World Trade Center

Sources & Organizations

The Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry

Specific Information

15 Years Later, Physics Journal Concludes: All 3 WTC Towers Collapsed Due to Controlled Demolition

2010-11-10 9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate (video)

9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel (video)

Bombs Explosions at the WTC Complex on 9/11/01

Theory: World Trade Center Demolition by Nuclear bombs (Rejected Theory by MEK)

What Are Controlled Demolitions?

Who Placed the Explosives and How?

WTC GRAND JURY PETITION -LCI

.

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 911 Attack, 911Truth Archive, nuclear weapons, World Trade Center | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

United Airlines Flight 93 – 9/11

Sources & Organizations

Complete 911 Timeline – United Airlines Flight 93

Specific Information

Cleveland’s FAA Center Evacuated

Dimensions of the Flight 93 Official Crash Crater

Flight 93 Crash Site: Still Unexplained

Flight 93 Engines: WTF???

Flight 93 Hoax

Flight 93 crash story is...

Flight 93 Crash Time Discrepancy

Green Primer on flight 93 debris?

Lack of Plane Wreckage at the Flight 93 Crash Scene – Witnesses

Lee Purbaugh’s plane, the forest damage, and the three Shanksville High students

Metal scraps at Shanksville and more

Official Flight 93 Crash Story Violates Laws of Momentum

Rare News Footage Describing the Crash Site Video blocked at NBC request.

Yet Another Plane Crash Leaves Recognizable Debris and Bodies

.

Shanksville

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 911 Attack, 911Truth Archive, Flight 93, United Airlines Flight 93 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

9/11 Government/Media Censorship and Propaganda

Sources & Organizations

Specific Information

14 Best 9/11 Movies of All Time [MEK Note: Except for two, all these movies are propaganda built around the Government Fabricated Story. Of truthful value only 911: Press for the Truth and Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004) can be recommended. As movies go Operation Terror actually is based on the real facts of what happened concerning 9/11.]

Fighting Public Belief in Government/Corporate Media Lies, Propaganda and Conspiracies

YouTube, Google suppress AE911Truth, boost ‘authoritative’ sources like NIST

YouTube 9/11 Censorship

,

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 911 Attack, 911Truth Archive, AE911Truth, Censorship | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Families of 9/11 Victims

Sources & Organizations

9/11 Family Steering Committee

Specific Information

9/11: Press for Truth -Documentary

Jersey Girls

.

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 9/11 Families of Victims, 911 Attack, 911Truth Archive | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

9/11 First Responders – Sept 11, 2019 Conference

First Responders Urge 9/11 Investigation — Sept. 11, 2019 Press Conference

On the 18th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, 9/11 first responder Christopher Gioia, a commissioner of the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District in New York, announced the launch of the “Justice for 9/11 Heroes” campaign at a news conference at the National Press Club.

In July, Mr. Gioia and the four other commissioners of the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District unanimously approved a resolution (https://www.ae911truth.org/news/540-n…) calling for a new investigation into the September 11th attacks. Two of Gioia’s fellow commissioners are suffering chronic health effects from working at Ground Zero, and one of the department’s members, Thomas J. Hetzel, who was also a member of the FDNY, was killed in the line of duty that day.

The Franklin Square and Munson Fire District is now spearheading efforts throughout New York State and across the country to unite the fire service behind their call for Congress to reopen the 9/11 investigation. The congressional inquiry they are seeking would be conducted in parallel with the ongoing grand jury investigation initiated by U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Geoffrey Berman (https://www.ae911truth.org/grandjury).

Mr. Gioia was joined at the news conference by Bob and Helen McIlvaine, whose son Bobby was killed at the World Trade Center. For the past two years, Mr. McIlvaine has led a campaign, in his son’s name, to introduce and enact draft legislation that would establish a select committee in Congress to reinvestigate the World Trade Center’s destruction (https://www.ae911truth.org/get-involv…).

Also present were David Meiswinkle, who is president of the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, and architect Richard Gage, who is founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Mr. Meiswinkle discussed his organization’s current litigation against the U.S. Department of Justice and the F.B.I. (https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11in…). Mr. Gage outlined the recently released findings of a four-year computer modeling study of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse by researchers at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), which AE911Truth funded (https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7).

The group then made their way to Capitol Hill to meet with several members of Congress, asking them to review the UAF WTC 7 study and to introduce the Bobby McIlvaine Act. The offices they visited included those Congresswoman Kathleen Rice, who represents the Long Island district where Franklin Square is located, and U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand from New York.

.

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 911Truth Archive, first-responders | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

25th Anniversary of 9/11 Movie Program

My Congressional Campaign Statement   

Absolutely nothing about the government/corporate media 9/11 story is truth.  The 9/11 attacks were planned, managed and covered-up by my government.   Corporate media ownership joined in the cover-up.  Since the release of the 9/11 Commission report, which I consider a confession, I have offered a $100K reward to the first person who can prove (even demonstrate) that the government didn’t do 9/11.   Click Here for my full statement

.

My Personal Views on 9/11

2023-09-11 Absolutely Nothing is True about the Military-Industrial-Media 9/11 Story (Bullet list that explains what happened concerning 9/11 event)

Michael Kerr Interview – on 9/11 Free Fall Podcast

Shame on the Progressive Movement Concerning 9/11

911 Reward

BE THE FIRST PERSON to prove to my reasonable satisfaction that the United States Government (with Corporate Media as co-conspirators) didn’t manage and cover-up 9-11, then I will give you $100K using my home equity.

Do you still believe the U.S. Government/Corporate Media story about 9-11? If you do, this should be an easy $100K. After all, your beliefs are backed by the U.S. Government and promoted as true by the vast, powerful corporate media. Haven‘t they thoroughly examined and investigated the events surrounding 9-11 already? They wouldn‘t lie would they?

