.
However, she readily admitted it would have been preferable to allow a more nuanced approach for some individuals, if there had been more time to prepare.
“This was a really difficult time for all in the workforce. Every nurse goes to work to do the best they possibly can, and these vaccine mandates certainly posed many good people against one another, and we have to do things better.”
Recent research by Auckland University of Technology published in February concluded mandates had limited effect on increasing vaccine uptake among the country’s 171,486 healthcare workers.
Economics professor Gail Pacheco, who co-authored the study, said almost 90 percent of healthcare workers had already received two doses of the vaccine when the mandates were announced in October 2021.
There was no sudden jump: vaccination coverage among healthcare workers increased at the same steady rate until it hit more than 95 percent, she said.
But what mandates definitely did was damage pay and career prospects for unvaccinated workers.
“In addition to not improving vaccine uptake, the employment rate fell by 15 per cent and earnings fell by 19 per cent compared to vaccinated workers not subjected to the mandate.”
Pacheco, director of the New Zealand Policy Research Institute at AUT, said the mandates may have eroded trust in the government.
“And it could also have strengthened the anti-vax sentiment more generally, which will not only affect uptake of the Covid vaccine, but more routine immunisations as well.”
Partly that was because people did not like being “told what to do”, she said.
“There was a German survey that found just over 3 per cent of people said they would not want the Covid-19 vaccination if it was voluntary. But that increased to more than than 16% if it was mandatory.”
Another 6410 people received a temporary medical exemption between November 2021 and September 2022 — of whom 89 per cent had had a recent Covid-19 infection.
Health New Zealand Te Whatu Ora says some of these people could have been included in the Significant Service Disruption Exemptions, but it did not track the potential overlap.
Pacheco said none of the health workers interviewed for the study saw themselves as “anti-vaccine”.
Many received exemptions after suffering an adverse reaction to the first dose, or due to an underlying medical condition.
But they struggled with the hostile reaction from other people, including workmates.
One nurse told researchers:
“We’re supposed to be a caring profession. Nothing about this is caring Due to no fault of my own, I have now been labelled an anti-vaxxer and anti-science, and in some people’s opinion, not worthy of calling myself a nurse. This hurts me immensely. This is what mandates have done. There is no room for individual circumstances.”
[…]
On Reiner’s first court appearance after the long Easter break, he and his legal team made what can easily be termed bombshell – that there has been a Dossier Reiner Fuellmich from the German state with the express purpose to take him out, notably out of any possibility of gaining a position in the political arena.
I understand the concerns of the German state. Here was someone with integrity and courage, with charisma and intelligence, with extensive experience plus shared leadership in a small German political party. Very appealing to many people fed up with mandates, loss of freedom of speech, mass immigration, and ever so much else. Here was a suitable leader.
Anyway, here is the Dossier, from bittel.tv. You can also find it on Roger Bittel’s Telegram channel:
👉 Dossier Deutsch (https://t.me/bitteltv/25826)
👉 further languages (https://t.me/bitteltv/25838)
👉 the full broadcast (https://t.me/bitteltv/25839)
All of the dossier is important. However, you may be most interested in the last section:
Report and recommendations for action regarding Reiner Fuellmich
Date: August 24, 2021
Author: B**
Subject: Comprehensive analysis and recommendations for dealing with Reiner Fuellmich
Included within this last section:
The awarding of or the possibility of obtaining politically exposed offices must be prevented by all means within the rule of law.
How is this to be done:
The initiation of criminal proceedings on the basis of the evidence collected against Reiner Fuellmich must be prepared. This includes cooperation with public prosecutors [bolding and italics mine] and the preparation of charges in the event of demonstrable violations of the law. Any necessary constructions must be weighed up and suitable third parties recruited [bolding and italics mine].
NOW HERE, THE FULL DOSSIER. I RECOMMEND READING IT.
http://www.bittel.tv / Broadcast from 2.4.2024
Dossier Reiner Fuellmich
Reiner Fuellmich, co-chairman and candidate for chancellor of the party “dieBasis”, is a German lawyer who has become known in particular for his involvement in various legal disputes and his public statements on various issues, including the measures and political decisions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. His views and legal activities have attracted both national and international attention and are the subject of controversy.
Professional career:
Reiner Fuellmich began his legal career after graduating from law school. He is licensed to practice law in Germany and in California, USA. Over many years, he has specialized in various areas of civil law and has been involved in several legal disputes, some of which have attracted considerable media attention.
