SD Cop Sentenced to Only 1 Year in Jail for Murdering White Man, Shot to Death as He Fled. Arrested b/c Dog Wasn't On Leash [all laws are backed by the Threat of Violence in System Based on Coercion]

From [HERE] A former San Diego County sheriff’s deputy who shot and killed a man who was running from authorities outside the downtown jail nearly two years ago was sentenced Monday to three years of probation and one year in jail.

Aaron Russell, 25, pleaded guilty last month to voluntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of Nicholas Bils, 36.

According to the NYT, Mr. Bils was putting golf balls at a San Diego park on May 1, 2020, in a game of fetch with his dog when park rangers approached him and told him that his dog could not be off its leash and that the park was closed because of the coronavirus, Mr. Iredale has said.

Park rangers told Ms. Bils that her son had swung a golf club at rangers and then fled, her lawyers said. The rangers caught him about a mile away and arrested him on suspicion of assault with a deadly weapon. On the way to a county jail, Mr. Bils slipped his left hand out of a handcuff and ran out of the car, prosecutors said. When it stopped in front of the downtown jail. He ran north on Front Street at B Street. Mr. Russell, who was in uniform, was standing at a nearby intersection and saw the escape, prosecutors said, adding that he fired five shots, striking Mr. Bils four times.

Another sheriff’s deputy who had witnessed the escape testified that he had planned to chase and tackle Mr. Bils, the district attorney’s statement said.

“He testified he saw no need for any type of other force and did not feel anyone in the area was in immediate danger,” the statement said.

San Diego County Superior Court Judge Francis Devaney issued the sentence during a hearing that lasted most of the morning. Under state law, the judge had the option of placing Russell on probation, with or without time in local custody, or sentencing him to prison.

The prosecutor, Deputy Dist. Atty. Stephen Marquardt, had sought a six-year term behind bars.

When choosing probation, the judge ordered a three-year suspended sentence, meaning that if Russell were to violate the terms of probation, he could be sent to prison.

The former deputy initially had been charged with murder, making him the first law enforcement officer in California to be charged as such since the state raised the standard two years ago for when peace officers can use deadly force.

Such force is permissible only when “necessary,” when a life is in imminent danger and nonlethal methods are not available, the law states. Previously, deadly force had been allowable when “reasonable.”

According to the San Diego County district attorney’s office, Russell admitted in the plea agreement he entered Jan. 7 that he “unreasonably believed that I or someone else was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury” when he saw Bils running from the jail.

“I actually but unreasonably believed that the immediate use of deadly force was necessary to defend against the danger. I, therefore, acting alone, personally used my department-issued firearm to shoot Nicholas Bils, ending his life,” Russell admitted in the agreement.

Bils’ mother, Kathleen Bils, has sued Russell and the county in federal court, alleging excessive force and wrongful death.

When SF Police Encountered Dacari Spiers he was Hugging His Girlfriend, Not Committing a Crime. Nevertheless, a White Cop Struck the Black Man 8X w/Baton and Broke His Leg. Cop's Trial Underway

From [HERE ]Within seconds of arriving to a domestic violence call in San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf, police Officer Terrance Stangel struck Dacari Spiers eight times with a baton -– a beating that left Spiers with a broken wrist and leg.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed on a handful of the facts in the now-infamous use-of-force case, but laid out their conflicting arguments about whether Stangel acted excessively, during opening statements Monday in the case against the officer. 

The trial is the first prosecution against an officer for on-duty use-of-force by District Attorney Chesa Boudin – and possibly the first in city history – and has already exploded into a contentious political conflict between the city’s chief of police and the Boudin’s office.

But as the warring sides and their respective supporters dig in – Judge Teresa Caffese was adamant that things would proceed in court. Recent allegations of misconduct by an investigator in the district attorney’s office, Caffese said, did not affect Stangel’s due process. 

Assistant District Attorney Hans Moore, outlined his case to the jury – directing them to focus on the Stangel’s conduct rather than a barrage of facts outside of the beating. 

"This is a trial about officer Terrance Stangel and his excessive use of force to detain Mr. Decari Spiers," he said. "That’s all this trial is about."

Moore addressed domestic violence accusations the defense would soon bring up, saying Spiers was engaged in a "loving embrace" with his girlfriend when police arrived. Moore said Stangel showed up out of nowhere and began a volley of baton blows before he had time to react.

Spiers’ girlfriend even told officers at the scene that Spiers never touched her, according to body worn camera video played at trial.

But Stangel’s attorney, Nicole Pifari, pushed back on the prosecution’s narrative. She said the officers were responding to multiple 911 calls reporting Spiers was violently choking his girlfriend. (huh? cops don’t answer 911 calls, they get radio runs from dispatch)

She said Spiers resisted and even shoved Stangel’s partner before he used his baton.

"Stangel’s use-of-force was calculated, measured, reasonable and lawful," Pifari said.

But even as the trial was underway inside the San Francisco Hall of Justice, a conflict between Chief Bill Scott and Boudin continued to simmer.

Scott last week announced that he was pulling out of an agreement that gave the district attorney’s office authority as the lead investigator in officer use-of-force cases.

The agreement – or memorandum of understanding – was created by the chief and former District Attorney George Gascon following a number of controversial police killings in San Francisco, including the 2015 killing of Mario Woods. 

Scott cited recent testimony from an investigator in the district attorney’s office, who said she was pressured to remove exculpatory evidence from Stangel’s arrest warrant. 

Boudin on Thursday denied any wrongdoing and accused the chief of politicizing the prosecution of Stagel. Boudin is facing a recall in June. The chief has been under increasing pressure from his own rank-and-file, which scheduled a "no confidence" vote that it later canceled after the chief’s announcement. 

"I can assure you that when my office – my team – makes mistakes that we own them," Boudin said. "And I can tell you that we did not make mistakes under my leadership in this case."

On Monday, police spokesman Matt Dorsey said the department had reached out to the state Department of Justice, pledging its commitment to reform and asking the office to take over as lead investigator in police use-of-force cases. 

Dorsey questioned the integrity of the district attorney’s Independent Investigations Bureau following the accusations from investigator Magen Hayashi, which he called "essentially a whistleblower allegation."

"Based on sworn testimony and evidence, however, it is clear to the chief of police — as it should be to any reasonable observer — that the San Francisco District Attorney’s office has breached its agreement and betrayed a public trust both our departments owe to the San Franciscans we serve," Dorsey said.

Chicago Cops Don't Stop/Solve Murders, They Fuck w/Black Folks: Video Shows Cops Pistol-Whip a Black Man While Threatening His Life. COPA Recommended Termination but Public Rulers are Unfireable

From [HERE] A group of Chicago police officers involved in a brutal 2017 arrest are still working for the department nearly five years later, despite the Civilian Office of Police Accountability (COPA) recommending three of them be fired in March 2021. 

During the arrest, one officer pistol-whipped a man until he was apparently unconscious while another officer held him to the ground. 

The Reader obtained surveillance video of the arrest via a public-records request to COPA. The video shows CPD officers Chavez Siler and Michael Benamon struggling with a man they were attempting to arrest for possessing a handgun. Multiple times during the arrest, Siler held his own service weapon to the man’s head and repeatedly struck him in the head with it. Siler also inadvertently pointed his gun at other officers during the struggle. Siler continued to hold his gun to the man’s head and pistol-whip him even after he was lying on the floor with Benamon kneeling on him. 

Following a lengthy investigation, COPA recommended that Siler and two other officers involved in the arrest be fired. They haven’t been. 

In the interest of fully informing the public about an incident involving officers who are still employed by the police department, the Reader is publishing an edited version of the surveillance footage. 

Warning to readers: The video is graphic and depicts a violent assault. 

According to documents obtained from CPD via a FOIA request, on March 15, 2017, officer Siler and his partner, Michael Benamon, approached a man who had a gun concealed in his waistband at a mini-mart in Humboldt Park. Siler grabbed the man’s wrists, and Benamon wrapped his arms around the man from behind and attempted to pull the gun from his pants.

The man pulled away from the officers’ grasp, and they all stumbled into another aisle as the cops attempted unsuccessfully to wrestle him to the ground. As the man stood back up, Siler pulled his own gun and “placed it directly against [the man’s] head,” according to the COPA report. In the video, Siler can be seen holding his gun to the man’s head and repeatedly pistol-whipping him. Benamon also hit the man with a closed fist in the back as the officers tried to restrain him. 

Still holding his gun to the man’s head, Siler shouted at him to put his hands in the air. The man already had one hand in the air, and Benamon was holding his other hand. The man replied that he had his hand up. 

At one point, the man was able to raise both hands. Benamon grabbed the man’s gun and said “I got it,” then handed it off to officer Corey Boone, who had just entered the mini-mart. Siler and Benamon wrestled the man to the floor in the rear of the shop, and Benamon kneeled on his back. 