Research Info for the 20th Anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks

  • WTC 1, 2 and 7 Buildings Collapsed due to Demolition, Not Fire.
  • No Plane Hit the Pentagon – Partial Pentagon Demolition
  • No Plane Crashed near Shanksville, PA
  • 9/11 Commission Report 2004 (Government Cover-up)
  • The Government and Corporate Media Attacks on the 9/11 Truth Movement
  • Project for the New American Century – The Organization and Members who made 9/11 Happen
  • More on THE GLOBAL ELITE WHO ENGINEERED 9/11:   HERE IS THE EVIDENCE

“Not all conspiracy theories are crazy” Conspiracy Theories and 9-11

MEK Challenge to PolitiFact over their support of the “greatest lie of all time!” -2021-02-05 (They never responded)

Government Fake 9/11 Story

2021-10-24 MEK 9/11 Comment

2021-08-21 9/11 Attack Research Index

Operation Terror – the Movie Amazon Director & Writer Commentary Must watch!

.

Research on specific aspects of 9/11 Attacks (work in progress)

Official 9/11 Myth

9/11 Commission Report

9/11 Truth Debunkers

9/11 Government Conspiracy

9/11 Questions & Overall Views on What Happened

9/11 Real Suspects

9/11 Truth Movement – Websites

9/11 Television News Archive

9/11 Websites

Airport Security

Al-Qaeda

American Airlines Flight 11

American Airlines Flight 77

Anthrax Attack

Black Boxes

Books

CIA

Cleveland Airport Mystery

Coincidence Theorist’s Guide to 9/11 and “Ultimate List” of Improbabilities and Coincidences Around 9/11

Continuity of Government

Demands for a New Investigation

Documentary

Drones

Environmental Concerns

Families of 9/11 Victims

FBI

Films about September 11 tragedy

Firefighters

First Responders

Finances and Money

Government Chaos

Government False Flag Operations

Government/Media Censorship

Hijackers

Investigations by Government – 9/11

Israel

Military Industrial Complex

New Investigation Demanded

NY GRAND JURY LAWSUIT – 9/11

Operation Terror – the Movie Amazon Director & Writer Commentary 

Osama Bin Laden

Passengers on Airlines

Pentagon

Phone calls from Airlines

Phone calls – WTC Towers

Planes were Fake [Discounted Theory]

PNAC – Project for a New American century

Real Suspects

Saudi Arabia

Secret Service

Shanksville

Simulated Exercise Attacks

Survivors – 9/11

Terror Propaganda

Terrorists

United Airlines Flight 93

United Airlines Flight 175

War Crimes “In the Name of 9/11”

War Games – 9/11

Whistleblowers

Witnesses

World Trade Center

WTC 2

WTC 7

WTC Towers

.

Our Emergency

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

.

Special Note: If one of my website links is bad, click Current Bad Website Links Detours to find a new link that should work!

Posted in 911 Attack, 911 Reward, 911Truth Archive | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

John Davies on 9/11 Attacks – Sept 1, 2021

John Davies

9/11: TRUTH, NOT PROPAGANDA. This is the most important post i have done here, though certainly not the most comfortable or comforting. People can best make a judgment when aware of evidence, and keeping an open mind. The official versions promoted by mainstream media in USA, UK and various countries, are already well known. Here is my summary of a widely held but fiercely suppressed, sidelined and censored alternative view.

MOTIVES

– The Neo-Cons, with their Project for a New American Century, had said a “new Pearl Harbor” was needed for their military plans in the Middle East to get public support and be enacted.

With 9/11 they soon got that support. Their intention was for increased US power, strategic control from the Mediterranean to China, enrichment through resources, and elimination of the enemies of USA and Israel. –

Bush and his government, who were pushing for a war with Iraq before 9/11, wrongly connected Saddam and Iraq with 9/11 and lied over both Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, and its imminent threat, to justify the war.

9/11 also paved the way for acceptance of the USA Patriot Act, prepared before 9/11, with increased government control over dissidents and US citizens’ lives, extensive surveillance, indefinite incarceration, breach of common civil rights and further empowerment of the CIA and the establishment.

CONSPIRACIES-

Watergate, Operation Northwoods (plot similar to 9/11), Operation Dirty Trick, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, MK Ultra, Cointelpro disinformation programme, the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, the Willowbrook school experiment, and a mass of unethical and fatal human experimentation, forced sterilisation in USA and abroad, the Iran-Contra scandal, CIA large-scale drug-dealing, assassinations, attempted assassinations of Castro, Operation Paperclip, torture at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo bay, as well as lies over Iraq WMD, are just some of the proven/ admitted fatal or nefarious establishment conspiracies by the United States establishment alone.

US governments have been willing to kill, as well as needlessly cause the deaths of, large numbers of their own citizens, not just foreign civilians; an assumption that Bush’s or any US government would never allow or carry out such an attack as 9/11 is naive and mistaken.

Conspiracies happen all the time. The frequent use of the term “conspiracy theory” as an absurdity suits criminals and skulduggery in the establishment and politics, as a simple means of dismissing awkward claims or investigations. Each conspiracy claim should be judged on its own merits, with open mind, based on evidence, not assumptions and automatic ridicule. 9/11 truth claims are very far from analogous to Flat Earth, the Sun orbiting the Earth or Elvis Presley being alive on Mars.

The official contradictory versions of 9/11 involve a conspiracy theory (implicating only Muslim extremists), which according to those who automatically ridicule “conspiracy theories” must be no less ridiculous than others.

FAILURE TO PREVENT-

The US military machine should have been able to foil the attacks, and certainly once the 1st plane had hit, but in 109 minutes, in the USA’s most sensitive airspace, none of the planes were intercepted or even closely approached before hitting their targets, including the Pentagon, the heart of the US military machine. Potential intercepting planes were delayed, remained grounded or were sent off in wrong directions. Speedy scrambling of jets and interceptions of planes are the expected and routine response in USA, as the alleged hijackers would have known.