Engagement against banks and corporations:
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Fuellmich made a name for himself in particular through his involvement in cases against large banks and companies. These often involved consumer protection and claims for damages.
[…]
>
Marthad Shingiro Umucyaba & Aidan Jonah
Canada’s descent into fascism will be spearheaded by Global Affairs Canada, headed by the genocidal maniac, Melanie Joly. Joly, as a representative of Canada’s currently governing Liberal Party, will invoke the Nazi cells and pro-colonial propaganda divisions hidden and sheltered throughout the Canadian political environment, including the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, the Estonian Central Council, and the MacDonald-Laurier Institute.
The first major indication of this fact is a Global Affairs Canada two-part interview where a senior fellow of all three aforementioned rightist organisations, Marcus Kolga, is interviewed to explain “disinformation”.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Party as a whole has also moved to rehabilitate Jaroslav Hunka, with the complicity of every other political party in Canada’s parliament. The invited witness to a Canadian parliament committee, Dr. Lubomyr Luciuk, spread Nazi apologia including a vigorous defense of the Waffen SS 14th Division (Galicia), which was explained in detail by Aidan Jonah’s recent article for The Canada Files.
So what do these shameless events indicate for Canada’s “liberal democratic” political direction? If Jaroslav Hunka does receive Dr. Luciuk’s sought after “apology” from the House of Commons, then every racialized diaspora in Canada should buckle up.
Who is Marcus Kolga?
Marcus Kolga, the project lead for the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s US government-funded Disinfowatch.org, is the “disinformation expert” invited by Global Affairs Canada to gaslight the Canadian public about Stalin, the KGB, communism, and the Russians in general. He’s infamous for multiple reasons.
One being a 2018 paper for the Macdonald-Laurier Institute that quietly spewed apologia for an event commemorating the Estonian Nazi formations that fought on the Tannenberg Line, including the 20th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Estonian), the Estonian Legion, and the 3rd Estonian SS Volunteer Brigade. Celebrated annually in NATO-controlled Estonia (page 23), the event was portrayed by Marcus Kolga as “an annual commemoration of Estonian soldiers who died on the Tannenberg Line”, which “commemorated those who resisted against the Soviet Red Army as the Germans retreated in 1944.”
Kolga made the claim that “Nazi” insignia at the celebration was the work of “Russian agents”.
Kolga is also known for being the President of the pro-Nazi collaborator coalition in Canada known as the Central Eastern European Council, which includes shameless organisations like the Ukrainian Canadian Council and the Estonian Foundation of Canada, who have both supported the infamous 2019 Black Ribbon Day vigils throughout Europe. The BRD vigils are for Nazi collaborators, but are disguised as vigils for the “Victims of Nazism and Stalinism”. The last one was led by CEEC in 2023 during Marcus Kolga’s ongoing tenure.
The CEEC, under Kolga’s leadership, was also a main force behind the infamous Toronto Ukraine memorial which contained apologia for the fascist OUN-B leader, Stepan Bandera.
Richard Sanders revealed that “In 2012, Estonia passed a law to hail Estonia’s Waffen SS as “freedom fighters.” Sanders further details how “the Estonian Central Council in Canada and the Estonian World Council praise Estonia’s government,” but “have not condemned its glorification of Nazi veterans.”
Kolga, as with the Estonian Foundation of Canada Director, continued with EFC’s partnership with the ECCC, as they stayed silent about the Estonian government honouring Nazis.
Meanwhile, in more recent times, Kolga inferred that Dimitri Lascaris should be charged for visiting Crimea and doing journalism there. He also referred to University of Ottawa professor Ivan Katchanovski’s academic journal article proving that the Ukrainian government wasn’t behind the massacre of 100 Maidan protesters as a conspiracy theory (27:00 – 27:50). Further, he denied that the Myrotvorets list was a kill list designed to intimidate critics of the Ukrainian government, a kill list which has two Canadian journalists on it.
What is “disinformation”? Marcus Kolga’s Falsehoods vs Reality
Kolga’s first task for the GAC series was to define a propaganda tactic called “disinformation” (0:22-1:57), whose origins he attributed to Stalin, Lenin, and the KGB during the cold war era. He used the Russian “dezinformatsiya” translation as its nefarious “origin”. Capitalist Jeremy Norman, another shill for NATO, claims the term “dezinformatsiya” is coined from Stalin himself, linking it to an alleged “KGB Black Propaganda” department.