Siler continued to pistol-whip the man in the head while he was on the floor and place the barrel of his gun against his head. He also told his fellow officers to “tase him in the face.” Boone then tased the man twice in the back. 

The assault lasted nearly five minutes. It stopped only when the man was apparently unconscious, according to the COPA report. After he came to, officers helped him stand with difficulty and walked him out of the mini-mart. 

In the surveillance video, a pool of blood is visible on the floor where the man’s head had lain.

The Independent Police Review Authority opened an investigation of the incident in 2017, and  handed it off to COPA in September of that year. It took COPA another two and a half years to complete the investigation. 

On March 30, 2021, COPA found Siler used excessive force during the arrest. Holding his gun to the man’s head, pistol-whipping him, and threatening to shoot him in the head, the report states, constituted a “repeated application of deadly force . . . wholly out of line with reasonableness.” 

Siler’s use of excessive force during the arrest was in violation of CPD policies and procedures, COPA found. 


“Such actions are inconsistent with Department training and directives and ultimately bring significant discredit to the Department,” the report states. “Officer Silar’s [sic] decision making during the incident and his subsequent justification for his actions render him unfit to serve as an officer.”

On March 30, 2021, COPA recommended the police department fire Siler, as well as officers Boone and Robert Clark, who were involved in the arrest and later were found to have lied or refused to cooperate with investigators. 

The police department has thus far not fired any of them. All three were relieved of police powers in July 2021 and are on administrative duty, according to a CPD spokesperson. 

COPA recommended a 60-day suspension for Benamon for punching the man in the back as he attempted to flee, which is prohibited by CPD policy. Benamon remains on active duty.

The agency also recommended 180-day suspensions for two supervisors, Sergeant Kevin Leahy and Lieutenant Wilfredo Roman, for approving “multiple deficient reports” in which the officers involved omitted or obfuscated key details of the incident. 

Leahy remains on active duty. Roman was relieved of police powers and assigned to CPD’s alternate response section in July 2021. In September, Roman was arrested and charged with aggravated battery for allegedly shoving a flashlight between the buttocks of a teenager during a February 2021 arrest.

In November 2021, Siler was filmed punching a 17-year-old student at George Westinghouse College Prep, a public high school in Garfield Park. Records the Reader obtained from CPS show Siler had worked there as a part-time security guard since 2010. After that incident, he was suspended from the school with pay for one week before being suspended without pay on November 24, apparently indefinitely.

Since he joined the department in 2007, Siler has been the subject of at least nine complaints, including one in which he drew his service weapon while off-duty during an argument with a woman at a Church’s Chicken. 

The disciplinary case stemming from the pistol-whipping is still pending, according to the CPD spokesperson.

Black Man Hadn't Done Anything Wrong or Illegal, but He Disobeyed Authority So White Ft Myers Cops Attacked Him in 7-11 and Falsely Detained Him. Obedient Jurors Deny Liability, Uphold Conduct by Cops

The jury has reached a verdict in a federal use of force trial against the Fort Myers Police Department.

The jurors reached a favorable verdict for two officers sued by Holley Jones after a 2018 encounter led to him getting tasered. The verdict came after close to three hours of deliberations. The incident happened at a 7-Eleven in Lee County in 2018. It was captured on the officers’ bodycams. Jones filed a lawsuit against officers Andrew Barlow and Christian Robles. [MORE] and [MORE]

Jones was inside a Fort Myers 7-Eleven at 11501 State Road 82 in Lehigh Acres on April 15, when he was approached by officers, James Barlow, and Christopher Robles, who told Jones that they wanted to speak with him outside, according to the lawsuit.

In police body camera footage of the incident, Jones is seen extending his hand to shake the officer’s hand in an attempt to learn his name, but Robles repeatedly said “don’t touch me”.

Officer Robles repeated his request for Jones to step outside and told him not to touch him, despite not being touched by Jones previously, the report claims.

The officers asked a store clerk if she wanted Jones to leave.  She said no, and that he had done nothing wrong. No probable cause existed at the time of the stop (when he was not free to go) because no crime had been committed and Jones was not identified as a suspect to a non-existent crime.

Jones, however did disobey authority - which is the “only crime-all others are offshoots.” - Dr. Blynd

Adding to It's Racist Legacy, Employees at JP Morgan Chase Bank Couldn't Believe a Black Woman was a Doctor So They Refused to Cash Her Check - Lawsuit Filed

FUCK YALL. IN 2004 JP MORGAN CHASE ADMITTED THAT IT PROFITED FROM THE ENSLAVEMENT OF BLACKS. IT ACKNOWLEDGED OWNING 13,000 SLAVES. COO JAMIE DIMON [RACIST SUSPECT IN PHOTO] SAID J.P. MORGAN WAS SORRY FOR CONTRIBUTING TO A "BRUTAL AND UNJUST INSTITUTION" AND OUTLINED HOW IT PLANNED TO REPAIR THE DAMAGE. [MORE]

WELLS FARGO & JP MORGAN ARE THE CHIEF FINANCIERS OF PRIVATE PRISON COMPANIES [CORECIVIC & GEOGROUP] PROFITING OFF THE INCARCERATION OF NON-WHITE IMMIGRANTS [MORE]

JPMORGAN CHASE & CO RARELY LENDS MONEY TO BLACK PEOPLE. [MORE] AND HAS CHARGED THEM MORE FOR CAR LOANS. [MORE]

JP MORGAN ALSO GOT PAID EXPLOITING INMATES RELEASED FROM PRISON USING THEIR DEBIT CARDS/ [MORE]

From [HERE] A Black doctor from Houston has accused JPMorgan Chase Bank of racial discrimination, according to a federal lawsuit. NBC News reported that Dr. Malika Mitchell-Stewart, who Valley Oaks Medical Group recently employed after completing her residency, rejoiced with excitement when she received her first check from the company worth a whopping $16,780.16.

However, NBC News reported that Mitchell-Stewart’s big moment quickly turned sour when staff members at the bank’s First Colony Branch in Sugar Land failed to help her deposit the big signing bonus. In the suit, the 34-year-old medical official claimed that the bank’s employees accused her of her fraud and questioned her employment as a doctor.

“Dr. Mitchell-Stewart certainly did not expect that when she attempted to open a bank account with Chase and proudly deposit her first check as a new physician,” the suit read. “What Dr. Mitchell-Stewart was reminded of on this day was that she is a black woman attempting to deposit $16,000 in a predominantly white affluent suburb. … Solely because of her race, Dr. Mitchell-Stewart was discriminated against by members of Chase’s banking staff and denied services provided to non-African American customers of Chase.”

In a statement to ABC News 13, Mitchell-Stewart claimed that the humiliating moment made her feel like “a criminal.”

“It was an unfortunate situation. They took my special moment away… I’ve never done anything wrong,” she said.

The young doctor further explained that she cooperated with the bank staff’s egregious demands by calling Valley Oaks Medical Group to verify her medical credentials in addition to presenting a business card, but even that was not enough.

“In order to get Texas medical license or a medical license at all, you have to have a clean record,” Mitchell-Stewart added. “You have to go to school for so many years, and they just didn’t care. They didn’t respect that. They didn’t respect my credentials.”

Chase issued a statement shortly after the lawsuit made headlines.

“We take this matter very seriously and are investigating the situation,” the company wrote. “We have reached out to Dr. Mitchell-Stewart to better understand what happened and apologize for her experience.”

While it’s a step in the right direction, Mitchell-Stewart’s attorney, Justin Moore, said the incident sheds light on the banking industry’s long history of discrimination against Black people.

“For a black female physician to be treated this way by Chase is a devastating reminder that no matter how hard we try and how far we climb, major corporations in this country still view us as if we are nothing,” Moore told NBC News. “Courageously, Dr. Mitchell-Stewart decided to not let Chase treat her like a criminal because she is Black and is seeking to fight back. … We all should be inspired by her resolve and willingness to fight back.”

Over the last decade, a few other Black bankers have fought back against racial discrimination. In December 2021, a Black man named Joe Morrow from Minneapolis reached a quiet settlement with the U.S. Bank after a branch manager accused him of trying to cash a fraudulent check.

During the incident in October 2020, Morrow attempted to cash a $900 check from his company United Natural Foods. Still, the transaction quickly landed him in handcuffs when the branch manager failed to verify his employment with the company and called the police instead.

According to the Star Tribune, the bank manager told authorities that he had allegedly received three fraudulent checks from the same employer that week. While awaiting confirmation, police placed Morrow in handcuffs. One officer claimed that the young man “flexed” at him “in a threatening manner.”

The settlement amount was never disclosed as a part of Morrow and U.S. Bank’s agreement. Still, the Minneapolis-based company said in a statement that they were committed to reviewing their employee training guidelines, which reportedly include “unconscious bias training.”