The Government lied in saying it had no planes aloft in Washington during the crisis. An Air Force E-4B was captured on news footage.-

Norman Mineta’s testimony, taken with Vice-President Cheney’s statement he ordered shoot down for flight 93 only, inadvertently implicated Cheney in stand down order for flight 77 as it approached the Pentagon. Mineta’s testimony (among others) also showed that Cheney knew of events and was in control long before he and the 9/11 Commission said, in order to excuse the defence failure. –

Bush and government colleagues lied when saying it had not occurred to any of them that planes might be used in such a way; training exercises for such an eventuality had taken place, and there had been warnings, the trade centers had also been attacked before. There were even war game/ terror drill simulations for similar attacks on 9/11 itself, adding to confusion.-

The “Phoenix memo” was just one piece of evidence that the security services knew in advance of an Islamic threat using flight schools. – According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and four others, Able Danger had identified 2 of 3 al-Qaeda cells active in the 9/11 attacks; the ‘Brooklyn cell’ linked to “Blind Sheik” Omar Abdel-Rahman, including alleged September 11 attacks leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot’s other 19 hijackers. Shaffer and the others were ordered not to testify to the investigating committee.-

The FBI’s Most Wanted page for Bin Laden did not include 9/11 among the crimes he was wanted for. This was explained by the FBI as due to the lack of “hard evidence” of his involvement. Yet he was quickly identified to the world’s media as the culprit and used as the excuse to start war in Afghanistan. Rather than being detained, members of Bin Laden’s family were allowed to fly out of USA.

WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 & THE TWIN TOWERS-

The symmetrical collapse of WTC7, not hit by a plane, at free fall speed for 2 1/4 seconds, and virtual freefall speed overall, into its own “footprint”, as well as the symmetrical collapse of the twin towers, showed the typical signs of controlled demolition. –

A BBC reporter said WTC7 had collapsed long before it did. Silverstein said he gave the order to “pull it”. The 9/11 Commission ignored the collapse of WTC7, as did most of the mainstream media following 9/11.-

Police clearing the area in advance of its collapse said WTC7 was going to blow up.-

NIST did not investigate controlled demolition as cause of the collapse, even though admitting free fall. NIST are still refusing to release various key data of their computer modelling and the collapse. Their report, like their deeply flawed modelling, aimed to explain a fixed pre-set hypothesis, rather than open to possibilities and the obvious alternative, was misleading, full of inaccuracies and did not match reality or actual film footage, as confirmed by (among other engineers’ and scientists’ responses) the University of Alaska’s investigation, which is clear that the collapse was certainly not caused by fire, but “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”-

Prior to 9/11 there had been no previous instances of such demolition-like collapses of high rise steel buildings as the twin towers and WTC7. NIST explained the collapse of WTC7 as due to fire (which it exaggerated), but far worse fires in high-rise towers (such as Grenfell, which remained standing, among many others) have not led to swift and demolition-like collapse. No steel-framed high rise building has collapsed due to fire, apart from (according to the official explanation) the 9/11 towers. –

At the time, many TV reporters said they heard explosions in the towers after the initial planes’ impacts, and many reporters and presenters said it appeared the towers had been brought down by explosives, a belief also voiced by officials in the White House, FBI and Fire Department. Cheney and Giuliani were quick to deny that. Mainstream media then accepted official denials and explanations without due scrutiny or questioning; in fact proponents of controlled demolition and use of explosives have been routinely castigated and ridiculed, or ignored.-

TV reporters and presenters also mentioned the surprisingly small amount of debris and rubble- as confirmed on film. Also melted steel, witnessed too by fire fighters and others. – Numerous cars, trucks and buses in the area were toasted- astonishing to reporters, and contrary to the official version.-

Seismic recordings did not match the official explanations for the towers but indicate instead the use of explosives.-

New York Fire Department Commissioners have called for a new investigation into 9/11, due to “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.” –

Building construction and fire service guidelines were not changed despite the NIST report into the three towers’ unprecedented collapses- an implicit acknowledgment of a different cause than NIST and official explanations.-

Rubble and evidence were illegally removed from Ground Zero crime scene. Mass pulverisation and molten steel at Ground Zero indicated controlled demolition. There was evidence of nano-thermite, thermate and explosive material. The fires were not hot enough to melt steel. The twin towers turned to dust, in mid air.-

A large number of witness statements of numerous explosions at the towers, including multiple witness accounts of a massive explosion in the lobby of one tower, were ignored by both the 9/11 Commission and NIST. NIST did not look for evidence of explosives and incendiaries in the rubble. –

Bush said explosives were planted high in the towers by operatives in order to maximise destruction. Maintenance and renovation work in the towers were carried out in the months before 9/11, with elevators out of service being repaired and reduced public access within the building.-

Senator John Kerry, probably unaware of the implications, acknowledged that World Tarde Center 7 had been brought down by controlled demolition.- 5 Israelis seen filming the attacks on the towers and dancing in celebration were arrested in a van which according to the media was filled with explosives, but were later released.

THE PENTAGON-

There has been no film footage shown of a plane hitting the Pentagon, despite a court order that it be released. There were many cameras at the Pentagon. Personal filming and cameras near the Pentagon at the time were confiscated. Very short images from 2 cameras released merely show an explosion, but no plane, and there are discrepancies indicating tampering with the footage.-

The plane hitting the Pentagon would have required an extremely difficult and needless manoeuvre round and low behind the building by the hijack pilot whose flying ability was claimed to be poor. –

9/11 Commissioner Roemer initially said a missile (but then changed it to plane: “a missile……..plane”) breached the Pentagon defence.-

The day before 9/11 Rumsfeld admitted 2.3 trillion dollars were missing from Pentagon funds. 9/11 diverted attention from the issue and the Pentagon attack undermined a thorough investigation. The budget office was destroyed.