Notwithstanding the fact that the NKVD did not transition into the KGB until 1956, three years after Stalin’s death in 1953, and that Lenin died in 1924, well before the USSR was officially established in 1936, even the term “disinformation” was used in American press well before even the 1917 Russian Revolution. The term was used in its original English in American papers as early as 1887, if not even earlier.
In fact, “Black Propaganda”, where scandalous statements are falsely attributed to someone else, was an early American colonial tactic against Indigenous nations. It was also a regular tactic employed by the Nazis in the areas under their colonial occupation, such as Ukraine and Denmark. The Irony is that the very act of attributing the “disinformation” and “black propaganda” tactics to the enemies of NATO are shameless acts of hypocrisy and projection, both historically and in the present day.
The Nazi apologist professor of the Royal Military College: Dr. Lubomyr Luciuk
Dr. Lubomyr Luciuk spent a good eight minutes (0:00-8:13) in the House of Commons spreading propaganda about the Waffen SS 14th Division and Ukrainian Nazi collaborators. He also highlighted the 1980s cover-up of Canada’s harbouring of Nazis as “evidence” of due diligence by the state on this topic, the most infamous example being the “Deschenes Commission”. Finally, he demanded an apology from the House of Commons to Jaroslav Hunka. That shameful moment in history was explained in detail by The Canada Files.
What should be noted though, is whom Dr. Luciuk held responsible for the “scrutiny” on Jaroslav Hunka, as he was demanding an “apology”. He noted the “Russian agents” and “Soviet agents” within the country and the “left-wing”, international condemnation of the standing ovation to Jaroslav Hunka notwithstanding. His comments were intentionally vague and broad, and meant to cast a wide net, Dr. Luciuk himself being an educator for the Royal Military College of Canada.
Liberal MP Jennifer O’Connell shamelessly continued the insinuation (8:13-8:32), by providing Dr. Luciuk with a leading question about how the backlash against the standing ovation and the controversy itself “were used by Russia”. The message is now clear from the Liberal Party. Any protestation against Nazi apologia will be “used by Russia”, so better to tow the line than raise objections, or else.
Global Affairs Canada and the NATO-Nazi propaganda playbook
The fact that many of the far-right Nazis that currently shape propaganda tactics in NATO and Global Affairs Canada today were brought in from abroad might give the false impression that “free” and “democratic” Canada was being tainted by malign “foreign” influence since the Second World War. The fact remains, however, that the Final Solution is a term originally coined by Canadian officials in the context of genocide. Even the forefather of Nazi ideology himself, Adolf Hitler, idolized and revered the American and Canadian actions towards Indigenous nations and was inspired by “Manifest Destiny” and the Western Expansion.
NATO ideology today, just like the Western imperialist ideology of antiquity, is pro-colonial, and viciously opposed to any ideology that diametrically opposes colonialism, such as communism. Fascism is a development in the modern capitalist state designed to protect against a communist uprising, but in general is designed to crush anti-colonial dissent. Therefore, what’s happening in Global Affairs Canada is simply Canada welcoming immigrants who’ve truly understood and embraced the essence of the Canadian experience and Canadian foreign policy: genocide and ethnic cleansing.
[…]
Dr Eddy Betterman
Before being chosen as the world’s leading provider of mRNA “vaccines” for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), pharmaceutical giant Pfizer amassed a lengthy rap sheet of criminal activity that much of the world does not even know exists.
In 2009, Pfizer was ordered to pay $2.3 billion in what the United States federal government announced was “the largest medical fraud settlement in U.S. history.” Basically, Pfizer had committed so many crimes pertaining to its vaccines and other pharmaceutical poisons that the litigation piled up sky-high, resulting in a massive settlement windfall.
At the heart of the $2.3 billion settlement was Pfizer’s illicit marketing of its drugs for purposes not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Pfizer was deemed to have committed “fraudulent marketing” and the company agreed to settle for these crimes at a dollar amount higher than any other in Big Pharma history.
In 2009, Pfizer pleaded “guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act,” though none of its executives, including the company’s CEO, were held criminally liable. Instead, the company paid the fee and continued on, eventually becoming the leading candidate in the Operation Warp Speed scheme of the administration of former President Donald Trump. (Related: Did you hear? New research has found that mRNA injections “could have fatal consequences” – so beware!)