“We will continue to listen and learn from the community as we expand our efforts to advance the cause of equality for all,” Andy Cecere, U.S. Bancorp’s chief executive officer, told The Star Tribune. In May 2020, the company pledged to donate more than $100 million a year to close the racial wealth gapa separate report from the outlet noted

Similarly, in 2019, the horrors of banking while Black was highlighted from within the racist inner workings of the industry’s system when a former Black financial advisor named Ricardo Peters and his client, NFL star Jimmy Kennedy, shared recordings of their interactions with bank employees, highlighting some of the discrimination they faced.

The St. Louis Rams alum, who amassed nearly $13 million during his career, claimed that he was given “the runaround” on more than one occasion after he tried to become “a private client,” the New York Times reported in their article titled, “This Is What Racism Sounds Like in the Banking Industry.” Kennedy’s confusion was quickly cleared up upon meeting his new advisor at one of the bank’s locations in Arizona.

“You’re bigger than the average person, period. And you’re also an African-American,” the employee explained in the NFL player’s audio recording of their conversation. “We’re in Arizona. I don’t have to tell you about what the demographics are in Arizona. They don’t see people like you a lot.”

The 6-foot-4-inch athlete initially sought help from the branch’s star financial advisor Peters, but Kennedy was shocked when he discovered why he was being assigned a new financial advisor. Peter’s claimed in the scathing piece that higher-ups at the company intentionally blocked him from taking on elite clients as he climbed up the ranks in his position.

In one incident, a manager accused him of stealing customers’ personal files. Although the situation was rectified, his boss told him that he “needed to be more cognizant of how his colleagues perceived him.”

Peters’ questionable manager later showed his true colors when the bank official complained that another financial advisor was stealing a prospective client. A Black woman who had previously been on section-8 was awarded a large sum from a wrongful death suit following her son’s passing.

“You’re not investing a dime for this lady,” he said, per Peter’s audio recording. He claimed that he knew from experience that she would quickly burn through the money. “It happens every single time…This is not money she respects,” he added. “She didn’t earn it.”

After being fired from Chase without warning, Peters opened up his own investment firm, but because of his swift termination, all of his clients’ financial transactions were put on hold, including Kennedy, who had nearly $92,000 frozen in limbo during the tough period.

The NFL star’s new advisor claimed that the bank was intimidated by his size and afraid to notify him that his application to become a private client had been denied.

“You sit in front of him. You’re like three times his size — you feel what I’m saying? — he already probably has his perception of how these interactions could go,” the employee explained, advising him not to notify the bank’s racist manager.

Kennedy later filed a discrimination lawsuit against the branch, but the company denied the claims.

“We found no evidence to substantiate your allegations,” Chase wrote in a letter.

COVID Cases Inflated for Profit: ‘The Guy Went in for Multiple Gunshot Wounds and he was Coded as COVID’

Jeanne Stagg, a whistleblower who worked in Inpatient Utilization Management, approached Project Veritas after seeing cases coded as COVID-19 that she says should not have COVID-19 listed as the “primary diagnosis.”

  • Stagg: “I’ve tried to raise awareness to my leadership and even with the Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Department, and it just kind of fell on deaf ears.”

  • The Chief Medical Officer for United Healthcare of Louisiana (Medicaid) opined in a recorded phone conversation that the Medicaid rate for reimbursement of COVID-19 patients, which is faster and significantly higher, could be the motivation for the improper “primary diagnosis” codes.

  • “Oh, yes. Yeah. I would think that there’s some motivation that it’s driving higher rates of reimbursement or quicker reimbursement, or something, because otherwise there’s no reason to put, you know, something like that as a leading diagnosis in an asymptom-- basically asymptomatic patients,” said Dr. Morial, Chief Medical Officer for United Healthcare of Louisiana.

  • The Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals has suspended utilization review which is the process of determining whether health care is medically necessary for a patient or an insured individual. The whistleblower says this could be a major contributing factor to spikes in COVID numbers, which then influence public health decisions. [MORE]

All COVID Shots Remain Experimental: The Moderna Vax was Granted FDA Approval but Remains UNAVAILABLE and “Legally Distinct" from Their Emergency Use Vax, which is the Only One Offered, same w/Pfizer

From [HERE] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Monday granted full approval of Moderna’s Spikevax COVID vaccine for people 18 and older.

Similar to the agency’s licensing last year of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine, the approval raised a number of legal questions related to mandates and product availability.

Spikevax is a two-dose primary series, approved also for administration as part of a heterologous (“mix and match”) single booster dose for individuals who previously completed their original series of vaccinations with the Pfizer or Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines.

According to the FDA, Spikevax “has the same formulation as the [Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)] Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and … can be used interchangeably with the EUA Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series.”

However, in its approval letter, the FDA said Spikevax is “legally distinct” from the Moderna EUA vaccine:

“The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness.”

The FDA made the same distinction between the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine and the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, which the agency fully licensed in August, 2021, a move that raised questionsabout liability and the legality of vaccine mandates.

After Monday’s announcement, media outlets were quick to reassure the public the two Moderna vaccines are the same and that this was just a marketing ploy, where Moderna simply “rebranded” what is otherwise the same vaccine.

No ‘fully licensed’ COVID vaccine actually available

While Moderna’s Spikevax vaccine is now fully licensed, the original Moderna vaccine will remain under EUA. Indeed, the FDA on Jan. 7 reissued the EUA.

The FDA has also made it clear the Spikevax vaccine will not be available to the American public, announcing:

“Although SPIKEVAX (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) are approved to prevent COVID-19 in certain individuals within the scope of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine authorization, there is not sufficient approved vaccine available for distribution to this population in its entirety at the time of reissuance of this EUA.”

These claims parallel the chain of events that followed the FDA’s full approval of the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine in August 2021.

At the time, Pfizer and the FDA claimed Comirnaty was not yet available, as there were sufficient stocks of the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine still available to be administered.

As of this writing, the FDA states, via its website, that Comirnaty products are “not orderable at this time.”

The FDA has not indicated when, or if, the Spikevax and Comirnaty vaccines will be available for distribution in the U.S.

Are EUA and fully licensed vaccines really interchangeable? 

As reported by The Defender, there is a significant legal distinction between products authorized under EUA and those fully licensed by the FDA.

EUA products are experimental under U.S. law. Under the Nuremberg Code and federal regulations, no one can force a human being to participate in this experiment.

Specifically, under 21 U.S. Code Sec.360bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III), “authorization for medical products for use in emergencies,” it is unlawful to deny someone a job or an education because they refuse to be an experimental subject. Instead, potential recipients have an absolute right to refuse EUA vaccines.

That’s an issue military members, unable to find any vaccination sites that offer the fully licensed Comirnaty vaccine, cited in various lawsuits challenging vaccine mandates.

Notably, on Nov. 12, 2021, a federal judge rejected an argument by the U.S. Department of Defense, in defending the military’s vaccine mandate, that the Pfizer Comirnaty and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are “interchangeable.”

U.S. law also requires the EUA designation be used only when “there is no adequate, approved and available alternative to the product for diagnosing, preventing or treating such disease or condition.”

This means that, in legal terms, all EUA products should be withdrawn once alternative products have received full approval.

Perhaps the most significant legal distinction, however, pertains to the legal protections afforded vaccine manufacturers, depending on how their product is classified.

Under the 2005 Public Readiness and Preparedness (PREP) Act, EUA-approved vaccines enjoy a significant liability shield. Specifically, vaccine manufacturers, distributors, providers, and government officials involved in the policymaking, approval, and distribution process are immunefrom any legal liability.

Under such regulations, the only way an injured party can sue is if he or she can prove willful misconduct, and if the U.S. government has also brought an enforcement action against the party for willful misconduct.

No such lawsuit has ever succeeded.

Conversely, fully licensed vaccines, such as Spikevax and Comirnaty, do not have a liability shield, and are instead subject to the same product liability laws as other products.

This means the Spikevax and Comirnaty vaccines could expose pharmaceutical companies to significant financial claims if individuals injured by the vaccines chose to sue the vaccine makers.

The rush to get COVID vaccines authorized for all ages — a ploy to avoid liability? 

There’s another reason Pfizer and Moderna don’t want their fully licensed vaccines to be available yet — they’re waiting for the vaccines to be authorized, then licensed, for children as young as 6 months old.

Why? Because once a vaccine is fully licensed by the FDA, the only way its manufacturer can be shielded from legal liability is if the vaccine is added to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s childhood vaccination schedule.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), passed into law in 1986, provides a legal liability shield to drugmakers if they receive full authorization for all ages and the vaccine is added to the mandatory schedule.

Reporting on the FDA’s approval of Spikevax, investigative journalist Jordan Schachtel wrote:

“Are Pfizer and Moderna waiting for full authorization for children’s shots to distribute Comirnaty and Spikevax to the masses? There’s plenty of litigators who have suggested that this is exactly what is going on in Big Pharma world.”

By creating the public perception that the Pfizer and Moderna EUA vaccines are fully approved, businesses, schools and other institutions are emboldened to impose vaccine mandates that violate existing law and allow the vaccines to be administered without informed consent.