HIJACKINGS & FLIGHTS-

Lack of evidence from the 4 black boxes –

There was massive pulverisation of the towers yet an intact hijacker passport was found nearby. –

There has been no film footage or evidence of the alleged hijackers in the airports or entering or being on board the planes- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said flight 93 was shot down; this was excused as “mis-speaking”. –

Debris of flight 93 plane was scattered over several miles and reporters and witnesses at the “crash site” said at the time there was very little sign of a plane crash there. –

Seismic records indicate flight 93 shoot-down rather than crash.

9/11 COMMISSION, GOVERNMENT & MEDIA COVER-UP-

According to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (among others), Bush and Cheney were opposed to a public investigation into 9/11. They resisted it. They refused to testify under oath, alone, or in public to the 9/11 Commission which they had delayed and underfunded and was directed by their Neo-Con ally Zelikow, with a pre-arranged outline for the report. –

The lead Commissioners Hamilton and Kern said they did not have enough time or money and were bound to fail. Commissioners have admitted that the commission was variously misled, obstructed and, ultimately, forced to participate in a politically-motivated cover-up, with many questions unanswered. –

The 9/11 Commission said the military lied to them.- The Commission ignored most of over 400 questions put by the steering committee of the victims’ families, who wanted Zelikow removed from his role. Many family members, including firefighters’ relatives, support 9/11 Truth.-

There was a large amount of suspicious dealing in shares indicating fore-knowledge of 9/11, ignored by the commission. SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks.-

The official and mainstream media versions of 9/11 have been riddled with inaccuracies, lies, changes and contradictions (with many outlined in David Ray Griffin’s book 9/11 Contradictions).-

A White House spokesman lied in saying that Bush left the school at once on being told of the attacks. In a genuine attack, he should have left with security, as per standard procedures, for his safety in a public place, but did not, as footage later proved. –

Supposed debunking (promoted, or accepted without challenge, by mainstream media) of the 9/11 truth movement’s claims have in turn been roundly debunked- debunking which has been sidelined. Whereas various TV programmes present a case for alien landings on Earth and establishment cover-up, the main TV channels and newspapers in USA and UK have almost entirely barred any presentations of 9/11 truth. –

Google, yahoo and youtube have now systematically sidelined information and videos promoting 9/11 Truth, with mainstream establishment accounts to the fore instead. Youtube have made it hard to find a video simply of WTC7’s collapse, without the official version and explanation attached, never mind a video from the 9/11 Truth point of view..-

Mainstream media have sidelined the NY fire commissioners’ claim of pre-planted explosives in the towers and demand for a new investigation, and the Fairbanks University of Alaska report into WTC7, among other important developments challenging the official versions. –

Before its public release Spike Lee’s series on 9/11 has been criticized for giving credence to conspiracy theorists and he has been obliged to edit it. What amounts to a conspiracy of silence and deliberate misdirection still prevails. The establishment and mainstream media guard 9/11 coverage ferociously.

WHISTLEBLOWERS & ONGOING 9/11 TRUTH CHALLENGE-

Active culprits in the plot would hardly be likely to admit their complicity.- Whistleblowers include Sibel Edmonds, Coleen Rowley, Robert Wright, Susan Lindauer, William Binney, Kevin Ryan and Harry Samit. David Schippers, prosecuting lawyer involved in the attempt to impeach Clinton, admitted advanced knowledge of the attack, which he passed on to various government agencies, officials and senior politicians in Senate and Congress, but was ignored.

Major General Stubblebine said a plane did not hit the Pentagon.

Republican Congressman Curt Weldon denounced the intelligence agencies’ prior knowledge of 9/11, the inaction and cover-up.

CIA operative Robert Baer casually mentioned fore-knowledge of the attacks through a White House contact.

Regarding the Pentagon ordering Lt. Col Anthony Shaffer and four other key witnesses not to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee investigating Able Danger’s fore-knowledge of the Mohamed Atta cell, committee chairman Arlen Specter stated “That looks to me as if it may be obstruction of the committee’s activities”-

Thousands of architects, engineers, scientists, pilots, firefighters, distinguished academics, CIA and FBI operatives and officials, even government officials including Bush’s chief economist, are part of the 9/11 Truth movement. Some have lost their jobs as a result, others had been reluctant to come forward publicly for fear of ridicule and damage to their careers (no doubt many more still are). –

Fair, independent, open-minded investigation and media coverage in many countries, including USA in particular, are long overdue. It is important that the truth is recognized, not only to bring the perpetrators still alive to justice, but to properly understand the significance of 9/11, its causes, outcomes and lessons, learn from the truth, and to help ensure that no such event takes place again.~

Youtube has been systematically deleting or sidelining WTC7 collapse videos, as many users have noticed, while promoting those with official versions and explanations. I managed to find this at least: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd7tqpwdlpQ

.

The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 911 Attack, 911Truth Archive | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

World Death Rate/ Covid-19 Deaths

Pandemic Declared January 30, 2020

Days since Pandemic Declared: 584

Worldwide Deaths per Day: 163,898

Coronavirus Covid-19 Deaths per Day: 7,845

% of Deaths from Coronavirus: 4.79%

Deaths from Smoking per Day: 13,740

Deaths of children (under 5) per Day: 20,892

Deaths from Cancer per Day: 22,574

Deaths from Communicable Disease per Day: 35,682

% Deaths per Coronavirus (Known) Cases: 2.26%

% of Coronavirus Deaths per World Population: 0.058% (58 per 10K)

% of Yearly Deaths per World Population: 0.758%

% of Coronavirus Deaths per Worldwide Deaths since Pandemic Start: 0.48%

Coronavirus Deaths/ All Deaths by Age/ % of Deaths to Coronavirus Deaths

0-1 45/19,786/99.8%

1-4 23/3,570/99.4%

5-14 72/5,738/98.8%

15-24 648/36,900/98.3%

0-24 788/65,994/98.8%

25-34 2,922/74,621/96.2%

35-44 7,711/103,323/93.1%

45-54 21,254/183,109/89.6%

55-64 54,134/419,338/88.6%

65-74 99,901/631,363/86.4%

75-84 128,192/765,067/85.6%

85- 146,217/955,720/86.7%

World Population Clock

World Population (as of 9/5/2021)7,889,658,815
Last UN Estimate (July 1, 2021)7,874,965,825
Births per Day382,865
Deaths per Day163,925
Net Change per Day 218,940
Population Change Since Jan. 154,297,120
  • net increase of 1 person every 0.39 seconds
  • Population estimates based on interpolation of data from World Population Prospects

.