While Pfizer was told back in 2009 to “cease its conduct of criminal activities,” the company did no such thing, despite entering into “an expansive corporate integrity agreement” with the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
That agreement was supposed to stop Pfizer from ever again committing the same types of crimes. And yet here we are in 2024 with untold millions of people in the U.S. alone who were harmed or killed by Pfizer’s mRNA COVID injections, which were also falsely advertised as “safe and effective.”
It should be noted that back in 2009 when Pfizer entered the agreement with the OIG, the HHS was headed up by none other than Anthony Fauci. This is presumably why Pfizer was never really held accountable for its crimes against humanity, and why Pfizer would go on to commit even more crimes against humanity during COVID.
“Pfizer has casually violated the conditions of its 2009-2013 four-year probation,” reported Global Research about what transpired.
“That ‘similar conduct’ by Pfizer has been repeated in 2020-2023 in relation to a very dangerous substance (mRNA Vaccine), on a much larger scale (compared to Bextra, Celebrex in 2009).”
In other words, what we are seeing now is what happened in 2009 but on a much larger scale.
“What is unfolding is the worldwide ‘fraudulent marketing’ of a ‘killer vaccine,’” Global Research explains. “The level of criminality is beyond description.”
What was supposed to protect people from a scary Chinese virus ended up killing people en masse, driving up excess mortality all around the world. Pfizer in its own documents admits that its mRNA injection for COVID is deadly, but the world was never told about it.
“Neither the media nor the governments of 190 countries (with some exceptions) have had the courage to inform the broader public,” reports explain. “From a legal standpoint, the Pfizer’s [sic] CEOs who violated the DOJ clauses pertaining to their 2009 probation should have been arrested.
What Pfizer is guilty of is already far worse than anything mobster Al Capone did prior to being indicted on charges of tax evasion in 1931. And we know that Hollywood has made numerous productions out of Capone’s crimes – will they do the same thing to Pfizer?
[…]
Via https://dreddymd.com/2024/04/06/pfizer-criminal-record-pharmaceutical-fraudulent-snake-oil/
By Mark Goodwin and Whitney Webb
Latin America is quietly being forced into a carbon market scheme through regional contractual obligations – enforced by the satellites of a US intelligence-linked firm – which seeks to create an inter-continental “smart grid,” erode national and local sovereignty, and link carbon-based life to the debt-based monetary system via a Bitcoin sidechain.
Sweeping across the shores of Latin America comes a scheme from some of the most predatory figures in the venture capital ecosystem of the United States. It is a brazen attempt to assert foreign influence across Latin America and threatens to reshape the very fabric of the region and the day to day lives of its people. At its core is a serpentine set of contractual obligations, held at the municipal level, cast throughout Central and South America, upheld by an intelligence-linked satellite company, and controlled by a private sector consortium of green-washed financiers aiming to turn the region’s forests into equity and carbon credits.
At the same time, it obliges local governments to spend “conservation” funds on projects that further financialize nature and aid the construction of an inter-continental “smart” grid. One of its key ambitions appears to be further entrenching the debt load of the region through the multi-lateral development banks and the dollarization of the continent from the subnational level up through carbon markets upheld by a digital ledger. What seems like a technological marvel aimed at progress and connectivity harbors a darker agenda — one that intertwines planetary surveillance, financial predation, geopolitical maneuvering, and the domination of a resource-rich continent buried in debt.
This grand design, known by the acronym GREEN+ and conceived by stalwarts of the digital dollar and debt schemes of the private sector, has quietly taken root through a web of political entanglements at the local level. Even a key figure in the Drexel Burnham Lambert junk bond scandal plays a role. Astonishingly, every capital city of Latin America has eagerly signed on, apparently unaware of the strings attached to these seemingly benign partnerships, while a majority of municipalities in the region have also made commitments with these same groups that will push them to join GREEN+, potentially in a matter of weeks. The (hopefully) well-meaning regional governments have unwittingly paved the way for a sweeping surveillance apparatus tied to American intelligence that threatens to erode privacy and civil liberties under the guise of progress and combating the climate crisis.
Upon further observation, GREEN+’s connections reveal a disturbing narrative of financial interests melding with geopolitical ambitions. The backers of the satellite company share ties with former members of the highest offices of US financial policy and regulation alongside the key architects and profiteers of private capital creation, aiming to consolidate control over monetary flows in Latin America within the redistribution of distressed government debt from the public to the private sector. As this two-part series will show, this concerted effort is not merely about surveillance – it’s a calculated move towards further dollarization, tightening the grip of corporate and technological monopolies over the economic landscape of the Americas.
