68.5 F
Chicago
Friday, September 18, 2026
Home Blog Page 2965

White House Says “Significant Military Response Coming” As Iran Denies Involvement In US Troop Deaths

0
White House Says “Significant Military Response Coming” As Iran Denies Involvement In US Troop Deaths

Iran has vehemently denied that it was behind the weekend drone attack on a Jordanian base near the Syrian border which killed three American troops, and according to a revised figure injured 34. A one-way drone reportedly slammed into a tent which was housing soldiers at the base, which is why casualties are so high, but questions remain.

Tehran has called the accusations that it was behind the attack “baseless” after President Biden on Sunday vowed “We shall respond”. Within the hours after news of the attack on Jordan’s Tower 22 base there were widespread reports that Iranian allied groups in Iraq and Syria were temporarily evacuating their bases, expending retaliatory airstrikes.

Iranian allies are now bracing for a major US response to the deadly attack on the Jordanian outpost, according to the Wall Street Journal. Already there’s been an apparent Israeli airstrike on a Damascus suburb, resulting in the deaths of two people, said to be targeting an “Iranian-backed group”. 

Via Associated Press

Even as Iran has denied involvement, an Iranian-linked group called “Islamic Resistance of Iraq” has taken responsibility for the Jordanian base attack. The core of the ‘resistance’ coalition in Iraq continues to be Kateeb Hizballah however, as Washington Post explains further of the details:

“Tower 22”, the U.S. base in NE Jordan where three American troops were just killed, overlooks a Syrian refugee camp called Rukban, where 15,000 people have been living for years. It is also near the Al-Tanf Garrison, where a couple hundred U.S. troops are based.

This is a crucial node between Iraq and Syria that Iranian militias have long sought to control. There have been several drone attacks on Tanf since Oct. 7. This is a brazen escalation.

The group that will claim responsibility calls themselves the “Islamic Resistance of Iraq,” but that’s really a post Oct 7 umbrella group of IRGC sponsored militias. The actual attackers were likely Kateeb Hizballah with support of Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujab and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq.

The Washington Post analysis goes on to claim that Islamic Resistance of Iraq has direct IRGC backing and was formed in order to “target Americans” – also at a moment the Iraqi government has made clear that it wants US troops out of the country.

Iran appears to be seeking to cool tensions while bracing for potential strikes

The three US troop deaths constitute the first American military fatalities since Oct.7 and the war in Gaza began, though there have been over 150 attacks targeting US bases and outposts in Iraq and Syria. While the initial assumption has been that the drone was launched from Syria, this has ultimately yet to be determined pending a Pentagon investigation.

Meanwhile, Axios reports that Biden’s national security team convened several times on Sunday. Biden and his top officials say that a “significant military response” against pro-Iranian militias is coming. “We don’t want war but those who are behind this attack need to feel our response,” one unnamed admin official told Axios on Sunday evening.

Attack location

What remains clear is that the US has once again backed itself into a corner in the Middle East. Sporadic ‘deterrent’ strikes either on militant camps or Houthi positions related to the Red Sea crisis have not done anything, and yet bigger American military intervention would inevitably lead to another all-out US war in the Middle East and thus a new endless quagmire.

“We don’t want a wider war with Iran, we don’t want a wider war in the region, but we gotta to do what we gotta to do,” National security (NSC) spokesman John Kirby said Monday. “We certainly know Iran is backing these groups … we are taking it very seriously.” It’s never a good sign when the NSC, which is absolutely the most ‘insider’ of the deep state, shrugs and says “we gotta do what we gotta do…” when it comes to matters of war (which once upon a time required the authorization of the people’s direct representatives in Congress). 

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 08:35

US Sanctions Strand 10 Million Barrels Of Russian Crude For Weeks

0
US Sanctions Strand 10 Million Barrels Of Russian Crude For Weeks

By Julianne Geiger of OilPrice.com

About 10 million barrels of Russian crude oil have been stranded off the coast of South Korea thanks to U.S. sanctions, traders and shipping data told Reuters on Friday.

The 10 million barrels, carried by 14 tankers, are of the Sokol variety from Sakhalin-1 and remain unsold due to Western sanctions. That amount represents about 45 days’ worth of Sakhalin-1 production at its average rate of 220,000 barrels per day.

The vessels—including 3 VLCCs—carrying the Russian crude oil have been stranded near the port of Yosu in South Korea for weeks after the United States sanctioned multiple vessels and companies that were transporting the Sokol grade.

Reuters sources and shipping data courtesy of Kpler and LSEG indicate that the VLCCs, carrying 3.2 million barrels, have been acting like floating storage.

At least some of the Sokol crude oil was destined for Indian Oil Corp. The delays in delivery caused by payment problems have caused Indian Oil Corp to search for crude from elsewhere—mainly from its own storage and the Middle East.

The United States initiated sanctions and a price cap on Russian crude oil transiting by water more than a year ago. The intent was not to disrupt the flow of oil, but to restrict revenues to Russia, who would otherwise use crude oil money to fund its military operations in Ukraine. The Biden Administration has insisted that its sanctions and G7 price cap have been effective, despite the accusations from some that they have been largely ineffectual.

The Kyiv School of Economics estimated in December that Moscow would bring in $178 billion from oil sales in 2023—and predicted that this figure would rise in 2024. According to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, the import ban and price cap have cost Russia $37 billion in export revenue. “The price cap has had an impact but has failed to live up to its potential” CREA analysts said last December.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 05:00

Mess In The West: ‘Army Of God’ Convoy Heads To US Border While EU Farmers Block Cities

0
Mess In The West: ‘Army Of God’ Convoy Heads To US Border While EU Farmers Block Cities

In the US, a convoy of truckers, calling themselves “God’s Army,” is preparing to embark on a journey from several locations across the Lower 48 to the southern border as tensions soar between Texas and the Biden administration. Meanwhile across the Atlantic, farmers are bearing down on Europe’s capitals – from Bucharest to Warsaw to Brussels – venting frustrations about climate policies. These social instabilities are breaking out ahead of key European and US elections this year. 