How Many People Die Each Day

World Death Rate

  • Deaths per Year (365 Days): 59,822,770
  • Deaths per Month (30 days): 4,916,940
  • Deaths per Day: 163,898
  • Deaths per Hour: 6,829
  • Deaths per Minute: 114
  • Deaths per Second: 1.90

.

World-O-Meter Coronavirus

Coronavirus Cases: (as of Sept 5, 2021) 221,542,850

Deaths: 4,581,744

Recovered: 198,036,657

% Deaths per Coronavirus (Known) Cases: 2.26%

% of Coronavirus Deaths per Population: 0.058% (58 per 10K)

Posted in coronavirus, Covid-19, pandemic | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Action Alert: Time to Put Our Historic Win on 5G and Wireless Harm Into Action!

Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD’s) historic win against the FCC presents the first real opportunity to create change surrounding 5G technology and harmful wireless radiation. We must capitalize on this win and maximize its impact in order to protect our communities and our children from the massive rollout of 5G currently underway. Our elected officials must be informed of this decision.

Considering the ubiquity of wireless technology, this landmark court decision should have been the top story on every media outlet. However, since “mainstream” media is largely owned by Telecom, it has not. Thus, educating the public and our elected officials about this ruling and its effects depends on us.

Act Now. Please send our letter to your elected officials. Our advocacy portal makes it easy.  Simply enter your information and the letter will automatically be sent to your representatives to encourage them to take action to protect the public from 5G and wireless harms and from those in the FCC & FDA who have been misleading the public and knowingly harming us and our children for decades.

You can help put our landmark ruling to work! Finally, this regulatory agency can be held accountable and real, practical protections put in place, but only if every one of us acts now.
If the form is not working for you, try this page.

Letter sent to Government officials

In 2019, after 6 years of alleged review, the FCC issued a decision that its 5G and wireless guidelines protect public health. This decision has been used to remove “barriers” for 5G deployment, to quiet the public’s concerns and to deny accommodations for those who are ill from wireless technologies. Those who raised concerns were labeled “conspiracy theorists.”
Consequently, Children’s Health Defense and other petitioners sued the FCC, challenging the legitimacy of the decision.


On August 13, 2021, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit Court ruled that the FCC’s 2019 decision is “capricious and arbitrary.” and not evidence based as it relates to non-thermal, non-cancer harm. The court remanded the decision to the FCC.
As a result, compliance with FCC guidelines can no longer imply that wireless “smart” devices and infrastructures are safe.


According to the court, both the FCC and the FDA failed to review substantial evidence of harm. The petitioners filed 11,000 pages of evidence, showing that pulsed radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted from Wi-Fi, smart meters, cell towers and 5G can and have caused illness.
The court’s dismay was most apparent in the January 2021 hearing. The judges’ questions revealed their doubt that FCC guidelines are relevant to the current wireless reality.


The ruling stated the FCC failed to respond to evidence that the testing of cell phones is flawed; to address evidence of prenatal harm, a potential link to ADHD, and harm to children; evidence that this radiation causes electro-sensitivity; blood-brain barrier damage; cognitive & neurological problems; and evidence of mechanisms of harm; harm from long-term exposure; pulsation, modulation, and the effects of new technologies like Wi-Fi & 5G.


The Court noted that the FCC failed to address evidence of environmental harm. It quoted a Dept. of the Interior letter stating that cell towers affect migratory birds and that the FCC guidelines are 30 years out of date.


We ask you to take action to protect the public and our children. Legislators must move swiftly to:
1. Alert the public that it can no longer trust that wireless devices are safe and instruct them to reduce exposure.
2. Halt any further deployment of 5G, satellites and wireless-based technologies.
3. Remove the FCC from regulating health effects of wireless.
4. Appoint a committee chaired by the EPA with NIEHS and independent scientists to review the science and promulgate biologically-based guidelines.
5. Remove the FCC commissioners and the FDA department head who were part of the 2019 decision. They violated the public trust and caused harm to many.


The FCC’s blind pursuit of wireless with reckless disregard for public health have caused widespread sickness and even death. We must PAUSE before entering another roll-out of wireless infrastructure and develop guidelines that do in fact protect the public and require telecom to develop safer technologies.
Thank you.

.

Responses (None to date: Letter sent 2021-09-04)

.

Wireless Technology

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in 5G Wireless, wireless | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

CDC – Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings

[MEK Note: Video Interviews on Censored Covid Story and the S**t We Are All In!]

Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings

Updated July 26, 2020

CDC – Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings

This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings.1,2  This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available. Please check the CDC website periodically for updates.

What is the Shielding Approach1?

The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.

Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19.3 In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population.4,5  For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.

In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence1,6,7, to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect.

A summary of the shielding approach described by Favas is shown in Table 1. See Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in low-resource, displaced and camp and camp-like settings 1,2 for full details.

Table 1: Summary of the Shielding Approach1

Level

Movement/ Interactions

Household (HH) Level:

A specific room/area designated for high-risk individuals who are physically isolated from other HH members.

Low-risk HH members should not enter the green zone. If entry is necessary, it should be done only by healthy individuals after washing hands and using face coverings. Interactions should be at a safe distance (approx. 2 meters). Minimum movement of high-risk individuals outside the green zone. Low-risk HH members continue to follow social distancing and hygiene practices outside the house.