The scheme’s proponents also speak of how it will significantly advance the “economic” and “regional” integration of the Americas, invoking visions of unity while obscuring the true nature of their agenda for economic domination and stronger regional governance. Their model, eerily reminiscent of the EU’s transition from a free trade union to a bureaucratic behemoth yoked to the US through the Eurodollar, sets the stage for unelected entities to enforce policies through programmable money, enabled by smart contracts on blockchains and designed to benefit the few at the expense of the many.
What materializes before us is not just a technological evolution but a quiet banker coup — one that lays the groundwork for land grabs and invasive surveillance under the guise of progress and conservation. It’s a narrative that echoes throughout history, where intelligence-linked figures and predatory financial interests converge to prey upon the Global South, leaving a trail of economic exploitation and geopolitical manipulation in their wake. What masquerades as progress for individuals and the environment at large may very well be the harbinger of a new era of subjugation and control.
[…]
Key to the program are the services provided by GREEN+ founding member Satellogic, an Argentina-founded company closely aligned with Peter Thiel’s Palantir and Elon Musk’s SpaceX that specializes in sub-meter resolution satellite surveillance. Satellogic, a contractor to the US government and whose founders were also previously contactors for the US’ DHS, NSA and DARPA, will provide surveillance data of the entire world’s “protected areas” to GREEN+’s governing coalition, composed of the NGOs CC35, the Global Footprint Network, The Energy Coalition and other “respected stakeholders.”
According to the press release that details Satellogic’s alliance with GREEN+, the satellite surveillance data “will enable individuals, organizations, and global markets to accurately monitor the compliance of signatory jurisdictions to avoid deforestation.” However, other information in the press release reveals that forests will actually be monitored for the purpose of generating “credible” carbon credits to be traded on exchanges by GREEN+ on behalf of subnational governments. The press release also states that the GREEN+ alliance with Satellogic will “advance the future measurement of energy emissions in the most populated areas of the planet,” i.e. the surveillance of carbon emissions from space. Satellogic launched some GREEN+-affiliated satellites in 2022 as part of its pilot and is due to launch the remainder this April during Miami Climate Week. Satellogic’s past and upcoming launches of GREEN+ satellites were/will be conducted in collaboration with Elon Musk’s SpaceX, also a contractor to the US military and US intelligence agencies.
[…]
Via https://unlimitedhangout.com/2024/04/investigative-reports/debt-from-above-the-carbon-credit-coup/
Episode 2 Prehistoric Egypt
The History of Ancient Egypt
Professor Robert Brier
Film Review
Brier defines prehistory as time before writing. According to archeologists, Egypt first acquired writing around 3200 BC. The scientific study of prehistoric Egypt began around 1859 when archeologists discovered the first stone tools.
Paleolithic 700,000 BC
The first pre-humans migrated to Egypt from southern Africa around 700,000 BC, at a time when Egypt was lush Savannah. They had speech and used stone axe heads and fire. The axe head was the only tool found in Egypt until the Neanderthals arrived in Egypt between 70,000 and 43,000 BC. The latter buried their dead, cared for the sick and made specialized tools such as scrapers (to prepare hides as clothing).
Around 43,000 BC modern man arrived to replace the Neanderthals. They are fish and molluscs and lived in clans of 25-30 people. Their life expectancy was 30 years, and they made tools from obsidian, which forms a sharper edge than flint. New tools included a sickle to harvest crops (which were intensively cared for but not planted) and a bow and arrow, making tiny specialized arrowheads for hunting birds.
Mesolithic 10,000 – 5,000 BC
This period saw the development of grinding stones to grind grain and cosmetics (used for religious and aesthetic purposes).
Neolithic 5,000 BC to present
From 5,000 BC on, there is clear evidence people were growing grain in Egypt and making pots to cook it and make beer. A total population of 2,000 were living in communities of 150, with clear evidence of a division of labor that included crafts people as well as farmers. Upper and Lower Egypt each has their own king and people start burying their dead in sand pits. Burying bodies in dry sands leads to natural mummification. This may have inspired the Egyptian science of mummification.
There’s early evidence of art, with cosmetic grinding plates carved in animal shapes, decorated pots and small female figurines.