The organizers of the “Take Our Border Back” convoy are “calling all active & retired law enforcement and military, Veterans, Mama Bears, elected officials, business owners, ranchers, truckers, bikers, media and LAW ABIDING, freedom-loving Americans” to “assemble in honor of our US Constitution and Bill of Rights” at the southern border, in protest against the federal government’s inability to secure the border, according to the convoy’s website.

“Fellow citizens and compatriots … I call on you in the name of liberty, of patriotism and everything dear to the American character to come to our aid with all dispatch,” Pete Chambers, one of the coalition’s leaders, wrote. “If this call is neglected, we are determined to sustain ourselves as long as possible and act like soldiers who never forget what is due to our own honor and that of our country.”

The convoy plans to “send a message” to government officials at all levels about the need to secure the board amid the multi-year invasion of millions of illegals. Chambers believes Americans are “besieged on all sides” by evil “dark forces.”

As we’ve noted, journalists have uncovered a “shadowy network” of what appears to be taxpayer-funded non-government agencies, facilitating the most massive border invasion this nation has ever seen. 

Last week, Texas Governor Greg Abbott declared the migrant crisis an “invasion” and invoked Texas’ constitutional authority to defend and protect itself. 

Abbott stated, “That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary. The Texas National Guard, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and other Texas personnel are acting on that authority, as well as state law, to secure the Texas border.”

The Biden administration could’ve easily secured the border with an executive order … but radicals in the White House don’t want to waste a good crisis ahead of the presidential election in 281 days. 

Meanwhile…

Across the Atlantic, farmers have been venting their anger in several of Europe’s capitals that will likely “slow the implementation of environmental reforms in the European Union and make it harder for Brussels to negotiate free trade agreements,” according to research firm Stratfor. 

“Farmers across Europe have taken to the streets in recent weeks to voice their discontent over their governments’ economic, environmental and trade policies,” Stratfor continued. And this is all happening ahead of June’s European elections. 

Uprisings in the West, among the working class, objecting to unpopular “globalist” policies are happening ahead of major elections. 

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 04:15

Meet Amy Pope: The UN’s Human-Trafficking Czar

0
Meet Amy Pope: The UN’s Human-Trafficking Czar

Authored by Robert A. Bishop via American Thinker,

Meet Amy Pope, an open borders advocate, Obama apparatchik, and an accomplice of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. As the UN’s Deputy Secretary of the International Organization of Migration (IOM), the preeminent NGO in the field of migration, she plays an integral role in the illegal alien surge at our southern border.

In the Obama regime, as a policy wonk, she held flashy-sounding job titles: DoJ Deputy Chief of Staff, Deputy Assistant to the President, Deputy Homeland Security Advisor, Special Assistant to the President, Transborder Security Director, Interior Enforcement (2010-2016). During Trump’s term, she was a partner in the UK Schillings law firm, an Associate Fellow in the UK’s Chatham House think-tank, and a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council (2017-2020). Bonafides of a globalist influencer.

While at Chatham, nonprofit think-tank Migration Policy Institute (MPI) commissioned Pope for a white paper on “Immigration and U.S. National Security.” The Institute advocates for permanent legal residence for undocumented immigrants in the United States and global migration policy. Progressive organizations like the Gates Foundation and George Soros Open Society — the usual suspects — fund MPI. The report concluded domestic terrorists represent the most significant threat, while asylum seekers pose a relatively low threat.

The primary terrorist threat comes from small pockets of radicalized individuals or “lone wolves,” many of whom were born and raised in the United States or in Europe and would not be obvious targets for exclusion.

Unfortunately, there is also evidence that much-needed resources, political will, and capability are increasingly being siphoned away from addressing meaningful threats to national security and focused on the extremely low threat posed by people seeking asylum, economic advancement, family reunification, or otherwise traveling to the United States.

Is it a coincidence that her conclusion became DHS Secretary Mayorkas’s top security priority of domestic violent extremism?

Before the 2020 elections, she appeared before the UK’s Oxford Union, the world’s most prestigious debating society. She denounced President Trump for his policy on building the border wall and limiting immigration, sanctimonious proclaiming “that this President has failed in every respect to keep the United States safe from harms,” the essence of Kafkaesque reasoning.

Pope was a senior advisor on migration with the Biden administration before becoming the Deputy Director for the UN’s International Organization of Migration. Last year, the State Department, which provides substantial grants to IOM, successfully campaigned to get her elected to a five-year term as Director General. 

Her coronation occurred at the United Nations 87th Assembly, meeting with world leaders on human mobility to “harness the power of migration,” where migration is a powerful driver to fulfill the UN’s Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development Goals. She is proud to be moving tens of millions of people from their land of origin to destabilize Western host nations. 

Pope followed up with a victory lap as a panelist on migration at the UN’s Climate Change Conference COP28 and the World Economic Forum. Her slogan is “stakeholders around the world,” a euphemism for global Marxism. Her ideology is profoundly rooted in the ‘America Last’ doctrine.

IOM aims to work closely with governments and other United Nations agencies to enable resettlement.  To achieve that goal, it provides migrants with cash-based interventions, supplies, and transit assistance, in addition to coordinating and managing UN way stations like Lajas Blancas and Bajo Chiquito camps in Panama.

Because of unprecedented migration, Pope’s bold strategic plan is increasing the 2024 budget to $7.9 billion — nearly a threefold increase over the 2023 budget. We can be sure that the State Department will help to fill that void.

Pope is subverting American values and principles by facilitating an illegal alien insurgency, unofficially over eight million primarily military-aged males. Destabilizing social order and undermining the rule of law is the definition of an insurrectionist. Ironically, she violates the United Nations’ definition of human trafficking: “The crime of human trafficking consists of three core elements: the act, the means, the purpose.” Defunding the UN and its NGOs will help curtail the global migration flows.

Bob Bishop is a forensic investigator and retired CPA. His social media accounts are LinkedIn, X, and YouTube.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 03:30

Several Common Drugs Are Linked To Dementia

0
Several Common Drugs Are Linked To Dementia

Authored by Marina Zhang via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

It is well-known that dementia is often a result of aging. However, sometimes it can be caused by medications.