It has also been argued that by relabeling the product, any previous data regarding vaccine injuries and side effects identified in association with the EUA vaccine are not counted in the safety studies for the approved vaccine.

The FDA approval of the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, its subsequent lack of availability and the continued administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA vaccine led Children’s Health Defense (CHD) to file a lawsuit against the FDA and its acting director, Dr. Janet Woodcock, for their allegedly deceptive and rushed approval of the Comirnaty vaccine, arguing that the approval represented a classic “bait and switch” tactic.

CHD further alleged in its lawsuit that the FDA violated federal law when it simultaneously licensed Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine and extended Pfizer’s EUA — as the agency has now done with Moderna and Spikevax — for a vaccine that has the “same formulation” and that “can be used interchangeably,” according to the FDA.

FDA admits no safety data for Spikevax use among pregnant women

Beyond the legal questions raised by the FDA’s approval this week of Spikevax, the approval also raises safety questions.

For instance, the FDA admitted Spikevax was insufficiently tested on pregnant women, stating that “[a]vailable data on SPIKEVAX administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy.”

Furthermore, Spikevax was approved without having been tested for its ability to provide protection against the Omicron variant, which is reported to account for 99.9% of current U.S. COVID cases — it was approved only for providing protection against mutations that are no longer circulating.

And yet, the FDA cited the Omicron variant as the reason behind its decision to pull its EUA for monoclonal antibody products. The FDA claims that these products have not been shown to provide protection against the Omicron variant.

Speaking Truth to Power, Shaq said 'Mandates are Wrong.' Power Ignorantly Responded (thru Dummy, Nischelle Turner); the Unvaxed Somehow Put the Vaxed at Risk. [Injections Don't Stop or Prevent COVID]

From [CHD] and [Infowars] NBA legend Shaquille O’Neal publicly declared Thursday that in his opinion no one “should be forced” to take a vaccine, and hit back at a reporter who claimed that Americans are not being made to take shots.

Speaking on his podcast, Shaq said “Look, I encourage everyone to be safe and take care of your family; I do. But there are still some people that don’t want to take it. And you shouldn’t have to be forced to take something you don’t want.”

When his CBS reporter guest Nischelle Turner tried to argue that vaccine mandates do not constitute forcing people to take the shots, O’Neal disagreed.

“It is forced. Because if the man don’t take it, the man gonna get fired,” he shot back.“I’m gonna probably get in trouble for this,” O’Neal added, suggesting a hypothetical situation where a fictional co-worker of “Entertainment Tonight” co-host Turner is ordered to get vaccinated.

Shaq stated “Say Nischelle, your sound guy at ‘ET’ been working there 10 years. That [job is] all you know. Let’s just say ‘ET’ puts out a new policy: If you don’t get the vaccination, you’re going to lose your job,” O’Neal said, adding that he believes it is not just for people to have choose between their livelihoods and “going against [their] morals”.Turner said she “wholeheartedly disagrees” with O’Neal, stating “You’re not just affecting yourself, you’re putting the public at risk and it’s a public health issue.”

“You work for a private company, bro,” Turner asserted, adding “We’re a capitalist society. It’s a free market society. If you don’t want to follow that company’s policy, then you follow yourself on out the door.”

“I’m with you on the rules because I’m a rules guy,” O’Neal responded, adding “But I do feel sympathetic towards people who have to make that kind of decision.” 

“I don’t,” Turner replied “not when you’re putting other people at risk.”

As defined in FUNKTIONARY:

dummy - a wooden puppet or programmed dupe that only speaks when spoken through. 2) one seeming to act independently but in reality controlled by another. -Webster's Dictionary. I know it's hard for most people to imagine themselves as dummies, but the reality of our circumstances painfully underscore this sad fact. How else could it be that for eons, centuries, and even up to this day, that the elite few rule, fool, divide and terrorize the many? If we imagine that we are free, we won't ever suspect or imagine we are dummies. Seeming to be free and actually experiencing, i.e., load testing, your alleged freedom are two different things altogether. As long as we seem to be free (despite all the facts to the contrary), it is most trivial to be manipulated and conned into doing the will of another against your own vital interests. If and whenever one is willing to overcome denial and accept his or her apparently free condition as false or an abject delusion, then the strings of control that have been (mis)guiding you will begin to become noticeable or perhaps even felt. What part of you has been complicit in ''pulling the strings" of the puppet master as the fat lady sings another stanza from the star-spangled banter? (See: Politician, Borg, Zombie, Proxymoron, Jehovah's Witness Protection Program, Dummy Return, True Believer, Perceptions & Disciple)

Because We Said So: Unable to Trick People Into Taking Genocidal COVID Shots, Blight House Probot Seeks to Censor Joe Rogan, Demands Content-Free Obedience to Authority and Science Free Dogma

From [KIRSCH] Early treatments using repurposed drugs in a proven protocol are the best way to treat COVID. Treating as soon as symptoms appear is key. Fareed and Tyson have now treated over 10,000 people infected with COVID without any deaths as long as the people arrived early in the disease. The NIH and CDC ignore these treatments. I recommend you choose an early treatment protocol where there have been at least 10,000 COVID patients treated early without a single death (such as the Fareed-Tyson protocol), and start it as soon as you have symptoms.

  1. The evidence is clear that all of the current COVID vaccines available in the US today are both unsafe and ineffective. They are not suitable for anyone because they are more likely to kill you than to save you. If they don’t kill you, they may permanently damage your immune system or leave you permanently disabled. Avoid these at all costs. After 90 days, it appears that the vaccines have negative efficacy against Omicron, making you up to twice as likely to be infected. This is likely why case rates are so high in highly vaccinated countries. See Incriminating Evidence for details.

  2. Cloth and surgical masks do not work. There have been just two randomized trials with masks and COVID (Denmark and Bangladesh) and they proved that surgical and cloth masks have no effect. Similarly, N95 masks do not work in practice either. The FAA rules basically require you to wear these masks on planes, mandating a medical intervention that is much more likely to make you sick and has no chance to protect you. See Incriminating Evidence for details.

  3. If you require PPE that might protect you from COVID, consider a 3M respirator with a P100 filter. Even better is to use a PAPR with your respirator (with a P100 or P3 filter). See this article on masks and respirators for details. These products that protect you do not protect others. The FAA will not allow these devices on a plane. 

  4. Social distancing is not the right way to think about risk reduction. Think instead the 4 D’s: draft, distance, density, duration. Putting yourself in an unventilated small room at close distance to a source for a long duration will maximize your exposure. The 6 foot rule for standing in line is nonsensical since as soon as you enter the airspace of the person in front of you, you will be breathing the virus from people who were standing in that spot hours (to days) ago (depending on the ventilation in the area). There is absolutely nothing magical about 6 feet. 

  5. Mitigation strategies such as testing, masking, isolation, and vaccination are largely ineffective. See this article for a convincing example.

  6. The best way to treat COVID is to do the opposite of what the CDC and FDA advises. So when they tell you to mask up, get boosted, avoid all repurposed drugs and supplements (including ivermectin, HCQ, fluvoxamine, vitamin D, zinc, aspirin, budesonide, etc), take paxlovid, molnupiravir, and remdesivir, you know what to do. 

  7. There is only significant spread if you have symptoms. For example, in a study in China, they looked at 1,174 close contacts of these asymptomatic individuals and could not find ONE CASE of a person getting COVID from the asymptomatic people. Therefore, testing asymptomatic people is unnecessary because it is a lot of effort for near 0 gain.

  8. Omicron is very mild compared to Delta. After you recover from an Omicron infection, data shows you will be protected from Delta as well.

  9. As of December 3, 2021, Omicron had spread to 38 countries, but the WHO couldn’t find anyone who died from Omicron. How is this a national emergency?

  10. People who get the virus and recover are always better off than a vaccinated patient. Unlike vaccinated people, if a naturally infected patient is ever re-infected, they cannot transmit the virus to others (as far as we know so far).

  11. Censorship of COVID advice by social media (in particular the hazards of the vaccines and the effectiveness of early treatment protocols) has cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

  12. None of the health authorities issuing mandates and directives are willing to participate in a recorded scientific discussion with the so-called “misinformation spreaders” such as Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Robert Kennedy, … Our authorities are afraid of the truth.

  13. The CDC, FDA, and NIH are all corrupt agencies that have looked the other way at safety signals. There are over 1M adverse events in VAERS and these represent over 40M adverse events in the real world. This is unprecedented, yet the CDC isn’t able to find a safety signal other than a “slightly elevated” risk of myocarditis. Attempts to bring the VAERS data to their attention is futile. They won’t even do a proper calculation of the underreporting factor which is required to do a proper risk-benefit analysis. They ignore the DMED dataentirely.

Are the Liars at CDC Counting the Common Cold as COVID to Inflate Numbers of So-Called "Cases?"