The date of these artifacts is mainly confirmed via carbon 14 dating* or pollen dating (comparing the pollen zones in different rock layers**)
*Carbon 14, present in all living things, begins breaking down the moment they die. Carbon 14 has a haf-life of 5,700 years.
**Non-living objects can sometimes be dated by Carbon 14 dating of pollen found in the same rock layer.
Film can be viewed free with a library card on Kanopy.
https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/1492791/1492795
David Miller
The FBI and the CIA know that the Zionist entity is the only entity with really significant spy networks in the US, but they are either unwilling or unable to investigate Israeli espionage networks operating freely across the country.
Listen to Nancy Pelosi at the end of January this year: “What we have to do is to try and stop the suffering in Gaza. This is about women and children, people who don’t have a place to go. So let’s address that. But for them to call for a ceasefire is Mr Putin’s message… Make no mistake. This is directly connected to what he would like to see.”
“I think some of these protestors are spontaneous and organic and sincere. Some, I think, are connected to Russia and I say that having looked at this for a long time.”
What is going on here? These are Zionist talking points. As the Palestinians say – every Zionist accusation is a confession. In reality, the only entity with really significant spy networks in the US is the Zionist entity.
The FBI and the CIA know this, but they are either unwilling or unable to investigate Israeli espionage networks operating freely in universities, businesses, and government facilities across the United States.
One well-known spy network is the Anti-Defamation League. Created in 1913, it has been spying on Arab Americans since before the creation of the Zionist entity. Throughout this period, the ADL has also closely collaborated with the FBI. Today, the ADL is doing more than attempting to repress free speech on Palestine; it is attempting to have ordinary pro-Palestine activism declared to be “terrorism”.
What they are trying to do is to use a vaguely worded law, which they lobbied for, to entrap Palestine solidarity activism as falling under a legal definition of material support for “terrorism”.
In late October, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and another Zionist group published an open letter urging universities to investigate Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) under the material support statute introduced in 1996.
In addition to accusing SJP of supporting Hamas, they were also, the ADL claimed, “voicing an increasingly radical call for confronting and ‘dismantling’ Zionism on U.S. college campuses.”
Material support for “terrorism” can include giving advice or other speech so long as it is at the behest or in coordination with the “terrorist” group.
But there is also an attempt by the ADL and its allies to claim that routine pro-Palestine activism should be legally understood as support for “terrorism”. They are working to blur the line between independent advocacy, which is allowed, and coordination, which could be terrorism.
It is of little comfort that there is no public evidence any SJP student members coordinated with Hamas or any other armed group. The case law construing the material support statute’s punishment of advocacy is so underdeveloped that there is considerable room for investigative overreach by the FBI.
The line between independent advocacy and material support as speech in coordination with a listed “terrorist” group “remains unelaborated”.
Of course, the ADL is one of the few non-government groups that trains federal law enforcement on counterterrorism. It can use the gap to advance its overreaching conception of the material support statute.
To fight back, all campus groups and university management need to declare that no independent campus speech, no matter how incendiary, serves as a legitimate basis for a material support investigation.
Another group, the Israel on Campus Coalition has been spying on pro-Palestine students for years.
It is linked to Israeli intelligence and strategically targets individual students or faculty on campus in order the “crush” the movement.
ICC was created by Hillel International and the Lynn Schusterman Family Foundation in 2002 to promote “Israel” advocacy on campus.
The money came from the business Charles who at that stage had a “major interest in Bank Hapoalim, Israel’s largest bank, and has extensive interests in oil, real estate, banking and shipping in the US.”
Today, Hillel and the ICC maintain close organizational ties. The ICC continues to provide Hillel professionals with “Israel” advocacy training and support.
Hillel has taken on a more extreme form of Zionism in recent years, sparking a rebellion by some student members who are critical of some aspects of Zionism.
They called their challenge Open Hillel, which says it “promotes pluralism and open discourse on Israel-Palestine in Jewish communities on campus and beyond. We aim to eliminate Hillel International’s Standards of Partnership for Israel Activities, which exclude individuals and groups from the Jewish community on campus on the basis of their views on Israel.” But even calling for a debate on Zionism was too much for the ICC, which engaged in spying on the Jewish student group.
The spy operation is closely co-ordinated with the Zionist regime as was revealed by The Lobby USA.