(Life science/Shutterstock)

Drug-induced dementia, the late neurologist and neurosurgeon K.K. Jain wrote, is a type of reversible dementia different from common neurodegenerative disorders.

Several drugs increase the risks of dementia, the most prominent being anticholinergic drugs, anti-epileptics, oncology drugs, and sedative-hypnotic drugs. These are all common prescriptions for older people.

In recent years, antidepressants have also been linked with dementia risks.

The Link Between Dementia and Common Drugs

Psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin, who has published several books on psychopharmacology, told The Epoch Times that most drugs on the market have some degree of neurotoxicity, which can lead to cognitive and neurological side effects.

Not everyone will be affected by a drug’s neurotoxic effects, though older people and those with brain deficits are more vulnerable.

With illnesses that surface in old age and the pills prescribed to treat each symptom, older people also tend to be the most likely cohort to be prescribed drugs that damage their cognition.

For example, many drugs prescribed to treat Parkinson’s disease are linked with dementia risks since they block acetylcholine in the brain as a way of preventing tremors and sudden movements in patients. Acetylcholine is a neurotransmitter that also facilitates cognitive function.

Proton pump inhibitors, often prescribed to treat heartburn, have also been shown in studies to increase people’s risks of dementia by 44 percent.

Within the literature, the most well-known class of drugs that can induce dementia are anticholinergic drugs.

Anticholinergics block the release of acetylcholine. As early as 1977, experiments using the anticholinergic drug scopolamine showed that 40 minutes after drug administration, young medical volunteers in their 20s manifested dementia-like symptoms and had a harder time recalling things they had just learned.

Anticholinergic drugs block autonomic muscle movements and various bodily functions and are often prescribed for cramping and spasms in various organs. They also function as a sedative.

Neuroscientist Dayan Goodenowe, who has a doctorate in medicine and psychiatry, explained on Epoch TV’s “Vital Signs” program that the acetylcholine system is the same system that controls cognition and mobility, two major functions impaired in dementia.

When neurons become unable to release acetylcholine, either due to age or drug effects, their contact with other neurons is reduced. The neurons and brain then start to shrink.

This has also been observed in research published by Indiana University professor Shannon Risacher, who has a doctorate in medical neuroscience. She found that people taking anticholinergic drugs have greater shrinkage of overall brain volume.

“Use of medication with significant anticholinergic activity should likely be discouraged in older adults if alternative therapies are available,” Ms. Risacher and her co-authors wrote in a JAMA Neurology study.

Examples of anticholinergic drugs include diphenhydramine, the active compound in Benadryl, Tylenol PM, and Advil PM. They also include common medications for Parkinson’s disease, such as benztropine, trihexyphenidyl, etc.

Acetylcholine naturally decreases with aging, so Mr. Goodenowe and his team have been attempting to find therapeutics that increase the brain’s acetylcholine levels without compromising overall brain function.

Antidepressants, Other Drugs, and Polypharmacy

Antidepressants, anti-epileptics, hypnotic sedatives, and opioids have also been shown to increase a person’s risk of dementia. These, along with anti-parkinsonian drugs, are all psychoactive.

The primary function of antidepressants is to block neurotransmitters such as serotonin instead of acetylcholine. However, these drugs still have potent anticholinergic properties and, when taken with other anticholinergics, could add to the overall load, potentially inducing side effects of delirium and dementia.

Older people with dementia are often prescribed antidepressants, anti-epileptics, and sedative drugs to help manage depression and aggression that can arise.

However, Dr. Breggin highlighted that an irony is that the drugs prescribed to patients to improve these conditions may very well exacerbate their illness.

Drugs not prescribed for psychoactive treatment have also been linked to dementia.

Type 1 histamine (H1) blockers, prescribed to control allergies, have been shown to increase the risk of dementia in some people. Compared to type 2 histamine (H2) blockers, some H1 blockers can cross the blood-brain barrier and prevent acetylcholine release.

Furthermore, prescribing multiple drugs to a patient—a practice known as polypharmacy—may cause cumulative adverse effects.

Whether a patient will develop cognitive impairment or not when prescribed a particular drug with anticholinergic properties is unpredictable and depends on factors such as co-medications which may have anticholinergic effects,” Drs. Alan Moore and Shaun O’Keefe, professors of geriatric medicine, wrote in their paper discussing drug-induced neurological effects.

“Studies have suggested that it is often the total burden of anticholinergic drugs that determines development of delirium rather than any single agent,” they added.

The Complex Brain

While many psychoactive drugs on the market attempt to “fix” the brain, how the organ is supposed to function at baseline largely remains a mystery.

Psychoactive drugs are often prescribed to correct brain chemical imbalances, but researchers do not know what the brain’s normal state truly looks like, as Yale University professor Avram Holmes illustrated in his 2018 comment about the brain having “no fixed normal” state.

“There are hundreds of neurotransmitters we don’t know about and maybe thousands of transmitters,” Dr. Breggin said. “We just have a few that are deeply affected by psych drugs, and [those are the ones we] could study because the drug companies in the pharmaceutical industry pay for that.”

Dr. Breggin argues that psychoactive drugs, which aim to address biochemical imbalances within the brain, actually cause the brain to become further maladapted.

He gave the example of SSRIs, which increase serotonin levels by blocking serotonin removal.

He has observed that the brain experiences two changes while on the drug: It reduces serotonin production and reduces the power of the serotonin removal system.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 02:45

Logically.AI Of Britain And The Expanding Global Reach Of Censorship

0
Logically.AI Of Britain And The Expanding Global Reach Of Censorship

Authored by Lee Fang via RealClear Wire,

Brian Murphy, a former FBI agent who once led the intelligence wing of the Department of Homeland Security, reflected last summer on the failures of the Disinformation Governance Board – the panel formed to actively police misinformation. The board, which was proposed in April 2022 after he left DHS, was quickly shelved by the Biden administration in a few short months in the face of criticism that it would be an Orwellian state-sponsored “Ministry of Truth.”

In a July podcast, Murphy said the threat of state-sponsored disinformation meant the executive branch has an “ethical responsibility” to rein in the social media companies. American citizens, he said, must give up “some of your freedoms that you need and deserve so that you get security back.”

The legal problems and public backlash to the Disinformation Governance Board also demonstrated to him that “the government has a major role to play, but they cannot be out in front.”

Murphy, who made headlines late in the Trump administration for improperly building dossiers on journalists, has spent the last few years trying to help the government find ways to suppress and censor speech it doesn’t like without being so “out in front” that it runs afoul of the Constitution. He has proposed that law enforcement and intelligence agencies formalize the process of sharing tips with private sector actors – a “hybrid constellation” including the press, academia, researchers, non-partisan organizations, and social media companies – to dismantle “misinformation” campaigns before they take hold.

More recently, Murphy has worked to make his vision of countering misinformation a reality by joining a United Kingdom-based tech firm, Logically.AI, whose eponymous product identifies and removes content from social media. Since joining the firm, Murphy has met with military and other government officials in the U.S., many of whom have gone on to contract or pilot Logically’s platform.

Logically says it uses artificial intelligence to keep tabs on over one million conversations. It also maintains a public-facing editorial team that produces viral content and liaisons with the traditional news media. It differs from other players in this industry by actively deploying what they call “countermeasures” to dispute or remove problematic content from social media platforms.

 The business is even experimenting with natural language models, according to one corporate disclosure, “to generate effective counter speech outputs that can be leveraged to deliver novel solutions for content moderation and fact-checking.” In other words, artificial intelligence-powered bots that produce, in real-time, original arguments to dispute content labeled as misinformation.

In many respects, Logically is fulfilling the role Murphy has articulated for a vast public-private partnership to shape social media content decisions. Its technology has already become a key player in a much larger movement that seeks to clamp down on what the government and others deem misinformation or disinformation. A raft of developing evidence – including the Twitter Files, the Moderna Reports, the proposed Government Disinformation Panel, and other reports – has shown how governments and industry are determined to monitor, delegitimize, and sometimes censor protected speech. The story of Logically.AI illustrates how sophisticated this effort has become and its global reach. The use of its technology in Britain and Canada raises red flags as it seeks a stronger foothold in the United States.

Logically was founded in 2017 by a then-22-year-old British entrepreneur named Lyric Jain, who was inspired to form the company to combat what he believed were the lies that pushed the U.K. into voting in favor of Brexit, or leaving the European Union. The once-minor startup now has broad contracts across Europe and India, and has worked closely with Microsoft, Google, PwC, TikTok, and other major firms. Meta contracts with Logically to help the company fact-check content on all of its platforms: WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook.

The close ties to Silicon Valley provide unusual reach. “When Logically rates a piece of content as false, Facebook will significantly reduce its distribution so that fewer people see it, apply a warning label to let people know that the content has been rated false, and notify people who try to share it,” Meta and Logically announced in a 2021 press release on the partnership.

Meta and Logically did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

 During the 2021 local elections in the U.K., Logically monitored up to “one million pieces of harmful content,” some of which they relayed to government officials, according to a document reviewed by RealClearInvestigations. The firm claimed to spot coordinated activity to manipulate narratives around the election, information they reported to tech giants for takedowns.

The following year, the state of Oregon negotiated with Logically for a wide-ranging effort to monitor campaign-related content during the 2022 midterm elections. In a redacted proposal for the project, Logically noted that it would check claims against its “single source of truth database,” which relied on government data, and would also crack down on “malinformation” – a term of art that refers to accurate information that fuels dangerous narratives. The firm similarly sold Oregon on its ability to pressure social media platforms for content removal.

Oregon State Rep. Ed Diehl has a led push against the state from renewing its work with Logically for the election this year. The company, he said in an interview, violates “our constitutional rights to free speech and privacy” by “flagging true information as false, claiming legitimate dissent is a threat, and then promoting “counter-narratives” against valid forms of public debate.

In response, the Oregon Secretary of State’s office, which initiated the contract with Logically, claimed “no authority, ability, or desire to censor speech.” Diehl disputes this. He pointed out that the original proposal with Logically clearly states that its service “enables the opportunity for unlimited takedown attempts” of alleged misinformation content and the ability for the Oregon Secretary of State’s office to “flag for removal” any “problematic narratives and content.” The contract document touts Logically as a “trusted entity within the social media community” that gives it “preferred status that enables us to support our client’s needs at a moment’s notice.”

Diehl, who shared a copy of the Logically contract with RCI, called the issue a vital “civil rights” fight, and noted that in an ironic twist, the state’s anti-misinformation speech suppression work further inflames distrust in “election systems and government institutions in general.”

Logically’s reach into the U.S. market is quickly growing. The company has piloted programs for the Chicago Police Department to use artificial intelligence to analyze local rap music and deploy predictions on violence in the community, according to a confidential proposal obtained by RCI. Pentagon records show that the firm is a subcontractor to a program run by the U.S. Army’s elite Special Operations Command for work conducted in 2022 and 2023. Via funding from DHS, Logically also conducts research on gamer culture and radicalization.

The company has claimed in its ethics statements that it will not employ any person who holds “a salaried or prominent position” in government. But records show closely entrenched state influence. For instance, Kevin Gross, a director the U.S Navy NAVAIR division, was previously embedded within Logically’s team during a 2022 fellowship program. The exchange program supported Logically’s efforts to assist NATO on the analysis of Russian social media.

Other contracts in the U.S. may be shrouded in secrecy. Logically partners with ThunderCat Technologies, a contracting firm that assists tech companies when competing for government work. Such arrangements have helped tech giants conceal secretive work in the past. Google previously attempted to hide its artificial intelligence drone-targeting contracts with the Defense Department through a similar third party contracting vendor.

But questions swirl over the methods and reach of the firm as it entrenches itself into American life, especially as Logically angles to play a prominent role in the 2024 presidential election. 

Pandemic Policing

In March 2020, as Britain confronted the spread of COVID-19, the government convened a new task force, the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU). The secretive task force was created with little fanfare, but was advertised as a public health measure to protect against dangerous misinformation. Caroline Dinenage, the member of parliament overseeing media issues, later explained that the unit’s purpose was to provide authoritative sources of information and to “take action to remove misinformation” relating to “misleading narratives related to COVID-19.”

The CDU, it later emerged, had largely outsourced its work to private contractors such as Logically. In January 2021, the company received its first contract from the agency overseeing the CDU, for £400,000, to monitor ”potentially harmful disinformation online.” The contracts later swelled, with the U.K. agency that pertains to media issues eventually providing contracts with a combined value of £1.2 million and the Department of Health providing another £1.3 million, for a total of roughly $3.2 million.

That money went into far-reaching surveillance that monitored journalists, activists, and lawmakers who criticized pandemic policies. Logically, according to an investigation last year in the Telegraph, recorded comments from activist Silkie Carlo criticizing vaccine passports in its “Mis/Disinformation” reports.

Logically’s reports similarly collected information on Dr. Alexandre de Figueiredo, a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Figueiredo had published reports on the negative ways in which vaccine passports could undermine vaccine confidence and had publicly criticized policies aimed at the mass vaccination of children. Despite his expertise, Logically filed his tweet in a disinformation report to the government. While some of the reports were categorized as evidence of terms of service violations, many were, in fact, routine forms of dissent aired by prominent voices in the U.K. on policies hotly contested by expert opinion.

The documents showing Logically’s role were later uncovered by Carlo’s watchdog group, Big Brother Watch, which produced a detailed report on the surveillance effort. The CDU reports targeted a former judge who argued against coercive lockdowns as a violation of civil liberties and journalists criticizing government corruption. Some of the surveillance documents suggest a mission creep for the unit, as media monitoring emails show that the agency targeted anti-war groups that were vocal against NATO’s policies.

Carlo was surprised to even find her name on posts closely monitored and flagged by Logically. “We found that the company exploits millions of online posts to monitor, record and flag online political dissent to the central government under the banner of countering ‘disinformation,’” she noted in a statement to RCI.

Marketing materials published by Logically suggest its view of COVID-19 went well beyond fact-checking and veered into suppressing dissenting opinions. A case study published by the firm claimed that the #KBF hashtag, referring to Keep Britain Free, an activist group against school and business shutdowns, was a dangerous “anti-vax” narrative. The case study also claimed that the suggestion that “the virus was created in a Chinese laboratory” was one of the “conspiracy theories’’ that “have received government support” in the U.S. – despite the fact that a preponderance of evidence now points to a likely lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology as the origin of the pandemic.

Logically was also involved in pandemic work that blurred the line with traditional fact-checking operations. In India, the firm helped actively persuade patients to take the vaccine. In 2021, Jain, the founder and CEO of the company, said in an interview with an Indian news outlet that his company worked “closely with communities that are today vaccine hesitant.” The company, he said, recruited “advocates and evangelists” to shape local opinion.

Questionable Fact-Checking

In 2022, Logically used its technology on behalf of Canadian law enforcement to target the trucker-led “Freedom Convoy” against COVID-19 mandates, according to government records. Logically’s team floated theories that the truckers were “likely influenced by foreign adversaries,” a widely repeated claim used to denigrate the protests as inauthentic.

The push to discredit the Canadian protests showed the overlapping power of Logically’s multiple arms. While its social media surveillance wing fed reports to the Canadian government, its editorial team worked to influence opinion through the news media. When the Financial Times reported on the protest phenomenon, the outlet quoted Murphy, the former FBI man who now works for Logically, who asserted that the truckers were influenced by coordinated “conspiracy theorist groups” in the U.S. and Canada. Vice similarly quoted Joe Ondrak, Logically’s head of investigations, to report that the “Freedom Convoy” had generated excitement among global conspiracy theorists. Neither outlet disclosed Logically’s work for Canadian law enforcement at the time.

Other targets of Logically are quick to point out that the firm has taken liberties with what it classifies as misinformation.

Will Jones, the editor of the Daily Sceptic, a British news outlet with a libertarian bent, has detailed an unusual fact-check from Logically Facts, the company’s editorial site. Jones said the site targeted him for pointing out that data in 2022 showed 71% of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were vaccinated. Logically’s fact-check acknowledged Jones had accurately used statistics from the U.K. Health Security Agency, but tried to undermine him by asserting that he was still misleading by suggesting that “vaccines are ineffective.”

But Jones, in a reply, noted that he never made that argument and that, Logically was batting away at a straw man. In fact, his original piece plainly took issue with a Guardian article that incorrectly claimed that “COVID-19 has largely become a disease of the unvaccinated.”

Other Logically fact-checks have bizarrely targeted the Daily Sceptic for reporting on news in January 2022 that vaccine mandates might soon be lifted. The site dinged the Daily Sceptic for challenging the evidence behind the vaccine policy and declared, “COVID-19 vaccines have been proven effective in fighting the pandemic.” And yet, at the end of that month, the mandate was lifted for healthcare workers and the following month, all other pandemic restrictions were revoked, just as the Daily Sceptic had reported.

As far as I can work out, it’s a grift,” said Daily Sceptic founder Toby Young, of Logically. “A group of shysters offer to help the government censor any criticism of its policies under the pretense that they’re not silencing dissent – God forbid! – but merely ‘cleansing’ social media of misinformation, disinformation and hate speech.

Jones was similarly dismissive of the company, which he said disputes anything that runs contrary to popular consensus. “The consensus of course is that set by the people who pay Logically for their services,” Jones added. “The company claims to protect democratic debate by providing access to ‘reliable information, but in reality, it is paid to bark and savage on command whenever genuine free speech makes an inconvenient appearance.”

In some cases, Logically has piled on to news stories to help discredit voices of dissent. Last September,  the anti-misinformation site leaped into action after British news outlets published reports about sexual misconduct allegations surrounding comedian and online broadcaster Russell Brand — one of the outspoken critics of government policy in Britain, who has been compared to Joe Rogan for his heterodox views and large audience.

 Brand, a vocal opponent of pandemic policies, had been targeted by Logically in the past for airing opinions critical of the U.S. and U.K. response to the virus outbreak, and in other moments for criticizing new laws in the European Union that compel social media platforms to take down content.

But the site took dramatic action when the sexual allegations, none of which have been proved in court, were published in the media. Ondrak, Logically’s investigations head, provided different quotes to nearly half a dozen news outlets – including Vice, Wired, the BBC, and two separate articles in The Times – that depicted Brand as a dangerous purveyor of misinformation who had finally been held to account.

“He follows a lot of the ostensibly health yoga retreat, kind of left-leaning, anti-capitalist figures, who got really suckered into Covid skepticism, Covid denialism, and anti-vax, and then spat out of the Great Reset at the other end,” Ondrak told Wired. In one of the articles published by The Times, Ondrak aired frustration on the obstacles of demonetizing Brand from the Rumble streaming network. In an interview with the BBC, Ondrak gave a curious condemnation, noting Brand stops short of airing any actual conspiracy theories or falsehoods, but is guilty of giving audiences “the ingredients to make the disinformation themselves.”

Dinenage, the member of parliament who spearheaded the CDU anti-misinformation push with Logically during the pandemic, also leapt into action. In the immediate aftermath of the scandal, she sent nearly identical letters to Rumble, TikTok and Meta to demand that the platforms follow YouTube’s lead in demonetizing Brand. Dinenage couched her official request to censor Brand as a part of a public interest inquiry, to protect the “welfare of victims of inappropriate and potentially illegal behaviour.”

Logically’s editorial team went a step further. In its report on the Brand allegations published on Logically Facts, it claimed that social media accounts “trotting out the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ refrain” for the comedian were among those perpetuating “common myths about sexual assault.” The site published a follow-up video reiterating the claim that those seeking the presumption of innocence for Brand, a principle dating back to the Magna Carta, were spreading a dangerous “myth.”

The unusual advocacy campaign against Brand represented a typical approach for a company that has long touted itself as a hammer against spreaders of misinformation. The opportunity to remove Brand from the media ecosystem meant throwing as much at him as possible, despite any clear misinformation or disinformation angle in the sexual assault allegations. Rather, he was a leading critic of government censorship and pandemic policy, so the scandal represented a weakness to be exploited.

Such heavy-handed tactics may be on the horizon for American voters. The firm is now a member of the U.S. Election Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center, the group managed by the Center for Internet Security that helps facilitate misinformation reports on behalf of election officials across the country. Logically has been in talks with Oregon and other states, as well as DHS, to expand its social media surveillance role for the presidential election later this year.

Previous targets of the company, though, are issuing a warning. 

“It appears that Logically’s lucrative and frankly sinister business effectively produced multi-million pound misinformation for the government that may have played a role in the censorship of citizens’ lawful speech,” said Carlo of Big Brother Watch.

“Politicians and senior officials happily pay these grifters millions of pounds to wield the red pen, telling themselves that they’re ‘protecting’ democracy rather than undermining it,” said Young of the Daily Sceptic. “It’s a boondoggle and it should be against the law.”

Tyler Durden
Mon, 01/29/2024 – 02:00

The CDC Covered Up The Vaccine’s Risks

0
The CDC Covered Up The Vaccine’s Risks

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The Epoch Times,

By the Spring of 2021, Americans were inundated by a cacophony of demands that everyone immediately line up for the shot that would supposedly end the pandemic.

The screams of certainty were deafening.

It was everywhere you turned: TV, radio, newspaper, social media, and medical authorities at all levels.

Several features of this campaign were suspicious.

 

People had begun to notice that the virus itself was nowhere near as deadly as had been claimed. Yes people got sick but, as with the flu, most everyone shook it off in time. Why get vaccinated for a pathogen against which your immunity can be earned the old-fashioned way? It never made sense that this was somehow essential for the whole population.

 

Then there was the question of whether it was going to be effective. Coronaviruses are fast-mutating, and the whole history of vaccines suggests they are not capable of keeping up. It’s even worse: some specialists at the time said that mass vaccination against one variant drives the virus to mutate even more, while disabling the capacity of the immune system to resist. That suspicion was confirmed true by the time the year was up.

Then there is the pressing question of safety. It was a new technology and hence an experiment. Absolutely no regular member of the public knew precisely what was in it yet. And yet everyone was forced to line up, roll up their sleeves, and accept it. No drug in the history of the FDA had been rolled out this way.

As for the claim that the shots are “safe,” that was never believable. To say “we don’t know” would have been the only honest statement, simply because there was no record of experience with these vaccines. You cannot declare something to be safe when there is no actual evidence or possibility of evidence within the time frame. It might be or it might not be. That should have been unbearably obvious.

Even at this point in the trajectory, the massive vaccine push had already overreached. Many people of intelligence knew this. There was clearly something odd about how all major pundits, as well as movie stars and social-media influencers, hectored the public. Many of these same people only six months earlier were telling the public to be skeptical of the vaccine because it was being pushed by the Trump administration.

Now at this late date, we are starting to get details about what was going on behind the scenes.

It turns out that the CDC started to see evidence of problems in the spring of 2021, namely the risk of myocarditis.

What did they do with that evidence? They buried it.

The Epoch Times has unearthed a startling email sent by the CDC to either Moderna or Pfizer letting them know that an CDC alert was likely coming.

“The pros and cons of an official HAN are what the main discussion are right now,” Dr. Sara Oliver, the official, wrote.

“I think it’s likely to be a HAN since that is CDC’s primary method of communications to clinicians and public health departments, but people don’t want to appear alarmist either.”

Despite the warning and the heads-up that this was going to be communicated with the public, the action alert was never sent. This was from May 25, 2021. During the same week, the CDC had previously told vaccine makers: “Wanted to make sure you were aware before anything was made public.”

This close collaboration between government regulators and agencies and the private manufacturers is suspicious enough. But to fail to alert the public of known risks is gravely irresponsible. We are talking here about people’s lives and health. They are supposed to be guardians of both but here we see the very opposite happening. They put marketing the shot above the health of the population.

At the time, something felt very wrong about the whole vaccination campaign. In the United States, we don’t do things simply because someone in authority says we should. We are skeptical of such invasions of our bodily integrity in the absence of transparency. When intimidation replaces rationality, there is something strange going on.

Many people got the shot anyway because the propaganda was so overwhelming. Some people went along despite their best instincts simply because they became exhausted from resisting. Even by the spring of 2021, mandates in business and government were starting to appear. Over time these grew more intense as the Biden administration tried every possible means to force the shots on the military, health care, transportation, and every business in America. The latter mandates were shot down by the Supreme Court but many stayed.

It became so insane that city governments like New York, Boston, and New Orleans locked down their whole towns to the vaccinated only. The unvaccinated could not go to theaters, libraries, restaurants, bars, or other indoor venues. They were blamed for prolonging the pandemic and declared generally unclean. All of this happened by the end of the year.

The health risks of the shot were known by the government and the vaccine makers but never revealed to the public. And why? It’s pretty simple. They knew that a truth-telling announcement would collapse demand for the shot. It was already sketchy and faltering so they decided to create the appearance of a united front. This was not only in the United States but in the UK and Europe too.

Clearly, a handful of pharmaceutical companies had by then captured control of myriad government agencies around the world, even the World Health Organization itself. It was so bad that health agencies shelved their entire mission in order to operate as marketing agencies for a particular technology. It was so intense that agencies buried even scary and known risks. We know this for sure now, thanks to sleuthing reporting.

How precisely this happened cries out for explanation. More strangely, most of us didn’t know that this had happened or was happening.

As it turns out, you can explain nearly everything that happened during the darkest months and years of our lives based on the one factor of panicking the population in order to maximize vaccine acceptance throughout the whole population. That was the reason for the prolongation panic, the disease-avoidance theater, the screaming media, the nutty mandates and restrictions, and all the rest. It was all designed to prepare the people for the shot.

It took me and others a very long time to see this. In retrospect, it all makes perfect sense what was going on. But how precisely this came to be—how democracies based on the idea of popular control of government became marketing agencies for Big Pharma—deserves years of investigation and deep reflections on the structural problems with government.

Meanwhile, we now have a health crisis to deal with as a consequence, not only of ill-health from lockdowns and missed diagnostics but also from the shots themselves. We don’t know the scale of the problem because the CDC has not been transparent about that either.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is your government. Is it any wonder that trust today is at rock bottom?

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/28/2024 – 23:20

December Border Surge Sets Alarming Record: 371,000 Illegal Crossings

0
December Border Surge Sets Alarming Record: 371,000 Illegal Crossings

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A record-breaking number of illegal immigrants crossed the U.S.-Mexico border last month, according to data released Friday by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), as the border crisis continues to rage with no end in sight.

A group of more than 1,000 unvetted immigrants wait in line near a U.S. Border Patrol field processing center after crossing the Rio Grande from Mexico, in Eagle Pass, Texas, on Dec. 18, 2023. (John Moore/Getty Images)

A stunning 371,036 encounters were caught entering the United States illegally in December, the data show, breaking the previous record of 341,392 set in August 2023.

Encounters along the southwest land border also set a new record, hitting 302,034, per other data released by CBP on Jan. 26

The record-shattering numbers come ahead of House Republican efforts to impeach Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his handling of the illegal immigration crisis.

Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) is expected to introduce articles of impeachment against Mr. Mayorkas next week.

Secretary Mayorkas has outdone himself yet again—never have we seen such catastrophic numbers, even with historically high encounter numbers on his watch,” Mr. Green said in a statement. “December’s numbers serve as more undeniable proof that Secretary Mayorkas must be impeached.”

Intentional ‘Disaster’?

Mr. Green said that not only are the record high numbers a “disaster,” but he alleged that they are intentional.

This staggering number of encounters at our borders only happens by design and a willful refusal to comply with the laws passed by Congress,” Mr. Green said, accusing the DHS chief of having “intentionally opened our borders.”

Mr. Green, like many of his fellow Republicans, has accused the Biden administration of relaxing border policies and flinging open the door to a sharp influx of illegal aliens.

Biden administration officials have rejected such allegations, claiming they’re doing all they can to stem the influx and variously blaming factors like seasonal fluctuations, a broken immigration system—even climate change.

Voters, meanwhile, have grown increasingly concerned about the border crisis, with a recent poll showing that immigration has become the top concern, shunting inflation into second spot.

“They are very concerned about immigration, inflation, and crime, and that’s why many of them are saying they want a new president,” Mark Penn, co-director of the Harvard CAPS / Harris poll and Stagwell chairman and CEO, said in a Jan. 22 statement.

Voters cast their ballots in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on Jan. 23, 2024. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

‘Give Me the Money’

President Joe Biden, whose approval on immigration sank to 35 percent in the poll, recently admitted that the border is not secure—although he denied his policies have had anything to do with it.

Mr. Mayorkas recently pinned the blame for the influx on Congress, or rather its failure to make legislative changes and provide more money for border security.

President Biden, too, has seen funding as key, most recently when he responded to a reporter asking him if he believed the border was secure.

“No, it’s not,” President Biden replied. “I haven’t believed it for the last 10 years. And I’ve said it for the last 10 years … give me the money.

President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign event at Montgomery County Community College, in Blue Bell, Pa., on Jan. 5, 2024. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Former President Donald Trump, under whose tenure (and tough border policies) the number of illegal crossings fell significantly, has been a sharp critic of his successor.

“When I was President, we had the most secure Border in History,” he wrote in a Jan. 25 statement. “Joe Biden has surrendered our Border and is aiding and abetting a massive Invasion of millions of Illegal Migrants into the United States.”

The former president accused President Biden of “fighting to tie the hands” of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in his efforts to bolster border security on his own, without federal help.

Texas is embroiled in a high-profile conflict with federal border protection agencies over the use of concertina wire along the southern border.

The Biden administration sued Texas over the razor wire, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against Mr. Abbott on Jan. 22 and allowed federal agents to cut Texas’ concertina wire barriers.

Unphased by the court order and the Biden administration’s criticism, Mr. Abbott said on Thursday that he would add more razor wire “to make sure we are doing even more to secure the border.”

Texas National Guard soldiers install additional razor wire along the Rio Grande in Eagle Pass, Texas, on Jan. 10, 2024. (John Moore/Getty Images)

‘Invasion Clause’

Declaring that the influx of illegal immigrants into his states amounts to an “invasion” that the Biden administration has failed to repel, Mr. Abbott on Jan. 24 invoked what’s been dubbed the invasion clause of the U.S. Constitution.

“The failure of the Biden Administration to fulfill the duties imposed by Article IV, § 4 has triggered Article I, § 10, Clause 3, which reserves to this State the right of self-defense,” Mr. Abbott said in a statement.

“For these reasons, I have already declared an invasion under Article I, § 10, Clause 3 to invoke Texas’s constitutional authority to defend and protect itself,” he said.

“That authority is the supreme law of the land and supersedes any federal statutes to the contrary,” the Texas governor added.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, left, listens as Republican presidential candidate and former President Donald Trump, right, speaks to Texas state troopers and guardsmen during a Thanksgiving meal at the South Texas International Airport, on Sunday, Nov. 19, 2023. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

President Trump expressed support for Mr. Abbott’s move and called on states to deploy National Guard troops to support Texas in its efforts to bolster border security.

“We encourage all willing states to deploy their guards to Texas to prevent the entry of illegals and to remove them back across the border,” President Trump said in a Jan. 25 statement.

President Trump further charged that President Biden was trying to hinder Mr. Abbott in his efforts to protect his state from the “onslaught” and, in fact, is working to keep the influx going “unchecked.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/28/2024 – 22:45

NPR’s New CEO Under Fire Over Social Media Postings

0
NPR’s New CEO Under Fire Over Social Media Postings

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The new CEO for National Public Radio (NPR) has become instant news over social media postings that she deleted before the recent announcement of her selection. Katherine Maher is the former CEO of Wikipedia and sought to remove controversial postings on subjects ranging from looters to Trump.

Shannon Thaler at the New York Post reassembled Maher’s deleted postings including a 2018 declaration that “Donald Trump is a racist” and a variety of race-based commentary. That included a statement that appeared to excuse looting:

She is also quoted for saying that “white silence is complicity.” She has described her own “hysteric white woman voice.” She further stated: “I was taught to do it. I’ve done it. It’s a disturbing recognition. While I don’t recall ever using it to deliberately expose another person to immediate physical harm on my own cognizance, it’s not impossible. That is whiteness.”

She further stated “I grew up feeling superior (hah, how white of me) because I was from New England and my part of the country didn’t have slaves, or so I’d been taught.”

The concern is that Maher will further the advocacy journalism at NPR in framing the news to advance social and political agendas. NPR employees have already objected to efforts to maintain a neutral tone in reporting and declared “civility is a weapon wielded by the powerful.” The most interesting question is how NPR will implement its controversial policy on allowing journalists to join in protests.

NPR declared that it would allow employees to participate in political protests when the editors believe the causes advance the “freedom and dignity of human beings.”

The rule itself shows how impressionistic and unprofessional media has become in the woke era. NPR does not try to define what causes constitute advocacy for the “freedom and dignity of human beings.” How about climate change and environmental protection? Would it be prohibited to protest for a forest but okay if it is framed as “environmental justice”?

NPR seems to intentionally keep such questions vague while only citing such good causes as Black Lives Matter and gay rights:

“Is it OK to march in a demonstration and say, ‘Black lives matter’? What about a Pride parade? In theory, the answer today is, “Yes.” But in practice, NPR journalists will have to discuss specific decisions with their bosses, who in turn will have to ask a lot of questions.”

So the editors will have the power to choose between acceptable and unacceptable causes.

Maher will now play a role in determining what causes advance “human dignity” that justifies reporters crossing the line to join the protests. Given her own past advocacy, NPR may have found the perfect adjudicator for advocacy journalists.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/28/2024 – 22:10

“High Crimes And Misdemeanors”: House Unveils Impeachment Articles Against Mayorkas Over Border Quagmire

0
“High Crimes And Misdemeanors”: House Unveils Impeachment Articles Against Mayorkas Over Border Quagmire

House Republicans on Sunday released articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, alleging he has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” in his mishandling of the southern US border.

(Photograph: John Moore/Getty Images)

According to the first article, Mayorkas is accused of:

  • Willful and Systemic Refusal to Comply with Federal Immigration Laws: This includes allegations of repeated violations of immigration and border security laws, contributing to illegal entries and compromising national security.
  • Failure to Comply with Detention Mandates: Accusations of implementing catch and release schemes, contrary to specific detention requirements in the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  • Exceeding Parole Authority: Claims that Mayorkas paroled aliens en masse, violating the case-by-case basis required by law.
  • Misrepresentation and False Statements to Congress: Allegations of making false claims about the security and control of the border.
  • Obstruction of Lawful Oversight: Accusations of failing to comply with congressional subpoenas and hindering investigations by the DHS Office of Inspector General.
  • Abandonment of Effective Border Security Initiatives: Claims that he neglected established border security measures without adequate alternatives, leading to increased illegal entries.
  • Failure to Enforce Immigration Laws and Control the Border: Accusations of failing to control illegal entries and the influx of unaccompanied alien children.
  • Diversion of Border Patrol Resources: Allegations that his policies led to the diversion of Border Patrol agents from their primary duties.
  • Increase in Encounters with Aliens on the Terrorist Watchlist: Claims of a significant increase in encounters with potentially dangerous individuals during his tenure.
  • General Neglect of Duty and Public Trust: Broad accusations of neglecting statutory duties related to immigration and border control.

As Just the News reports, a markup of the articles is scheduled for Tuesday, following a multi-phase, year-long investigation into Mayorkas.

“Congress has a duty to see that the executive branch implements and enforces the laws we have passed,” said House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green (R-TN), the Washington Post reports. “Yet Secretary Mayorkas has repeatedly refused to do so.”

Read the first article below:

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/28/2024 – 21:35