From [HERE] COVID cases from the Omicron variant are exploding, according the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the corporate media.

But are COVID-infected people testing positive for the Omicron variant, or for a mild coronavirus that’s responsible for the common cold?

According to this man’s testimony circulating social media, the answer is the latter.

“So my brother’s been sick for a few days, and the place he works makes him go get a COVID test,” the man says, adding he tested positive for a “mild” form of COVID.

“I’m like, ‘that’s weird. So you have Omicron?’ He goes, ‘no, they said it wasn’t Omicron.'”

So the man asked his brother to send him the test results, which revealed he tested positive for Coronavirus 229E — the common cold virus.

“Coronavirus 229E is the cold. My brother got sent home from work because he has a cold,” the man pointed out.

If the man’s testimony is true, then the CDC is violating its own protocol.

According to the CDC website:

Common human coronaviruses, including types 229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1, usually cause mild to moderate upper-respiratory tract illnesses, like the common cold. Most people get infected with one or more of these viruses at some point in their lives. This information applies to common human coronaviruses and should not be confused with coronavirus disease 2019 (formerly referred to as 2019 Novel Coronavirus).

The man went on to connect the dots between the exploding Omicron cases and the medical establishment using a cold virus to advance the COVID political narrative.

“Now if you extrapolate this out across the country, and all the positive COVID tests that are coming back — are they counting the cold as COVID positives?” the man asked.

“If they are, that explains a lot. That explains why cases are jumping everywhere. But also, what’s really behind them wanting to count the cold as a COVID-positive test?”

The answer, of course, is power and control by the globalist institutions like the World Economic Forum and the Davos group.

COVID testing company faked test results, lied to patients, WA lawsuit says

From [HERE] An Illinois-based coronavirus testing company with at least 13 sites in Washington, faked or delayed test results (or provided none at all), lied to patients and failed to properly store test samples, according to a lawsuit filed Monday by Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson.

The lawsuit, filed in King County Superior Court, describes how the company, Center for COVID Control, expanded to about 300 U.S. locations and allegedly took advantage of residents at a time when frequent testing was in high demand as a “critical tool in the fight against COVID-19.”

“Center for COVID Control contributed to the spread of COVID-19 when it provided false negative results,” Ferguson said in a statement. “These sham testing centers threatened the health and safety of our communities. They must be held accountable.”

The suit also alleges the Center for COVID Control stored tests in garbage bags for more than a week, rather than properly refrigerating them; backdated sample-collection dates so stale samples would still be processed; and instructed its employees to “lie to patients on a daily basis” when Washingtonians asked about delayed results.

Ferguson also named Akbar Syed, Aleya Siyaj and Doctors Clinical Laboratory in the lawsuit.

The Global Elite’s ‘Kill and Control’ Agenda: Destroying Our Food Security

From [GR] Governments around the world continue to impose an expanding sequence of measures to curtail rights and freedoms ostensibly to tackle a ‘virus’. In response, public demonstrations against these government measures are also ongoing and expanding with truck convoys the latest manifestation of this form of protest.

Unfortunately, while activists mistake these popular mobilizations for effective resistance, the Global Elite’s coup d’état against humanity gathers pace.

Concealed beneath the ‘virus’/‘vaccine’ narrative, and marketed by the World Economic Forum as the ‘Great Reset’, this coup is designed to utterly transform human society and even human life. This is because the detail outlined in the ‘Great Reset’ documentation, which anyone can investigate for themselves, clearly identifies intended changes to some 200 areas of human activity, essentially characterized as part of the ‘fourth industrial revolution’.

Beyond that, however, as a lengthening list of doctors, scientists and scholars have been warning us for some time, although their efforts are invariably heavily censored by corporate media, the injectables program is decimating the human population – see

‘Killing Off Humanity: How the Global Elite is using Eugenics and Transhumanism to Shape Our Future’ – while ensuring that those who submit to it and survive will only do so as transhuman slaves.

See ‘Beware the Transhumanists: How “Being Human” is being Re-engineered by the Elite’s Covid-19 Coup’.

Even beyond the injectables, however, the Global Elite is using a vast range of other measures to implement its ‘kill and control’ agenda.

One means of doing this has been to exploit the ‘pandemic’ (and its control measures such as lockdowns) to engineer the greatest redistribution of wealth from poor to rich in human history, thus starving to death vast numbers of people in Africa, Asia and Central/South America in the process – as the Director of the World Food Program had no trouble predicting in April 2020: see ‘WFP chief warns of “hunger pandemic” as Global Food Crises Report launched’ – while impoverishing (and often rendering homeless) substantial numbers in industrialized economies as confidently predicted by geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar, also in April 2020.

See ‘Who Profits From the Pandemic?’

Have these predictions been realized? As Oxfam has recently noted: ‘A new billionaire has been created every 26 hours since the pandemic began. The world’s 10 richest men have doubled their fortunes, while over 160 million people are projected to have been pushed into poverty.’ See ‘Inequality Kills: The unparalleled action needed to combat unprecedented inequality in the wake of COVID-19’.

But notable among the Elite’s other measures, including ongoing deployment of 5G which continues to devastate life generally – see ‘Deadly Rainbow: Will 5G Precipitate the Extinction of All Life on Earth?’ – are its ongoing efforts to destroy global supply chains, including those in relation to food, so that starvation functions to kill off far more than just marginalized populations but also to ensure that those left alive are compliant as the price of being ‘entitled’ to eat.

In essence, this component of their plan (which is now being rapidly implemented) is to disconnect humans from nature, herd us into ‘smart cities’ and destroy our sense of natural food; that is, destroy human culture.

Hence, using a combination of 5G, AI and blockchain technologies, the intention is to take complete control of food supply chains and get rid of natural food by creating lab-grown meat, synthetic foods and even ‘3D printed food’.

Watch ‘Architecting the Beast System’ and

‘DARPA funds Soylent Green as Empty Shelves in USA – #BareShelvesBiden Trends’ and see

‘Don’t Be Fooled: Lab-Grown Meat Is a Disaster in the Making’.

If you have not been following the progressive destruction of small farmers, the consolidation of agricultural land, the relentless promotion of genetically-mutilated organisms (GMOs), the destruction of food supply chains, the hoarding of food and even the destruction of food supplies, as well as the ongoing efforts to feed you a combination of synthesized trash and insect-based food substitutes, let me briefly outline the evidence below and tell you how Mohandas K. Gandhi would respond.

Control of Food Historically

Since the neolithic revolution (the transition from hunting/gathering to farming) began unfolding 60,000 years ago – see The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia and Dark Emu: Aboriginal Australia and the Birth of Agriculture – humans have farmed open-pollinated seeds that simply allow a farmer to keep some seed harvested in one season to plant in the next. But that natural round has been progressively eroded over recent decades.
Among those who have spent considerable time drawing attention to what the Global Elite has been doing and plans for us in relation to food generally, Dr. Vandana Shiva is certainly an outstanding figure. [MORE]

[CrimethInc is Trying to Kill Us] Most Toxic Food in the World? Farmed Salmon. Food Testing Reveals Farmed Salmon Has More in Common with Junk Food than Health Food

Story at-a-glance:

  • Aquaculture promotes itself as a sustainable solution to overfishing, but it actually takes 1.5 to 8 kilograms (3.3 to 17.6 pounds) of wild fish to produce a single kilogram (2.2 pounds) of farmed salmon.

  • Fish farms pollute the aquatic environment and spread disease to wild fish. Farmed fish are also an inferior food source, in part by providing fewer healthy nutrients — in part by containing more toxins.

  • Research shows farmed salmon contain five times more toxins than any other food tested, including higher levels of PCBs and dioxin.

  • Research also warns that farmed Atlantic salmon may contain PBDEs, toxic flame retardant chemicals that have been restricted or banned in the U.S. and many European countries due to their effects on child development.

  • Toxins in the fish feed and environmental concentrations of the chemicals have been identified as the two primary culprits.

From [MERCOLA] Fish are an important part of the ecosystem and the human diet. Unfortunately, overfishing has depleted many fish stocks, and the proposed solution — fish farming — is creating far more problems than it solves.

Not only are fish farms polluting the aquatic environment and spreading disease to wild fish, farmed fish are also an inferior food source, in part by providing fewer healthy nutrients, and in part by containing more toxins, which readily accumulate in fat.

Farmed salmon = most toxic food in the world

Salmon is perhaps the most prominent example of how fish farming has led us astray.

Food testing reveals farmed salmon is one of the most toxic foods in the world, having more in common with junk food than health food. Studies highlighting the seriousness of the problem date back more than a decade and include:

  • A global assessment of farmed salmon published in 2004, which found 13 persistent organic pollutants in the flesh of the fish. On average, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) concentrations in farmed salmon was eight times higher than in wild salmon, prompting the authors to conclude that “Risk analysis indicates that consumption of farmed Atlantic salmon may pose health risks that detract from the beneficial effects of fish consumption.”