Here is Lila Greenberg, formerly of AIPAC:
“The ICC pools resources from all of the campus organizations. So that they’re tapped in on all angles.”
According to Jacob Baime, currently the ICC’s chief executive officer, “We built up this massive national political campaign to crush [pro-Palestine activism].”
“It’s modeled on General Stanley McCrystal’s counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq. We’ve copied a lot from that strategy … And one of the pieces was this Operations and Intelligence Brief.”
This is then passed on to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs.
Baime confirmed that ICC “coordinates with” and “communicates with” the Ministry.
Once collected, data from the ICC’s web of campus spies and high-tech Israeli surveillance equipment then flow to the Anti-Defamation League.
The ADL, is in itself closely in touch with Zionist intelligence agencies but also uses the data to weaponize anti-Semitism in its reports on BDS and Palestine activism.
Among its other activities, the ICC offered to pay any pro-“Israel” student $250 to attend the sparsely attended damp squib of the March for Israel in November 2023 in Washington DC.
Make no mistake, the Zionist regime has agents on campus all over the United States. Everyone must be removed.
[…]
Zero Hedge
People may be putting plastic into recycling bins, but most of it generally ends up in landfills or incinerated.
Yet the demand for more plastic production continues—at a growing cost to human and environmental health—because of the belief that recycling offsets the associated waste and risks. A new report by the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) alleges that the plastics industry knowingly caused the current plastic waste crisis.
The nonprofit’s report claims that as the plastics industry faced mounting concerns over plastics being incinerated and piling up in landfills, they promoted recycling as a viable solution while dismissing it internally as impractical.
“They knew since the 1970s that plastic recycling was not going to be scalable and effective in tackling the plastic waste crisis,” Melissa Valliant, communications director of Beyond Plastics, a nonprofit aiming to reduce single-use plastic use and production, explained to The Epoch Times.
The report asserts that the efforts to sell the false promise of plastic recycling were to avoid restrictive regulations and potential product bans.
According to the report, one problem with plastic recycling is that it is not technically or economically feasible at scale. Unlike glass and metal, plastic cannot be repeatedly recycled without quickly degrading in quality. Most recyclable plastics can typically only be recycled once. As a result, most recycled plastic eventually ends up in landfills, even if it goes through an additional use cycle as another product.
Between the 1970s and 2015, 91 percent of plastic was either landfilled, burned, or leaked into the environment, according to a global analysis published in Science Advances. Another recent report published by Beyond Plastics estimated that less than 6 percent of plastic in the United States is successfully recycled.
These figures are based on all plastic waste generated, which includes plastics not made to be recycled and those thrown away. As for the plastic that makes it to a recycling center, there isn’t an official nationwide estimate of what percent of those plastics get recycled in the end.
However, certain types of plastic containers—soda and water bottles (PET 1) and milk jugs (HDPE 2), in particular—are more likely to be recycled.
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), an international organization focused on improving public policies, says only 9 percent of plastic collected for recycling worldwide in 2019 was actually recycled; 50 percent went into landfills, and 22 percent was mismanaged.
Another challenge is that there are too many different types of plastics. Recyclable plastics cannot be recycled with plastics made of different chemical compositions, and sorting the waste is infeasible.
The plastics industry’s actions “effectively protected and expanded plastic markets,” the CCI report states, “while stalling legislative or regulatory action that would meaningfully address plastic waste and pollution.”
The report, highlighting industry communications and documents, details how, beginning in the 1950s, the plastics industry’s profits soared with single-use disposable plastics, and this “shift to disposables” created the waste problem.
In response, the industry promoted landfilling and incineration. However, by the 1980s, the plastics industry faced growing backlash and legislation to limit the sale of single-use plastics because of pollution and its environmental impact.
The industry “launched multimillion-dollar ad and PR campaigns to convince the public consumer that this was a consumer problem; just put the right things in the bin, and all the plastic pollution would go away,” said Ms. Valliant.
Plastic production then skyrocketed, from approximately 2 million tons of plastic in the 1950s to nearly 460 million tons in 2019, and continues to rise.
The CCI report cites a 1986 report by Vinyl Institute, a trade association, that “recycling cannot be considered a permanent solid waste solution [to plastics], as it merely prolongs the time until an item is disposed of.”
Eight years later, an Exxon employee warned the American Plastics Council staffers that they did not “want paper floating around” saying they could not meet recycling goals since the issue was “HIGHLY SENSITIVE POLITICALLY.”