Neighborhood Level:

A designated shelter/group of shelters (max 5-10 households), within a small camp or area where high-risk members are grouped together. Neighbors “swap” households to accommodate high-risk individuals.

Same as above

Camp/Sector Level:

A group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector (max 50 high-risk individuals per single green zone) where high-risk individuals are physically isolated together.

One entry point is used for exchange of food, supplies, etc. A meeting area is used for residents and visitors to interact while practicing physical distancing (2 meters). No movement into or outside the green zone.

Operational Considerations

The shielding approach requires several prerequisites for effective implementation. Several are addressed, including access to healthcare and provision of food. However, there are several prerequisites which require additional considerations. Table 2 presents the prerequisites or suggestions as stated in the shielding guidance document (column 1) and CDC presents additional questions and considerations alongside these prerequisites (column 2).

Table 2: Suggested Prerequisites per the shielding documents and CDC’s Operational Considerations for Implementation

Suggested Prerequisites

*As stated in the shielding document*

Considerations as suggested by CDC

  • Each green zone has a dedicated latrine/bathing facility for high-risk individuals
  • The shielding approach advises against any new facility construction to establish green zones; however, few settings will have existing shelters or communal facilities with designated latrines/bathing facilities to accommodate high-risk individuals. In these settings, most latrines used by HHs are located outside the home and often shared by multiple HHs.
  • If dedicated facilities are available, ensure safety measures such as proper lighting, handwashing/hygiene infrastructure, maintenance and disinfection of latrines.
  • Ensure facilities can accommodate high-risk individuals with disabilities, children and separate genders at the neighborhood/camp-level.
  • To minimize external contact, each green zone should include able-bodied high-risk individuals capable of caring for residents who have disabilities or are less mobile.  Otherwise, designate low-risk individuals for these tasks, preferably who have recovered from confirmed COVID-19 and are assumed to be immune.
  • This may be difficult to sustain, especially if the caregivers are also high risk. As caregivers may often will be family members, ensure that this strategy is socially or culturally acceptable.
  • Currently, we do not know if prior infection confers immunity.
  • The green zone and living areas for high-risk residents should be aligned with minimum humanitarian (SPHERE) standards.6
  • The shielding approach requires strict adherence to infection, prevention and control (IPC) measures. They require, uninterrupted availability of soap, water, hygiene/cleaning supplies, masks or cloth face coverings, etc. for all individuals in green zones. Thus, it is necessary to ensure minimum public health standards6 are maintained and possibly supplemented to decrease the risk of other outbreaks outside of COVID-19. Attaining and maintaining minimum SPHERE6 standards is difficult in these settings for the general population.8,9,10 Users should consider that provision of services and supplies to high risk individuals could be at the expense of low-risk residents, putting them at increased risk for other outbreaks.
  • Monitor and evaluate the implementation of the shielding approach.
  • Monitoring protocols will need to be developed for each type of green zone.
  • Dedicated staff need to be identified to monitor each green zone. Monitoring includes both adherence to protocols and potential adverse effects or outcomes due to isolation and stigma. It may be necessary to assign someone within the green zone, if feasible, to minimize movement in/out of green zones.
  • Men and women, and individuals with tuberculosis (TB), severe immunodeficiencies, or dementia should be isolated separately
  • Multiple green zones would be needed to achieve this level of separation, each requiring additional inputs/resources. Further considerations include challenges of accommodating different ethnicities, socio-cultural groups, or religions within one setting.
  • Community acceptance and involvement in the design and implementation
  • Even with community involvement, there may be a risk of stigmatization.11,12 Isolation/separation from family members, loss of freedom and personal interactions may require additional psychosocial support structures/systems. See section on additional considerations below.
  • High-risk minors should be accompanied into isolation by a single caregiver who will also be considered a green zone resident in terms of movements and contacts with those outside the green zone.
  • Protection measures are critical to implementation. Ensure there is appropriate, adequate, and acceptable care of other minors or individuals with disabilities or mental health conditions who remain in the HH if separated from their primary caregiver.
  • Green zone shelters should always be kept clean. Residents should be provided with the necessary cleaning products and materials to clean their living spaces.
  • High-risk individuals will be responsible for cleaning and maintaining their own living space and facilities. This may not be feasible for persons with disabilities or decreased mobility.11 Maintaining hygiene conditions in communal facilities is difficult during non-outbreak settings.7,8,9 consequently it may be necessary to provide additional human resource support.
  • Green zones should be more spacious in terms of shelter area per capita than the surrounding camp/sector, even at the cost of greater crowding of low-risk people.
  • Ensure that targeting high-risk individuals does not negate mitigation measures among low-risk individuals (physical distancing in markets or water points, where feasible, etc.). Differences in space based on risk status may increase the potential risk of exposure among the rest of the low-risk residents and may be unacceptable or impracticable, considering space limitations and overcrowding in many settings.

Additional Considerations

The shielding approach outlines the general “logistics” of implementation –who, what, where, how. However, there may be additional logistical challenges to implementing these strategies as a result of unavailable commodities, transport restrictions, limited staff capacity and availability to meet the increased needs. The approach does not address the potential emotional, social/cultural, psychological impact for separated individuals nor for the households with separated members. Additional considerations to address these challenges are presented below.

Population characteristics and demographics

Consideration: The number of green zones required may be greater than anticipated, as they are based on the total number of high-risk individuals, disease categories, and the socio-demographics of the area and not just the proportion of elderly population.

Explanation: Older adults represent a small percentage of the population in many camps in humanitarian settings (approximately 3-5%4,5), however in some humanitarian settings more than one quarter of the population may fall under high risk categories13,14,15 based on underlying medical conditions which may increase a person’s risk for severe COVID-19 illness which include chronic kidney disease, obesity, serious heart conditions, sickle cell disease, and type 2 diabetes. Additionally, many camps and settlements host multiple nationalities which may require additional separation, for example, Kakuma Refugee Camp in Kenya accommodates refugees from 19 countries.16

Timeline considerations

Consideration: Plan for an extended duration of implementation time, at least 6 months.