The International Agency for Research on Cancer and the Environmental Protection Agency classify PCBs as probably carcinogenic.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, PCBs elicit a significant number of health conditions in animal studies, including cancer, immunosuppression, neurotoxicity and reproductive and developmental toxicity.

Disturbingly, research suggests contaminated fish is the most common source of PCB exposure, as the chemicals accumulate and build up in the fat tissue.

  • A 2005 investigation by another group of scientists concluded even relatively infrequent consumption of farmed salmon may be harmful to your health thanks to the elevated dioxin levels in the fish.

  • Toxicology researcher Jerome Ruzzin, who has tested for toxins in a number of different food groups sold in Norway, discovered farmed salmon contain five times more toxins than any other food tested. In light of his own findings, Ruzzin has stopped eating farmed salmon, even though some fishery experts disagree that all farmed salmon is a problem.

  • A 2011 study published in PLOS ONE found chronic consumption of farmed salmon caused insulin resistance, glucose intolerance and obesity in mice, thanks to the persistent organic pollutants (POPs) found in the fish.

According to the authors:

 “Our data indicate that intake of farmed salmon fillet contributes to several metabolic disorders linked to Type 2 diabetes and obesity, and suggest a role of POPs in these deleterious effects. Overall, these findings may participate to improve nutritional strategies for the prevention and therapy of insulin resistance.”

Researchers: Farmed salmon may contain fire retardants

In 2018, researchers warned that farmed Atlantic salmon sold in the U.S. and UK may also contain polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), toxic POPs that have been restricted or banned in the U.S. and many European countries due to their toxic influence on child development. As reported by The Star:

 “[A] new study by the University of Pittsburgh has found evidence of PBDEs in food fed to farmed salmon — even in those in supposedly PBDE-free environments.”

PBDEs are a class of chemicals that for years were used as flame retardants, and while restrictions were placed on some of the chemicals in this class in 2004, they can still be found in older products — and in the environment. China, Thailand and Vietnam — three areas that process significant amounts of electronic waste — are known to have higher levels of PBDEs in the environment.

In more recent years, flame retardant pollution has raised serious concern, as these chemicals build up in the environment over time and are in many areas now found in both groundwater and open waters.

Health risks associated with these chemicals, including PBDEs, include infertility, birth defects, neurodevelopmental delays, reduced IQhormone disruptions and cancer. In fact, flame retardant chemicals have been identified as one of 17 “high priority” chemical groups that should be avoided to reduce breast cancer.

Toxic fish food blamed for farmed salmon toxicity

You’re probably familiar with the saying that “you are what you eat.” However, a key take-home message here is that “you are what your food eats.”

In other words, whatever the animal you eat consumed, you consume also, which means you really need to know the source of the animals’ feed as well. In the case of farmed fish, toxins in the fish feed and environmental concentrations of the chemicals have been identified as the two primary culprits.

According to the authors, when the fish are raised in areas with high PBDE concentrations in the water, the feed becomes a relatively minor contributor. In PBDE-free waters, on the other hand, elevated concentrations of these toxins in the feed may be high enough to end up on your plate.

As noted by lead author Carla Ng, assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of Pittsburgh’s Swanson School of Engineering:

“[I]n otherwise clean and well-regulated environments, contaminated feed can be thousands of times more significant than the location of the farm for determining the PBDE content of salmon fillets … The international food trade system is becoming increasingly global in nature and this applies to animal feed as well.

“Fish farming operations may import their feed or feed ingredients from a number of countries, including those without advanced food safety regulations. The United States and much of Europe banned several PBDEs in 2004 because of environmental and public health concerns. PBDEs can act as endocrine disruptors and cause developmental effects. Children are particularly vulnerable.”

What makes the fish feed so toxic?

One of the main ingredients in farmed salmon feed is fatty fish such as eel, selected for their high protein and fat content. The problem is, many toxins readily bind to fat, and the fish feed industry is using fish deemed unfit for human consumption due to elevated toxicity.

As you might expect, when the fish used in fish feed contain toxic levels of pollutants, they get incorporated into the feed pellets.

One significant source of fish for farmed salmon feed is the Baltic Sea, which is well-known for its elevated pollution levels. Nine industrialized countries dump their toxic waste into this closed body of water, which has rendered many Baltic Sea fish inedible.

In Sweden, fish mongers are actually required to warn patrons about the potential toxicity of Baltic fish.

According to government recommendations, you should not eat fatty fish like herring more than once a week, and if you’re pregnant, fish from the Baltic should be avoided altogether. As mentioned by Ng, fish farms may also import their feed, or individual ingredients from other countries with lax regulations and significant pollution.

Toxic manufacturing processes add to the problem

Some of the toxicity also stems from the manufacturing process of the feed pellets. The fatty fish are first cooked, resulting in protein meal and oil. While the oil has high levels of dioxins and PCBs, a chemical called ethoxyquin is added to the protein powder as an “antioxidant,” which further adds to the toxicity of the final product.

Ethoxyquin, developed as a pesticide by Monsanto in the 1950s, is one of the best kept secrets of the fish food industry — and one of the most toxic.

The use of ethoxyquin is strictly regulated on fruits, vegetables and in meat, but not in fish, because it was never intended for such use. Fish feed manufacturers never informed health authorities they were using this pesticide as a preservative to prevent the fats from oxidizing and going rancid, so its presence in farmed fish was never addressed.

Disturbingly, testing reveals farmed fish can contain levels of ethoxyquin that are up to 20 times higher than the level allowed in fruits, vegetables and meats. What’s more, the effects of this chemical on human health have never been established.

The only research done on ethoxyquin and human health was a thesis by Victoria Bohne, a former researcher in Norway who discovered ethoxyquin can cross the blood-brain barrier and may have carcinogenic effects. Bohne was pressured to leave her research job after attempts were made to falsify and downplay her findings.

Environmental pollution is also affecting some salmon

Salmon is one fish species looked to as an indicator of environmental conditions, and salmon have become increasingly toxic. While farmed salmon is by far the worst, even wild salmon can contain unwanted pollutants. In a study of salmon found in Puget Sound, researchers discovered 40 contaminants, including drugs, in the flesh of the fish.

Some of the drugs were found at levels known to interfere with growth, reproduction and behavior. No one knows exactly how this chemical cocktail affects the fish, especially as they are exposed in combination. In all, the study found 81 of 151 contaminants tested for in Puget Sound off the coast of Washington.

Aside from toxins already mentioned above, such as PCBs, PBDEs and other POPs, researchers have also found a long line of pesticides — including the long-banned DDT — at concerning levelsin fish off the coast of California.

And despite the Clean Water Act, enacted nearly 40 years ago, there are areas of the U.S. where the water is so contaminated with mercury that residents are warned to refrain from eating any locally caught fish.

Microplastic pollution is another common seafood hazard

The fish you eat may also come with a side order of microplastic — in 2016 13 metric tons of plastic was entering the waterways every year. Once consumed, microplastic particles tend to remain in the body and accumulate, becoming increasingly concentrated in the bodies of animals higher up the food chain.

Scientists are still unsure of the effect this may have on those who eat the fish, but common sense would suggest it might not be entirely harmless, considering the fact that microplastic fibers soak up toxins like a sponge, concentrating PCBs, flame retardant chemicals, pesticides and anything else found in the water.

Evidence also suggests these microscopic particles can cross cellular membranes, causing damage and inflammation inside the cell. According to a 2016 report by the British Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), microplastics have been found in a wide variety of sea creatures, from zooplankton to whales and everything in between.

According to this report, “microplastics are present in seafood sold for human consumption, including mussels in North Sea mussel farms and oysters from the Atlantic.”

Eating six oysters could introduce about 50 plastic microbeads into your body and, according to DEFRA, this kind of contamination may indeed “pose a threat to food safety.” Other studies have found one-third of the fish caught in the English Channel contain microbeads, as do 83% of scampi sold in the UK.

Nutritional differences between farmed and wild salmon

As mentioned at the beginning, farmed salmon is also nutritionally less desirable than wild, which actually ties in with its toxicity. One significant nutritional difference is the fat content. Wild salmon contains about 5 to 7% fat, whereas the farmed variety can contain anywhere from 14.5 to 34%.

This elevated fat content is a direct result of the processed high-fat feed that farmed salmon are given, and since they contain more fat, they also accumulate higher amounts of toxins. Even when raised in similarly contaminated conditions, farmed salmon will absorb more toxins than the wild fish because of this.

But farmed salmon doesn’t just contain more fat overall — another nutritional travesty is its radically skewed ratios of omega-3 to omega-6 fats. Half a fillet of wild Atlantic salmon containsabout 3,996 milligrams (mg) of omega-3 and 341 mg of omega-6.

Half a fillet of farmed salmon from the Atlantic contains just a bit more omega-3 — 4,961 mg — but an astounding 1,944 mg of omega-6;26 more than 5.5 times more than wild salmon.

While you need both omega-3 and omega-6 fats, the ratio between the two is important and should ideally be about 1-to-1. The standard American diet is already heavily skewed toward omega-6, thanks to the prevalence of processed foods, and with farmed salmon, that unhealthy imbalance is further magnified rather than corrected.

A 2011 Norwegian report on farmed fish feed ingredients titled “Today’s and Tomorrow’s Feed Ingredients in Norwegian Aquaculture” talks about the negative impacts of the antinutritional factors of plant proteins and other additives in the feed.

Some of the most common ingredients in farmed fish feed include soybeans, rapeseed/canola oil, sunflower meal and oil, corn gluten meal from corn grains, wheat gluten, pulses (dry, edible seeds of field peas and fava beans), palm oil and peanut meal and oil — none of which are natural wild salmon foods.

However, as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations explains, Atlantic farmed salmon feeds can also contain animal by-products from poultry, meat meal, blood and hydrolyzed feathers.

Additives such as enzymes, crustacean products (to color the salmon flesh), vitamins and selenium are also added — and again, none these are ingredients that any wild salmon has ever encountered and all are about as far from a species-appropriate diet as you can get.

Salmon farming is not a green solution

By 2016 more than half the fish Americans were eating came from fish farms.

Aquaculture promotes itself as a sustainable solution to overfishing, but when you consider it takes 1.5 to 8 kilograms (3.3 to 17.6 pounds) of wild fish to produce a single kilogram (2.2 pounds) of farmed salmon, you start to realize there are significant holes in that claim. In reality, the aquaculture industry is actually contributing heavily to the depletion of wild fish stocks rather than saving them.

A salmon farm can hold upward of 2 million salmon in a relatively small amount of space. As with land-based factory farms where animals are kept in crowded conditions, fish farms are plagued with diseases that spread rapidly among the stressed fish.

Sea lice, pancreas disease and infectious salmon anemia virus have spread all across Norway, yet consumers have not been informed of these fish pandemics, and sale of diseased fish continues unabated.

To stave off disease-causing pests, a number of dangerous pesticides are used, including one known to have neurotoxic effects. Workers who apply this pesticide must wear full protective clothing, yet these chemicals are dumped right into open water, where it spreads with local currents.

The pesticides used have been shown to affect fish DNA, causing genetic effects. Estimates suggest about half of all farmed cod, for example, are deformed due to genetic mutations. What’s worse, female cod that escape from farms are known to mate with wild cod, spreading the genetic mutations and deformities into the wild population.

Genetically engineered salmon is now a commodity

It’s become quite clear that fish farms are not a viable solution to overfishing. If anything, they’re making matters worse, destroying the marine ecosystem at a far more rapid clip. Consumers also need to be aware that some farmed salmon may also be genetically engineered (GE).

AquaBounty salmon, engineered to grow twice as fast as typical farm-raised salmon, received U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval in November 2015 — it hit grocery store shelves and restaurants in 2021. Originally, it had been scheduled for marketing in 2020, but was delayed due to the COVID pandemic.

Crazy enough, the FDA is not regulating Aquabounty’s salmon as food. It chose to review it as a drug. All GE animals, it turns out, starting with this GE salmon, will be regulated under the new animal drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, “because the recombinant DNA (rDNA) construct introduced into the animal meets the definition of a drug.”

Interestingly, when AquaBounty announced that the GE fish was coming to market, they told the Associated Press that it would be going to “restaurants and away-from-dining services where labeling as genetically engineered is not required.”

Yet the reason the FDA gave for not requiring the fish to carry some form of GE label is that it’s nutritionally equivalent to conventional farm-raised Atlantic salmon.

The unnatural growth rate was achieved by inserting the DNA from two other fish, a growth-promoting gene from a Chinook salmon and a “promoter” gene from the eel-like ocean pout. This genetic tweaking results in fish with a chronic, continuous release of growth hormone.

While a typical salmon might take up to 36 months to reach market size (and grow only in spurts during warm weather), AquaAdvantage GM salmon are ready for market in just 16 to 18 months.

The fish are being grown on land and have several other supposed safeguards in place to prevent both escape and breeding with wild populations but, in nature, nothing is foolproof.

This became readily evident in 2017, when thousands of land-based Atlantic salmon escaped when the pens were broken asunder by a passing storm, creating what regulators called an “environmental nightmare.”

Are there any healthy seafood options left?

So, what’s the answer? Unfortunately, the vast majority of fish — even when wild caught — is frequently too contaminated to eat on a frequent basis. Most major waterways in the world are contaminated with mercury, heavy metals, POPs and agricultural chemicals.

This is why, as a general rule, I no longer recommend eating fish on a regular basis. There are exceptions, however. One is authentic wild-caught Alaskan salmon, the nutritional benefits of which I believe still outweigh any potential contamination.

The risk of wild Alaskan salmon accumulating high amounts of mercury and other toxins is reduced because of its short life cycle, which is only about three years.

Alaskan salmon (not to be confused with Atlantic salmon) is not allowed to be farmed and is therefore always wild-caught. Canned salmon labeled “Alaskan salmon” is a less expensive alternative to salmon fillets. Remember that wild salmon is quite lean, so the fat marks — those white stripes you see in the meat — are on the thin side.

If a fish is pale pink with wide fat marks, the salmon is likely farmed. Avoid Atlantic salmon, as salmon bearing this label are almost always farmed.

Another exception is smaller fish with short lifecycles, which also tend to be better alternatives in terms of fat content, such as sardines and anchovies. With their low contamination risk and higher nutritional value, they are a win-win alternative.

Other good choices include herring and fish roe (caviar), which is full of important phospholipids that nourish your mitochondrial membranes.

Originally published by Mercola.

Should Only the Rulers Have Guns? Suit Says the Blight House Has Created a Database of Firearms Owners; ATF Confirms Possession of Nearly 1 Billion Records of Gun Purchases Made by US Citizens

From [HERE] Gun rights groups have accused the Biden administration of trying to create a national database of firearms owners, in violation of the law. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has confirmed it was in possession of nearly one billion records of gun purchases made by US citizens.

Responding to a request by Republican Congressman Michael Cloud, the ATF said that it kept 920,664,765 such records as of November 2021. More than 855 million of these have already been digitalized, making them easier to search.

Firearm transaction records are reflected in the so-called ATF Form 4473, which includes various personal details on the buyer, including name, address and, in some cases, even social security number. According to US federal law, gun stores can destroy these forms after 20 years. However, if a firearms dealer goes out of business during that period its files become property of the ATF. And that's how the agency was able to accumulate so many records.

"A federal firearm registry is explicitly banned by law," Texas rep. Cloud told the Washington Free Beacon. However, the Biden administration has been "circumventing Congress" and using loopholes in the legislation to still work towards creating such database, he insisted. "Under the president's watch, the ATF has increased surveillance on American gun owners at an abhorrent level," the congressman added.

The federal affairs director of the Gun Owners of America, Aidan Johnston, reacted to the news by saying: "Make no mistake - this is clear evidence that a partial national gun registry exists." According to Johnston and other gun activists, the federal government may eventually use the database to "confiscate" firearms from the population, in breach of the Second Amendment.

The ATF has denied that it's trying to create a registry of gun owners, saying in a letter to Cloud that the records are only used to help law enforcement track down firearms that have been used to commit crimes. "Every trace must be identified as such by the requestor by selecting an appropriate crime code when submitting the trace request," it pointed out.

There were over 548 million such traces last year and almost 491 million in 2020, the agency said, adding that it had no way of knowing if those activities had led to any "successful prosecutions."

Joe Biden has made eradicating what he calls an "epidemic of gun violence" in America one of his priorities while in office. He plans to achieve this by cracking down on arms dealers who operate in violation of the law, by giving more support to law enforcement, by investing in community violence intervention programs, and helping former convicts reintegrate into society. Tightening of gun control rules is also on the cards, including introducing universal background checks and banning high-capacity magazines.

Record Low Homicide Clearance Rates are Proof Police Don't Prevent/Solve Murders. Could Police be Replaced w/Accountable, Controllable Servants who are Hirable/Fireable by Citizens? [Private Security]

From [HERE] In 2020 the reported rate at which killings were solved, known as the “clearance rate,” declined to a little below 50%.

The lower clearance rate in 2020 was an extension of a long, steady drop since the early 1980s, when police cleared about 70% of all homicides, and a decline that experts say was exacerbated by the pandemic. (The FBI won’t release 2021 numbers until later this year.)

In most cases, clearing a crime means at least one suspect was arrested and charged with the crime. However, individual agencies have different ways of calculating clearance, with some clearing a case once police identify a suspect, and others if an arrest is made. 

At the national level, the FBI uses blunt math to calculate a clearance rate, dividing the number of crimes that were cleared — no matter which year the crime occurred — by the number of new crimes in the calendar year. By clearing old and new cases, a department’s rate in any given year could exceed 100%. This leaves the numbers prone to statistical “noise,” but they can be useful for examining trends over the long term.

Clearance has long been the primary metric that law enforcement agencies use to assess their effectiveness at solving crime. Low or declining clearance rates often lead to increased political pressure on police leadership, and calls for more hiring or funding

For police to “clear” a crime, they usually need to identify and arrest the suspect. But according to more granular data collected by the FBI but reported by fewer agencies, at least 400 murders cleared in 2020 were solved by “exceptional means.” That means police believed they had enough evidence, but were unable to make an arrest. This occurs when the suspect has died, can’t be extradited or if prosecutors refuse to press charges. Critics say police use clearance by exceptional means — sometimes colloquially described as putting “bodies on bodies” — to artificially inflate clearance numbers. [MORE]

In reality “Defund the Police” was nothing ever more than a message on a sign, let alone being an actual crafted policy proposed to “legistraitors.” At best it is an ill conceived plan to somehow stop police brutality by giving the police smaller budgets. But having less money can have no effect on the granfalloon of “authority” or the right to forcibly control others. Police with small budgets in poor countries have no problem brutalizing citizens when they deem it necessary to do so. As such, “defund the police” was a reactionary slogan on sign that reflects real anger in the street about police authority and master servant relations between citizens and police.

The real threat to elites from “defund the police” is the fact that police services provided by the government can be summarily replaced by private security. Rather than reducing tax dollars budgeted to cops as a remedy to somehow stop police brutality, Defund the police” or replacing police could simply mean community hired and fired trained security workers who have a contractual duty to aid people in peril and a natural right to come to the defense of others but who have no right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on people. Therefore, there would be no need for a police department.

Security workers have the same rights that people have because all persons have the natural right to defend themselves and come to the defense of others if they believe the other person is in imminent danger from an aggressor. However, in the US legal system people have no general legal duty to rescue or aid other people in danger. Thus, security workers can be contractually obliged to aid people in peril and could be held accountable directly to the people who hire and fire them.

An essential difference between private security workers and police officers is that security workers possess no government authority or right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on other people. Unprovoked violence against others or the use of “force” is the basis of all social evils and can only be used in the sense of attack not defense. As explained in FUNKTIONARY, “Unfortunately, governments only function by force. Once established, they put laws into effect by threatening persecution, imprisonment, fine, or death against all who don't comply with those laws--including the use of the force continuum.” [MORE]

If a “public servant," such as a police officer, is uncontrollable, unaccountable, can’t be hired or fired by you, has irresponsible power over you and provides a compulsory “service” then he is actually your Master. Lysander Spooner, stated “It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?

How did politicians and public servants acquire such powers? [MORE]

Cops Kill Another Black Man in Liberal Minneapolis, Shot to Death During 6AM Raid. His Murder Wasn't Caused by 'Funding/Defunding' but by "Authority," the Right to Forcibly Control/Rule Over Citizens

From [HERE] and [FTP] Hundreds of protesters took to the streets of downtown Minneapolis on Saturday demanding justice in the fatal police shooting of a young Black man, Amir Locke, during a “no-knock” raid on an apartment earlier this week.

The boisterous but peaceful crowd, chanting Locke’s name and the slogan “no justice, no peace”, rallied at Government Plaza in Minnesota’s largest city three days after Locke, 22, was shot on his couch by police.

The day after the killing, police released video footage from the raid, which showed Locke was holding a gun as he twisted beneath a blanket on his sofa after being roused by officers moments before he was slain.

The shooting occurred at about 6:48 a.m. in the Bolero Flats Apartment Homes building on Marquette Avenue between 11th and 12th streets, where Huffman said a SWAT team was executing a search warrant on the seventh floor of the building. 

Huffman said they were assisting the St. Paul Police Department and “loudly and repeatedly announced ‘police search warrant’” as they entered an apartment using a key fob. 

Nine seconds after police entered the apartment, they encountered a man with a handgun in his hand, “pointed in the direction of officers,” and “shots were fired” and the man was struck, according to an MPD statement released later Wednesday. Huffman said one MPD officer fired; MPD later identified him as Mark Hanneman. 

The warrant was issued in relation to a homicide investigation led by detectives from the neighboring Saint Paul Police Department. Locke was not named in the warrant, and Minneapolis police have acknowledged it was unclear how or whether he was connected to that investigation.

On Thursday, interim Minneapolis police chief Amelia Huffman told a news conference the county attorney’s office was reviewing the shooting, and that video from the incident appeared to show Locke’s gun pointed toward officers when they opened fire.

Activists at the protest said Locke had a right to possess a weapon in his own home and was never given the chance to disarm himself in the chaotic moments as police stormed into his apartment without warning.

At least 500 demonstrators assembled in below-freezing temperatures on Saturday, demanding an unconditional ban on no-knock warrants, the dismissal and arrest of officers involved in the shooting, and the resignation of the mayor and police chief.

A series of speakers led the crowd through chants demanding racial justice and denouncing police violence against Black people, who organizers said have been disproportionately targeted by heavy-handed, and discriminatory law enforcement tactics.

On Friday, Mayor Jacob Frey responded to the Locke shooting, ordering a moratorium on “no-knock” search warrants, saying he was acting to “ensure safety of both the public and officers until a new policy is crafted”.

The Locke shooting was the latest of a string of incidents to put Minneapolis-area police department under scrutiny.

Almost two years ago, George Floyd, an unarmed Black man, was killed by a white officer who knelt on Floyd’s neck for over nine minutes during an arrest on suspicion of trying to pass a counterfeit $20 bill. Outrage over Floyd’s death sparked a nationwide movement challenging police brutality and bias in the US criminal justice system.

The video of Locke’s arrest showed police unlocking his apartment with a key and officers shouting, “Police, search warrant, get on the ground,” as they entered.

An officer then kicks at the couch where Locke was lying and as Locke turns, his arm emerges from under the blanket with a gun seen in his hand. Almost immediately, police fired at least three shots.

Lawyers for Locke’s family said he had no criminal history and legally possessed a firearm at the time of his death.

In reality “Defund the Police” was nothing ever more than a message on a sign, let alone being an actual crafted policy proposed to “legistraitors.” At best it is an ill conceived plan to somehow stop police brutality by giving the police smaller budgets. But having less money can have no effect on the granfalloon of “authority” or the right to forcibly control others. Police with small budgets in poor countries have no problem brutalizing citizens when they deem it necessary to do so. As such, “defund the police” was a reactionary slogan on sign that reflects real anger in the street about police authority and master servant relations between citizens and police.

The real threat to elites from “defund the police” is the fact that police services provided by the government can be summarily replaced by private security. Rather than reducing tax dollars budgeted to cops as a remedy to somehow stop police brutality, Defund the police” or replacing police could simply mean community hired and fired trained security workers who have a contractual duty to aid people in peril and a natural right to come to the defense of others but who have no right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on people. Therefore, there would be no need for a police department.

Security workers have the same rights that people have because all persons have the natural right to defend themselves and come to the defense of others if they believe the other person is in imminent danger from an aggressor. However, in the US legal system people have no general legal duty to rescue or aid other people in danger. Thus, security workers can be contractually obliged to aid people in peril and could be held accountable directly to the people who hire and fire them.

An essential difference between private security workers and police officers is that security workers possess no government authority or right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence on other people. Unprovoked violence against others or the use of “force” is the basis of all social evils and can only be used in the sense of attack not defense. As explained in FUNKTIONARY, “Unfortunately, governments only function by force. Once established, they put laws into effect by threatening persecution, imprisonment, fine, or death against all who don't comply with those laws--including the use of the force continuum.” [MORE]

If a “public servant," such as a police officer, is uncontrollable, unaccountable, can’t be hired or fired by you, has irresponsible power over you and provides a compulsory “service” then he is actually your Master. Lysander Spooner, stated “It is of no importance that I appointed him, and put all power in his hands. If I made him uncontrollable by me, and irresponsible to me, he is no longer my servant, agent, attorney, or representative. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over my property, I gave him the property. If I gave him absolute, irresponsible power over myself, I made him my master, and gave myself to him as a slave. And it is of no importance whether I called him master or servant, agent or owner. The only question is, what power did I put into his hands? Was it an absolute and irresponsible one? or a limited and responsible one?

How did politicians and public servants acquire such powers?

Allegedly governmental power comes from the people. That is, we delegate our individual power to the government for it to act on our behalf. However, it goes without saying that people cannot delegate powers or rights that they do not possess. So if people have delegated their powers to lawmakers and lawmakers have empowered police officers to act on our behalf, how did police acquire the moral right to commit acts of unprovoked violence on people? Asked differently, if you don’t have the right to initiate unprovoked acts of violence against other people then how can you delegate or authorize police officers or anyone else acting on your behalf to do so? How did government representatives and police acquire such super-human powers? [MORE]