The report’s authors aim to hold fossil fuel and other petrochemical companies accountable by pointing out that these admissions contradict decades of messaging promoting recycling.
Twenty petrochemical companies, including major oil and gas companies such as ExxonMobil, manufacture half of the world’s single-use plastics, according to the CCI.
In response to the CCI report, the Plastics Industry Association characterized the report as “political attacks” and that it is based on “outdated information and false claims.”
“This report was created by an activist, anti-recycling organization and disregards the incredible investments in recycling technologies made by our industry,” Matt Seaholm, president and chief executive officer of the Plastics Industry Association, said in the press statement.
Similarly, in a statement published by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Ross Eisenberg, the president of America’s Plastic Makers, called the report flawed, saying it “cites outdated, decades-old technologies, and works against our goals to be more sustainable by mischaracterizing the industry and the state of today’s recycling technologies.” He also pointed to the benefits of plastics and how they can be reused to meet different needs.
“We’ve set an ambitious goal for all US plastic packaging to be reused, recycled, recovered by 2040, and we are working towards this goal by supporting systems and technologies that remake new plastics from used plastics,” he shared.
But many wonder: Even if the ACC’s 2040 goal is met, does it solve the wide-ranging issues linked to plastics?
“Possibly more concerning than the environmental impacts are the health impacts of plastics on the human body,” said Ms. Valliant, who recommends consumers focus on efforts to reduce, reuse, recycle, and, when possible, refuse single-use plastic.
The management of plastics “needs to be addressed at a higher level than the individual,” Mathew Campen, a toxicologist from the University of New Mexico, told The Epoch Times.
When plastic is recycled improperly, it ends up not only in landfills and water sources but also in our soil, air, and even our bodies. Every day, we eat, drink, and inhale tiny bits of plastic because plastic doesn’t biodegrade over time—it simply breaks down into ever-smaller particles.
Mr. Campen, who investigates the impact of environmental toxicants on human health, is concerned about the increasing amount of plastics, specifically microplastics, in the environment and the potential effects.
“The truth is, governments and industry need to figure out a path to actually take care of this waste and not have it show up in our bodies,” he added.
[…]
Via https://www.zerohedge.com/political/recycling-bin-landfill-major-flaw-plastic-recycling
Eric Peters Auto
The Biden Thing’s secretary of transportation – where in the Constitution does it state the federal government shall have the power to micromanage our comings and goings? – said the other day that people who haven’t given up their cars with engines for devices with a battery are similar to people back in the early 2000s who stubbornly refused to embrace the cell phone future.
Words to that effect.
He actually said more than just that. The money quote is as follows:
“The automotive sector is moving toward EVs, and we can’t pretend otherwise. Sometimes when these debates happen, I feel like it’s the early 2000s and I’m talking to some people who think that we can just have landline phones forever.”
Observe the passive voice masking-over the force behind all of this. The automotive sector is not “moving toward EVs.” It is being pushed toward EVs. He then equates not wanting to be pushed to buy something unwanted as being stupid. There is contempt – and menace – in this statement. 
The irony of it is also lost on the Biden Thing’s secretary of transportation. Most people did get cell phones because – here it comes! – they offered advantages over land lines. These included more convenience and lower costs overall, if you bought a basic model (these currently can be bought for about $50 and a cheap monthly plan with unlimited service can be purchased for about $35). They also could do more things than just a phone, as everyone knows.
People bought them for the same reason most people prefer hamburgers made of beef rather than Impossible Burgers made of . . . well, whatever they make them out of.
It wasn’t necessary for the government to issue a slew of regulations aimed at making land line phones more expensive to manufacture – in order to discourage their use and make cell phones seem less expensive. There was no need to dangle tax kickbacks in the faces of people to get them to make the switch. People just made the switch. Because it made sense to the people who chose to buy cell phones.
That the Biden Thing’s secretary of transportation does not understand this relationship tells us a great deal about the qualifications of this man to be the secretary of transportation.
Or even just a secretary.
He holds the office – and sway over transportation – not because he is competent and well-intended (and never mind that business almost no one ever brings up about where in the Constitution this office is empowered with legitimate authority to even exist) but because he is willing to do whatever is required to push the car-buying public into battery powered devices that are not what the public wants. If that were not so, it would not be necessary to push them. QED.
[…]
Via https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2024/04/04/the-future-of-transportation-in-our-democracy/