Explanation: The shielding approach proposes that green zones be maintained until one of the following circumstances arises: (i) sufficient hospitalization capacity is established; (ii) effective vaccine or therapeutic options become widely available; or (iii) the COVID-19 epidemic affecting the population subsides.

Given the limited resources and healthcare available to populations in humanitarian settings prior to the pandemic, it is unlikely sufficient hospitalization capacity (beds, personal protective equipment, ventilators, and staff) will be achievable during widespread transmission. The national capacity in many of the countries where these settings are located (e.g., Chad, Myanmar, and Syria) is limited. Resources may become quickly overwhelmed during the peak of transmission and may not be accessible to the emergency affected populations.

Vaccine trials are underway, but with no definite timeline. Reaching the suppression phase where the epidemic subsides can take several months and cases may resurge in a second or even third wave. Herd immunity (the depletion of susceptible people) for COVID-19 has not been demonstrated to date. It is also unclear if an infected person develops immunity and the duration of potential immunity is unknown. Thus, contingency plans to account for a possibly extended operational timeline are critical.

Other logistical considerations

Consideration: Plan to identify additional resources and outline supply chain mechanisms to support green zones.

Explanation: The implementation and operation of green zones requires strong coordination among several sectors which may require substantial additional resources:  supplies and staff to maintain these spaces – shelters, IPC, water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), non-food items (NFIs) (beds, linens, dishes/utensils, water containers), psychosocial support, monitors/supervisors, caretakers/attendants, risk communication and community engagement, security, etc. Considering global reductions in commodity shortages,17 movement restrictions, border closures, and decreased trucking and flights, it is important to outline what additional resources will be needed and how they will be procured.

Protection

Consideration: Ensure safe and protective environments for all individuals, including minors and individuals who require additional care whether they are in the green zone or remain in a household after the primary caregiver or income provider has moved to the green zone.

Explanation: Separating families and disrupting and deconstructing multigenerational households may have long-term negative consequences. Shielding strategies need to consider sociocultural gender norms in order to adequately assess and address risks to individuals, particularly women and girls. 18,19,20 Restrictive gender norms may be exacerbated by isolation strategies such as shielding. At the household level, isolating individuals and limiting their interaction, compounded with social and economic disruption has raised concerns of potential increased risk of partner violence. Households participating in house swaps or sector-wide cohorting are at particular risk for gender-based violence, harassment, abuse, and exploitation as remaining household members may not be decision-makers or responsible for households needs.18,19,20

Social/Cultural/Religious Practices

Consideration: Plan for potential disruption of social networks.

Explanation: Community celebrations (religious holidays), bereavement (funerals) and other rites of passage are cornerstones of many societies. Proactive planning ahead of time, including strong community engagement and risk communication is needed to better understand the issues and concerns of restricting individuals from participating in communal practices because they are being shielded. Failure to do so could lead to both interpersonal and communal violence.21,22

Mental Health

Consideration: Ensure mental health and psychosocial support*,23 structures are in place to address increased stress and anxiety.

Explanation: Additional stress and worry are common during any epidemic and may be more pronounced with COVID-19 due to the novelty of the disease and increased fear of infection, increased childcare responsibilities due to school closures, and loss of livelihoods. Thus, in addition to the risk of stigmatization and feeling of isolation, this shielding approach may have an important psychological impact and may lead to significant emotional distress, exacerbate existing mental illness or contribute to anxiety, depression, helplessness, grief, substance abuse, or thoughts of suicide among those who are separated or have been left behind. Shielded individuals with concurrent severe mental health conditions should not be left alone. There must be a caregiver allocated to them to prevent further protection risks such as neglect and abuse.

Summary

The shielding approach is an ambitious undertaking, which may prove effective in preventing COVID-19 infection among high-risk populations if well managed. While the premise is based on mitigation strategies used in the United Kingdom,24,25 there is no empirical evidence whether this approach will increase, decrease or have no effect on morbidity and mortality during the COVID-19 epidemic in various humanitarian settings. This document highlights a) risks and challenges of implementing this approach, b) need for additional resources in areas with limited or reduced capacity, c) indefinite timeline, and d) possible short-term and long-term adverse consequences.

Public health not only focuses on the eradication of disease but addresses the entire spectrum of health and wellbeing. Populations displaced, due to natural disasters or war and, conflict are already fragile and have experienced increased mental, physical and/or emotional trauma. While the shielding approach is not meant to be coercive, it may appear forced or be misunderstood in humanitarian settings. As with many community interventions meant to decrease COVID-19 morbidity and mortality, compliance and behavior change are the primary rate-limiting steps and may be driven by social and emotional factors. These changes are difficult in developed, stable settings; thus, they may be particularly challenging in humanitarian settings which bring their own set of multi-faceted challenges that need to be taken into account.

Household-level shielding seems to be the most feasible and dignified as it allows for the least disruption to family structure and lifestyle, critical components to maintaining compliance. However, it is most susceptible to the introduction of a virus due to necessary movement or interaction outside the green zone, less oversight, and often large household sizes. It may be less feasible in settings where family shelters are small and do not have multiple compartments. In humanitarian settings, small village, sector/block, or camp-level shielding may allow for greater adherence to proposed protocol, but at the expense of longer-term social impacts triggered by separation from friends and family, feelings of isolation, and stigmatization. Most importantly, accidental introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission and increased morbidity and mortality as observed in assisted care facilities in the US.26

The shielding approach is intended to alleviate stress on the healthcare system and circumvent the negative economic consequences of long-term containment measures and lockdowns by protecting the most vulnerable.1,24,25 Implementation of this approach will involve careful planning, additional resources, strict adherence and strong multi-sector coordination, requiring agencies to consider the potential repercussion among populations that have collectively experienced physical and psychological trauma which makes them more vulnerable to adverse psychosocial consequences.  In addition, thoughtful consideration of the potential benefit versus the social and financial cost of implementation will be needed in humanitarian settings.

*Specific psychosocial support guidance during COVID-19 as specific subject areas are beyond the scope of this document.

References

  1. Favas, C. Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in camps and camp-like settings pdf icon[465 KB, 15 pages]external icon. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 31 March 2020.
  2. Maysoon, D, Zandvoort K, Flasche S, et al. COVID-19 control in low-income settings and displaced populations: what can realistically be done?external icon. 2020. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
  3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Groups at Higher Risk for Severe Illness. Content source: National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), Division of Viral Diseases. Last content review 14 May 2020.
  4. UNHCR Statistical Yearbook 2016external icon.
  5. UNHCR -Rohingya Refugee Response/Bangladesh-Joint Government of Bangladesh-UNHCR, Population Factsheet. Annex I and II. March 31,2020. Sent by email.
  6. The Sphere Handbook. Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response, 2018 editionexternal icon.
  7. Butler, N., Tulloch. O. Anthrologica, 2020. Social Sciences in Humanitarian Action pdf icon[275 KB, 8 pages]external icon.
  8. Blum, L.S., Yemweni, A., Trinies, V. et al. Programmatic implications for promotion of handwashing behavior in an internally displaced persons camp in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo. Confl Health 13, 54 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13031-019-0225-xexternal icon.
  9. Cronin AA, Shrestha D, Cornier N, Abdalla F, Ezard N, Aramburu C. A review of water and sanitation provision in refugee camps in association with selected health and nutrition indicators–the need for integrated service provisionexternal icon. J Water Health. 2008;6(1):1-13. doi:10.2166/wh.2007.019.
  10. Nyoka R, Foote AM, Woods E, et al. Sanitation practices and perceptions in Kakuma refugee camp, Kenya: Comparing the status quo with a novel service-based approachexternal icon. [published correction appears in PLoS One. 2017 Dec 19;12 (12 ):e0190129]. PLoS One. 2017;12(7):e0180864. Published 2017 Jul 13.
  11. Working with Persons with Disabilities in Forced Displacement pdf icon[343 KB, 28 pages]external icon: Need to Know Guidance 1. 2019.
  12. IFRC, UNICEF and WHO. Social Stigma Associated with COVID-19: A guide to preventing and addressing social stigma associated with COVID-19external icon.
  13. Sethi S, Jonsson R, Skaff R, Tyler F. Community-Based Noncommunicable Disease Care for Syrian Refugees in Lebanonexternal icon. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2017;5(3):495-506. Published 2017 Sep 28. doi:10.9745/GHSP-D-17-00043.
  14. Akik C, Ghattas H, Mesmar S, Rabkin M, El-Sadr WM, Fouad FM. Host country responses to non-communicable diseases amongst Syrian refugees: a reviewexternal icon. Confl Health. 2019;13:8. Published 2019 Mar 22. doi:10.1186/s13031-019-0192-2.
  15. Rehr M, Shoaib M, Ellithy S, et al. Prevalence of non-communicable diseases and access to care among non-camp Syrian refugees in northern Jordan. Confl Healthexternal icon. 2018;12:33. Published 2018 Jul 11. doi:10.1186/s13031-018-0168-7.
  16. UNHCR, Kakuma camp and Kalobeyei Settlement Visitors Guide pdf icon[5.7 MB, 10 pages]external icon.
  17. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Supply Chain System, Requesting and Receiving Suppliesexternal icon.
  18. UNFPA: COVID-19, A Gender Lens: Protecting sexual and reproductive health and rights and promoting gender equality.
  19. IFRC, Prevention and Response to Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in COVID-19, A protection, Gender and Inclusion PGI Technical guidance note pdf icon[560 KB, 12 pages]external icon.
  20. Inter-agency Standing Committee Interim guidance -Technical note. Protection from sexual exploitation and abuse (PSEA) during COVID-19 response. Version 1.
  21. Rashad, M, Farrell, S. April 24, 2020. Reuters, Islam’s holiest sites emptied by coronavirus crisis as Ramadhan beginsexternal icon.
  22. ABP News Bureau, April 24, 2020. Pakistani Imams Overrule Lockdown for Ramadan, 253 Healthcare Workers get Infected with COVID-19external icon.
  23. Operational considerations for multisectoral mental health and psychosocial support programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic, Version 1.1pdf iconexternal icon.
  24. Public Health England: Guidance on Shielding and Protecting People Who are Clinically Extremely Vulnerable from COVID-19external icon.
  25. Van Bunnik, Bram A.D., Morgan, L.K., et a. Segmentation and shielding of the most vulnerable members elements of an exit strategy from COVID-19external icon. University of Edinburg.
  26. Michael TM, Clark S, Pogosjans S, et al. COVID-19 in a Long-Term Care Facility — King County, Washington, February 27–March 9, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020; 69:339-342. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6912e1

.

Video Interviews on Censored Covid Story and the S**t We Are All In!

Jimmie Dore: EXPLOSIVE Truth About Vaccines & COVID w/Inventor Of mRNA Vaccine Technology, Robert Malone  Must listen too, especially if you believe the government, corporate media and Pharma!

CDC buries truth about Omicron The CDC report summary on initial Omicron cases ignores the reality found buried in their own report. Contradictory information the CDC does not want the public to know! Out of the initial 43 Omicron cases CDC followed, 34 people (79%) had been fully vaccinated with 14 even having had their booster shots. There were no deaths and the only person hospitalized was fully vaccinated.

Coronavirus Covid-19 Research History – Index

.

Specific Issues Index

from Creating Better World

Posted in coronavirus, Covid-19 | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment