thelibertybeacon--2020-09-17--Response to British Govt. Proposal to Roll Out COVID-19 Vaccine Before Christmas

Response to the British Government Proposal to Roll Out A COVID-19 Vaccine Before Christmas The British government ( Prime Minister Boris Johnson pictured ) are running a public consultation with a view to cutting every corner and safeguard in order to roll out a COVID vaccine campaign before Christmas ( the British “ warp-speed ” ) .
presumably with the Oxford/Astra-Zeneca product in mind .
For anyone who wants to respond it ends this Friday ( 18 September ) .
This how I have responded to the on-line form .
Temporary authorisation of the supply of unlicensed products The urgency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision needs to be taken is heavily in doubt .
While the government has taken it upon itself to place restrictions on the public from which it would gladly be alleviated the hospitalisation and fatality rates for the virus have been in continuous decline since the spring – if indeed there is a continuing infection rate this presumably confers more certain immunity than any putative vaccine .
None of the initial candidate products purports to offer strong immunity so it is hard to see even if there were any good reasons for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ products would offer sufficient grounds for their removal .
It is more likely that they would simply contribute to public confusion .
As I understand it the decision to distribute unlicensed vaccines ( or licensed ones ) will be taken by the JCVI .
The JCVI is described as an “ independent ” body , but of what ?
The chair of the JCVI , Andrew Pollard , is lead developer of the Oxford/Astra Zeneca COVID-19 vaccine , which has been backed by the government to the tune of at least £100 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meeting of the JCVI which recommended the Bexsero Men B vaccine to the schedule of which he was also lead developer , which became part of Conservative window-dressing at the 2015 election .
Even if Pollard recuses himself the “ independence ” of any decision will be in doubt – apart from anything else at its February 2016 meeting the JCVI enjoyed the hospitality of Pollard ’ s research institution , the Martin School , and his Oxford College , St Cross .
It is not reported that any members protested .
Dissent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , indeed no votes ever seem to be recorded .
Should a decision be delayed beyond the end of the year it will come under the remit of the licensing authority , the MHRA .
The MHRA is entirely funded by the industry for the licensing of medicines and biologicals , and also advised by Prof Pollard .
In 2009 the MHRA – at the time of the swine flu scare – failed to detect an association between the GSK vaccine Pandemrix and the condition of narcolepsy , and remained uncontrite in BMJ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is illusory at the present time to suppose the licensure in itself provides grounds for confidence .
The government in fact has no existing processes to ensure confidence .
The government also assumes that anything “ authorised ” will subsequently be “ licensed ” which further calls the independence of the process into question .
What if it turned out to be not just “ temporary ” The document maintains that it would be unfair to manufacturers to have to sustain liability , but it is not clear why it would be fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incredible costs loaded on to them , whether any suit was against the manufacturer ( to be reimbursed by the government ) or against the government itself , the cost of which would then be passed to the public , if successful .
Admittedly , in almost any circumstances the Legal Aid Agency will fail to support such litigation ( a dramatic instance would be Vioxx ) , so it is somewhat theoretical : whatever happens , the manufacturer makes a killing and there is little sanction on them to ensure safety , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the disease .
Ultimately , the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian , but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed ( including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling ) .
It is further prejudicial if scorn and loathing are heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply ( for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “ anti-vaxxers ” , or pronouncements by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being a threat to global health ) which is devoid of intellectual merit , quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review , which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics .
This fails to recognise the rights of the patient .
It also undermines the rights of the patient if they are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves .
It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural immunity , particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold ( which seems entirely likely ) .
Successive governments have also undermined their credibility by turning away applications for vaccine damage awards – in 2017 the Department of Works and Pensions was hauled over the coals in the Court of Appeal for using a “ Catch 22 ” like strategy to deny claims over Pandemrix for narcolepsy in the swine flu episode .
How does it propose to establish its fairness now ?
Another question @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so confident they will get it right this time ?
Or perhaps the principle of hit and run holds this time as well .
Expansion to the workforce of the eligible to administer vaccines This is a reckless initiative .
For instance , the business of the US vaccine court tends to be dominated by claims of shoulder injuries ( no doubt because it is relatively easy to prove ) , and these are not trivial .
To injure people in pursuit of the chimera of zero-COVID when 80 % of people never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politicians , governments and mainstream media have a scandalous record of magical thinking over vaccines : it is always easy to ignore or gaslight those who have been harmed , and to blame the unvaccinated for the vaccinated catching the disease .
If the government makes claims about the safety and effectiveness of products which are not true or have not been established it will be hugely culpable .
Propaganda should not have a place in medicine and the government would do well to exercise discretion irrespective of whether products have been licensed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any COVID-19 vaccine products which hit the market in the next decade , let alone the next few months , will not have been adequately tested .
I repeat my comment under ‘ Civil liability and immunity ’ : “ Ultimately , the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian , but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed ( including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling ) .
It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply ( for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “ anti-vaxxers ” , or pronouncements by the WHO about the “ vaccine hesitant ” being a threat to global health ) which is devoid of intellectual merit , quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review , which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics .
This fails to recognise the rights of the patient .
It also undermines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves .
It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of children , for example , to acquire natural immunity , particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold ( which seems entirely likely ) .
” If the government want to maintain a lower standard of ethics than informing the public of the risks and shortcomings of the products when promoting them in the media this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even asking the question does not reflect well .
Further , if the government wants to suppress criticism of vaccine products in either the mainstream media or social media on a generic basis this does not speak well of its good faith .
Of course , it goes without saying that no one should make false claims either in favour or against products , but if you legislate against people criticising them then you most certainly have something to hide .
What we could do better I am satisfied with the space @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dissatisfied with what I have been asked to comment upon and the overall context of a government acting outside normal constraints ( and even perhaps outside its extended remit through the Coronavirus Act ) .
It remains to be seen whether the government is capable of listening at this late stage to any well-founded criticism , or whether it will just bludgeon on regardless .
Note : The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children ’ s Health Defense @

Response to the British Government Proposal to Roll Out A COVID-19 Vaccine Before Christmas
CHD Guest Editorial by John Stone, UK Editor, Age of Autism
The British government (Prime Minister Boris Johnson pictured) are running a public consultation with a view to cutting every corner and safeguard in order to roll out a COVID vaccine campaign before Christmas (the British “warp-speed”). presumably with the Oxford/Astra-Zeneca product in mind. For anyone who wants to respond it ends this Friday (18 September). This how I have responded to the on-line form.
None of the initial candidate products purports to offer strong immunity … None of the initial candidate products purports to offer strong immunity …
Temporary authorisation of the supply of unlicensed products
The urgency of the situation in which such a decision needs to be taken is heavily in doubt. While the government has taken it upon itself to place restrictions on the public from which it would gladly be alleviated the hospitalisation and fatality rates for the virus have been in continuous decline since the spring – if indeed there is a continuing infection rate this presumably confers more certain immunity than any putative vaccine. None of the initial candidate products purports to offer strong immunity so it is hard to see even if there were any good reasons for the present restrictions that the introduction of these products would offer sufficient grounds for their removal. It is more likely that they would simply contribute to public confusion.
As I understand it the decision to distribute unlicensed vaccines (or licensed ones) will be taken by the JCVI. The JCVI is described as an “independent” body, but of what? The chair of the JCVI, Andrew Pollard, is lead developer of the Oxford/Astra Zeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which has been backed by the government to the tune of at least £100 million. In February 2014 Pollard chaired a meeting of the JCVI which recommended the Bexsero Men B vaccine to the schedule of which he was also lead developer, which became part of Conservative window-dressing at the 2015 election. Even if Pollard recuses himself the “independence” of any decision will be in doubt – apart from anything else at its February 2016 meeting the JCVI enjoyed the hospitality of Pollard’s research institution, the Martin School, and his Oxford College, St Cross. It is not reported that any members protested. Dissent at JCVI meetings had never been reported, indeed no votes ever seem to be recorded.
Should a decision be delayed beyond the end of the year it will come under the remit of the licensing authority, the MHRA. The MHRA is entirely funded by the industry for the licensing of medicines and biologicals, and also advised by Prof Pollard. In 2009 the MHRA – at the time of the swine flu scare – failed to detect an association between the GSK vaccine Pandemrix and the condition of narcolepsy, and remained uncontrite in BMJ correspondence as late as 2018. It is illusory at the present time to suppose the licensure in itself provides grounds for confidence. The government in fact has no existing processes to ensure confidence. The government also assumes that anything “authorised” will subsequently be “licensed” which further calls the independence of the process into question. What if it turned out to be not just “temporary”
… whatever happens, the manufacturer makes a killing and there is little sanction on them to ensure safety …
Civil liability and immunity
The document maintains that it would be unfair to manufacturers to have to sustain liability, but it is not clear why it would be fair to the public who have already had incredible costs loaded on to them, whether any suit was against the manufacturer (to be reimbursed by the government) or against the government itself, the cost of which would then be passed to the public, if successful. Admittedly, in almost any circumstances the Legal Aid Agency will fail to support such litigation (a dramatic instance would be Vioxx), so it is somewhat theoretical: whatever happens, the manufacturer makes a killing and there is little sanction on them to ensure safety, let alone that you will not catch the disease.
Ultimately, the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian, but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed (including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling). It is further prejudicial if scorn and loathing are heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply (for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “anti-vaxxers”, or pronouncements by the WHO about the “vaccine hesitant” being a threat to global health) which is devoid of intellectual merit, quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review, which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics. This fails to recognise the rights of the patient. It also undermines the rights of the patient if they are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves. It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of children, for example, to acquire natural immunity, particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold (which seems entirely likely).
Successive governments have also undermined their credibility by turning away applications for vaccine damage awards – in 2017 the Department of Works and Pensions was hauled over the coals in the Court of Appeal for using a “Catch 22” like strategy to deny claims over Pandemrix for narcolepsy in the swine flu episode. How does it propose to establish its fairness now? Another question is why after that experience they are so confident they will get it right this time? Or perhaps the principle of hit and run holds this time as well.
Expansion to the workforce of the eligible to administer vaccines
This is a reckless initiative. For instance, the business of the US vaccine court tends to be dominated by claims of shoulder injuries (no doubt because it is relatively easy to prove), and these are not trivial. To injure people in pursuit of the chimera of zero-COVID when 80% of people never have symptoms would be highly unethical.
Propaganda should not have a place in medicine … Propaganda should not have a place in medicine …
Vaccine Promotion
Politicians, governments and mainstream media have a scandalous record of magical thinking over vaccines: it is always easy to ignore or gaslight those who have been harmed, and to blame the unvaccinated for the vaccinated catching the disease. If the government makes claims about the safety and effectiveness of products which are not true or have not been established it will be hugely culpable. Propaganda should not have a place in medicine and the government would do well to exercise discretion irrespective of whether products have been licensed or not. The fact is that any COVID-19 vaccine products which hit the market in the next decade, let alone the next few months, will not have been adequately tested.
… no one should make false claims either in favour or against products, but if you legislate against people criticising them then you most certainly have something to hide.
I repeat my comment under ‘Civil liability and immunity’:
“Ultimately, the government shelters legally behind the principle of informed consent which leaves the onus on the patient or their guardian, but needs to entail that it is genuinely informed (including all the risks and shortcomings of the product as is provided in the Montgomery ruling). It is further prejudicial if scorn and loathing are heaped on anyone who is not sure whether to comply (for instance the several derogatory comments made the Prime Minister about “anti-vaxxers”, or pronouncements by the WHO about the “vaccine hesitant” being a threat to global health) which is devoid of intellectual merit, quite outside the spirit of freedom of choice or the recommendations of the recent Cumberlege review, which considered instances where injured patients were subjected to bullying tactics. This fails to recognise the rights of the patient. It also undermines the rights of the patient if they are expected to be vaccinated to protect someone other than themselves. It is not only a dubious principle it may well be that it is in the interests of children, for example, to acquire natural immunity, particularly if the virulence of the disease retreats to the level of the common cold (which seems entirely likely).”
If the government want to maintain a lower standard of ethics than informing the public of the risks and shortcomings of the products when promoting them in the media this does not reflect well on its intentions. Even asking the question does not reflect well.
Further, if the government wants to suppress criticism of vaccine products in either the mainstream media or social media on a generic basis this does not speak well of its good faith. Of course, it goes without saying that no one should make false claims either in favour or against products, but if you legislate against people criticising them then you most certainly have something to hide.
What we could do better
I am satisfied with the space allocated to comment, but I am dissatisfied with what I have been asked to comment upon and the overall context of a government acting outside normal constraints (and even perhaps outside its extended remit through the Coronavirus Act). It remains to be seen whether the government is capable of listening at this late stage to any well-founded criticism, or whether it will just bludgeon on regardless.
Note: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.
••••
••••
TLB Editors Note: This is World Mercury Project on steroids! TLB highly recommends you click on the image below, visit this great website, and do whatever you can to help see this vital forum succeed … for the sake of our children !!! Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-09-17--Do 5G Promises Come with Real Human Costs?

Do 5G Promises Come with Real Human Costs ?
As a science and technology aficionado who believes in using science to promote human health and prosperity , I was startled to find myself being classified as a Luddite in a recent commentary by authored by a Frontier Center research associate .
The commentary was entitled “ Luddites Stand in the Way of 5G Prosperity : Fears Overblown , Ignore Benefits of Communications Connectivity ” and was released on July 29 , 2020 .
The one thing I can agree with in that commentary is that faster communications would provide many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have to be made about how to deliver faster communications to households , offices , farms , and manufacturing buildings .
Not all choices are good ones .
And you can ’ t do a proper cost/benefit analysis without thoroughly exploring all of the costs .
The expression “ 5G ” refers to the fifth generation of wireless technology , which will carry more data , at higher speeds , than previous cellular networks .
But wireless 5G is not the only game in town when it comes to delivering high-speed internet .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ systems .
Fibre optic cables consist of extremely thin interior strands of glass or plastic which carry signals in the form of light , surrounded by multiple layers of cladding , coating , and jacketing which prevent the light signals from escaping .
Fibre optic cables are already in use for most of the world ’ s internet transmissions .
This 2010 article estimated that “ ninety-nine percent of the Internet ’ s physical distance has been strung with fiber already.
” This means there ’ s a good chance that the street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already has fibre optic cable running along its length , even though it may not yet be in use ( this is known as “ dark fibre ” ) .
I ’ ve been told that ’ s the case in the municipality where I live .
The problem stems from what ’ s called “ the last mile ” : the distance between the street ’ s central fibre optic cable and the customer ’ s wifi router or receiving devices .
Until recently , this last mile ( which might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has ordinarily been wired with coaxial cable or DSL ( Digital Subscriber Lines ) .
Such cables transmit data reliably over shielded wires , but the transmission speed is relatively slow compared to fibre optics .
It ’ s the last mile that the two competing new technologies propose to speed up .
This can be done in two ways : either by replacing the coaxial or DSL cable running from the street to your home with additional fibre optic cable , or by simply beaming signals wirelessly to your devices using antennae @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Wireless 5G in North America would require the installation of millions of small cellular antennae in order to ensure continuous coverage .
1 That ’ s because the wavelengths they use have a very short range , so antennae have to be placed close together .
For indoor use , small cells might need to be located as little as 10 meters apart .
Outdoors , small cells have a range varying from 500 meters to 2.5 kilometers .
2 Some neighbourhoods might end up with small cells located on almost every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequency bands for their 5G , but the most important thing to note is that none of the wireless 5G technologies have undergone any safety testing whatsoever with respect to the impact of these waves on human health .
None .
This was admitted by industry representatives at a U.S. Senate hearing held on February 7 , 2019 , an excerpt of which can be seen in this YouTube video .
Yes , there are government guidelines for electromagnetic energy .
Here in Canada , they ’ re called Safety Code 6 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( “ C4ST ” ) allege that the code is severely obsolete.3 It was created by Health Canada in the 1970s ( long before the development of smartphones ) to evaluate the technology existing at that time .
It has not had any major revisions made to it in the last 30 years—but it has nevertheless has been extended to constitute the guidelines for a host of later-developed technologies including smartphones and cell phone antennae .
Health Canada is apparently content to let it serve as the safety guideline for the untested 5G @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by 398 scientists and doctors has recommended a moratorium on the roll-out of wireless 5G .
They say new scientific evidence demonstrates that living organisms ( both plants and animals ) are adversely affected by EMFs ( that is , existing electromagnetic frequencies emitted by 2G , 3G , and 4G technologies—let alone 5G ) at levels well below current national and international guidelines .
The problem would simply be exacerbated by 5G .
The National Toxicology Program in the U.S. has published a study showing “ a statistically significant increase in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ animals exposed to EMF below the… guidelines followed by most countries.
” The Bioinitiative Report ( published in 2012 and recently updated to cover the period up to 2020 ) was authored by 29 people from 10 countries .
Among them , they held 10 medical degrees ( MD ) , 21 PhDs , and a few other degrees .
This group doesn ’ t seem to fit the description of Luddites .
Among the health problems they identified from EMFs , as indicated in scientific studies , are : • Increased oxidative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with numerous conditions such as Alzheimer ’ s disease , high blood pressure , atherosclerosis , heart disease , arthritis and diabetes—all of which have increased dramatically since the 1990s ) ; • Neurological effects ( changes in memory , learning or perception ) ; • Disrupted immune function ( an especially important problem in these days of COVID-19 ) .
Dr. Martin Pall , Ph.D. , is Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University .
He has studied extensively the biological effects of electromagnetic fields , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California legislators three years ago .
His list of 14 different adverse health effects include life-threatening cardiac arrhythmias , lower sperm counts , cataract formation , and sleep disruption .
In short , it is absurd to dismiss the health concerns about EMFs that have been brought forward by hundreds of scientists as the grumpy rumblings of Luddites who just can ’ t get their heads around the potential benefits of science .
Opponents of 5G have additional concerns besides human health .
They point to studies showing adverse effects of EMFs on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even the microbes in our soil and in our intestines might be affected .
The importance of healthy microbes to human health is only just beginning to be understood .
Of particular concern is the possibility that insect pollinators such as bees and butterflies might be prevented from performing their crucial function of ensuring that the world has enough to eat .
Many 5G critics are concerned about possible data leaks , especially to China , the home country of Huawei , a major manufacturer of wireless 5G technology .
According to C4ST @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide even faster connectivity speeds than wireless 5G , without emitting radiation .
These cables are also less vulnerable to natural disaster or attack , and more protective of privacy .
It may cost more to run fibre optics across the last mile to individual homes than it would to install a street ’ s worth of 5G small cells , but that ’ s a cost that can be borne by the individual who purchases the technological upgrade .
And this raises the problem that should be of concern to all economists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the installation of fibre optics—a private concern .
Once the small cells start broadcasting , their radiation impacts everyone within range , whether they are 5G customers are not .
In economists ’ terminology , 5G imposes negative externalities on people who just happen to live in or meander through the territory where 5G customers and their suppliers are causing radiation to be emitted .
In a densely populated city , your neighbour may want 5G while you don ’ t .
The result may be that a small cell sits on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bedroom window and bathes you in unwanted electromagnetic radiation all night .
Ms. Gomez ’ s article placed speculative values on the anticipated benefits of wireless 5G , but dismissed as “ unsupported ” any claims of harm .
Consequently , her cost/benefit analysis of 5G failed to take into account the following possible costs : • Health care costs of treating individuals who might be adversely affected by wireless 5G ; • Lost productivity of individuals who might be rendered unable to work due to 5G ; • The loss of crops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ important soil microbes are killed off or incapacitated .
There is also one certain , non-speculative cost that she has failed to take into account : namely , the cost of protective gear that many people are already acquiring to protect themselves from 5G as it expands relentlessly into Canada .
Since becoming aware of the adverse impacts of earlier generations of EMFs , I myself have purchased a device that I hope will reduce the impact of EMFs , and I ’ m investigating other devices to shield my windows , my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case 5G comes to my town .
New companies in this field are springing up all over the place , selling everything from metallic-lined clothing to pendants to Faraday cages for your bedroom .
At common law , the case of Rylands v. Fletcher ( 1868 ) established that a person is liable for damages if he allows something harmful to escape from his land onto neighbouring property .
Here ’ s the most famous passage from the British House of Lords : If a person brings , or accumulates , on his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ escape , may cause damage to his neighbour , he does so at his peril .
If it does escape , and cause damage , he is responsible , however careful he may have been , and whatever precautions he may have taken to prevent the damage .
It has not yet been tested whether a court would apply this rule to 5G electromagnetic waves ( or even 4G , for that matter ) but a UK group called Action Against 5G has retained a team of lawyers to commence legal proceedings .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK group does not oppose technology .
Rather , it opposes untested and suspected unsafe technology .
It advocates the use of fibre optics instead of wireless 5G to achieve speedier communications .
Likewise , a group called Stop5GNetherlands applied for an injunction on February 25 , 2020 to invoke an emergency procedure to stop the installation of 5G in the Netherlands .
In the US , the Children ’ s Health Defense organization headed up by lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is suing the Federal Communication Commission ( FCC ) for refusing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Canada ’ s ) are more than 25 years old .
In 2019 , an appellate court in Turin , Italy confirmed the trial court ’ s decision that the plaintiff ’ s acoustic neuroma ( a tumor affecting the inner ear ) was caused by the use of his mobile phone .
The city of Brussels and several parts of Switzerland have proactively imposed moratoriums on the rollout of 5G .
Many other municipalities around the world have followed suit , or are considering doing so .
Even some entire countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5G moratoriums are under consideration .
It would be the height of folly to close our eyes to the risks of wireless 5G when a huge percentage of our population is already suffering from chronic illnesses that have become increasingly more commonplace with every new generation of EMFs already deployed .
I hope more Canadians will wake up to the risks and join with concerned individuals around the world to prevent this untested and probably harmful technology from being inflicted upon non-consenting victims .

Do 5G Promises Come with Real Human Costs?
By: Karen Selick
As a science and technology aficionado who believes in using science to promote human health and prosperity, I was startled to find myself being classified as a Luddite in a recent commentary by authored by a Frontier Center research associate. The commentary was entitled “Luddites Stand in the Way of 5G Prosperity: Fears Overblown, Ignore Benefits of Communications Connectivity” and was released on July 29, 2020.
The one thing I can agree with in that commentary is that faster communications would provide many benefits to humankind. However, choices have to be made about how to deliver faster communications to households, offices, farms, and manufacturing buildings. Not all choices are good ones. And you can’t do a proper cost/benefit analysis without thoroughly exploring all of the costs.
The expression “5G” refers to the fifth generation of wireless technology, which will carry more data, at higher speeds, than previous cellular networks. But wireless 5G is not the only game in town when it comes to delivering high-speed internet. It faces stiff competition from fibre optic systems.
Fibre optic cables consist of extremely thin interior strands of glass or plastic which carry signals in the form of light, surrounded by multiple layers of cladding, coating, and jacketing which prevent the light signals from escaping.
Fibre optic cables are already in use for most of the world’s internet transmissions. This 2010 article estimated that “ninety-nine percent of the Internet’s physical distance has been strung with fiber already.”
This means there’s a good chance that the street where your home or workplace is located already has fibre optic cable running along its length, even though it may not yet be in use (this is known as “dark fibre”). I’ve been told that’s the case in the municipality where I live.
The problem stems from what’s called “the last mile”: the distance between the street’s central fibre optic cable and the customer’s wifi router or receiving devices. Until recently, this last mile (which might be only 20 feet in some cases) has ordinarily been wired with coaxial cable or DSL (Digital Subscriber Lines). Such cables transmit data reliably over shielded wires, but the transmission speed is relatively slow compared to fibre optics.
It’s the last mile that the two competing new technologies propose to speed up. This can be done in two ways: either by replacing the coaxial or DSL cable running from the street to your home with additional fibre optic cable, or by simply beaming signals wirelessly to your devices using antennae referred to as “small cells”.
Wireless 5G in North America would require the installation of millions of small cellular antennae in order to ensure continuous coverage. 1 That’s because the wavelengths they use have a very short range, so antennae have to be placed close together. For indoor use, small cells might need to be located as little as 10 meters apart. Outdoors, small cells have a range varying from 500 meters to 2.5 kilometers. 2 Some neighbourhoods might end up with small cells located on almost every telephone pole.
Different companies use different frequency bands for their 5G, but the most important thing to note is that none of the wireless 5G technologies have undergone any safety testing whatsoever with respect to the impact of these waves on human health. None. This was admitted by industry representatives at a U.S. Senate hearing held on February 7, 2019, an excerpt of which can be seen in this YouTube video.

Yes, there are government guidelines for electromagnetic energy. Here in Canada, they’re called Safety Code 6. Critics such as Canadians for Safe Technology (“C4ST”) allege that the code is severely obsolete.3 It was created by Health Canada in the 1970s (long before the development of smartphones) to evaluate the technology existing at that time. It has not had any major revisions made to it in the last 30 years—but it has nevertheless has been extended to constitute the guidelines for a host of later-developed technologies including smartphones and cell phone antennae. Health Canada is apparently content to let it serve as the safety guideline for the untested 5G wireless radiation.
An international appeal signed by 398 scientists and doctors has recommended a moratorium on the roll-out of wireless 5G. They say new scientific evidence demonstrates that living organisms (both plants and animals) are adversely affected by EMFs (that is, existing electromagnetic frequencies emitted by 2G, 3G, and 4G technologies—let alone 5G) at levels well below current national and international guidelines. The problem would simply be exacerbated by 5G. The National Toxicology Program in the U.S. has published a study showing “a statistically significant increase in the incidence of brain and heart cancer in animals exposed to EMF below the… guidelines followed by most countries.”
The Bioinitiative Report (published in 2012 and recently updated to cover the period up to 2020) was authored by 29 people from 10 countries. Among them, they held 10 medical degrees (MD), 21 PhDs, and a few other degrees. This group doesn’t seem to fit the description of Luddites. Among the health problems they identified from EMFs, as indicated in scientific studies, are:
Increased oxidative stress and free radical production (associated with numerous conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, high blood pressure, atherosclerosis, heart disease, arthritis and diabetes—all of which have increased dramatically since the 1990s);
Neurological effects (changes in memory, learning or perception);
Disrupted immune function (an especially important problem in these days of COVID-19).
Dr. Martin Pall, Ph.D., is Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University. He has studied extensively the biological effects of electromagnetic fields, and summarized his findings in a letter to California legislators three years ago. His list of 14 different adverse health effects include life-threatening cardiac arrhythmias, lower sperm counts, cataract formation, and sleep disruption.
In short, it is absurd to dismiss the health concerns about EMFs that have been brought forward by hundreds of scientists as the grumpy rumblings of Luddites who just can’t get their heads around the potential benefits of science.
Opponents of 5G have additional concerns besides human health. They point to studies showing adverse effects of EMFs on plants, insects, and animals. Even the microbes in our soil and in our intestines might be affected. The importance of healthy microbes to human health is only just beginning to be understood. Of particular concern is the possibility that insect pollinators such as bees and butterflies might be prevented from performing their crucial function of ensuring that the world has enough to eat.
Many 5G critics are concerned about possible data leaks, especially to China, the home country of Huawei, a major manufacturer of wireless 5G technology.
According to C4ST, the competing fibre optic technology can provide even faster connectivity speeds than wireless 5G, without emitting radiation. These cables are also less vulnerable to natural disaster or attack, and more protective of privacy. It may cost more to run fibre optics across the last mile to individual homes than it would to install a street’s worth of 5G small cells, but that’s a cost that can be borne by the individual who purchases the technological upgrade.
And this raises the problem that should be of concern to all economists. The installation of 5G is not—unlike the installation of fibre optics—a private concern. Once the small cells start broadcasting, their radiation impacts everyone within range, whether they are 5G customers are not. In economists’ terminology, 5G imposes negative externalities on people who just happen to live in or meander through the territory where 5G customers and their suppliers are causing radiation to be emitted.
In a densely populated city, your neighbour may want 5G while you don’t. The result may be that a small cell sits on a telephone pole 20 feet away from your bedroom window and bathes you in unwanted electromagnetic radiation all night.
Ms. Gomez’s article placed speculative values on the anticipated benefits of wireless 5G, but dismissed as “unsupported” any claims of harm. Consequently, her cost/benefit analysis of 5G failed to take into account the following possible costs:
Health care costs of treating individuals who might be adversely affected by wireless 5G;
Lost productivity of individuals who might be rendered unable to work due to 5G;
The loss of crops that might ensue if insect pollinators or important soil microbes are killed off or incapacitated.
There is also one certain, non-speculative cost that she has failed to take into account: namely, the cost of protective gear that many people are already acquiring to protect themselves from 5G as it expands relentlessly into Canada. Since becoming aware of the adverse impacts of earlier generations of EMFs, I myself have purchased a device that I hope will reduce the impact of EMFs, and I’m investigating other devices to shield my windows, my bed, and my work area in case 5G comes to my town. New companies in this field are springing up all over the place, selling everything from metallic-lined clothing to pendants to Faraday cages for your bedroom.
At common law, the case of Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) established that a person is liable for damages if he allows something harmful to escape from his land onto neighbouring property. Here’s the most famous passage from the British House of Lords:
If a person brings, or accumulates, on his land anything which, if it should escape, may cause damage to his neighbour, he does so at his peril. If it does escape, and cause damage, he is responsible, however careful he may have been, and whatever precautions he may have taken to prevent the damage.
It has not yet been tested whether a court would apply this rule to 5G electromagnetic waves (or even 4G, for that matter) but a UK group called Action Against 5G has retained a team of lawyers to commence legal proceedings. Like the Canadian group C4ST, the UK group does not oppose technology. Rather, it opposes untested and suspected unsafe technology. It advocates the use of fibre optics instead of wireless 5G to achieve speedier communications.
Likewise, a group called Stop5GNetherlands applied for an injunction on February 25, 2020 to invoke an emergency procedure to stop the installation of 5G in the Netherlands.
In the US, the Children’s Health Defense organization headed up by lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is suing the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) for refusing to update its safety guidelines which (like Canada’s) are more than 25 years old.
In 2019, an appellate court in Turin, Italy confirmed the trial court’s decision that the plaintiff’s acoustic neuroma (a tumor affecting the inner ear) was caused by the use of his mobile phone.
The city of Brussels and several parts of Switzerland have proactively imposed moratoriums on the rollout of 5G. Many other municipalities around the world have followed suit, or are considering doing so. Even some entire countries are on the list of places where 5G moratoriums are under consideration.
It would be the height of folly to close our eyes to the risks of wireless 5G when a huge percentage of our population is already suffering from chronic illnesses that have become increasingly more commonplace with every new generation of EMFs already deployed. I hope more Canadians will wake up to the risks and join with concerned individuals around the world to prevent this untested and probably harmful technology from being inflicted upon non-consenting victims.
••••
About the Author: Karen Selick is a senior research associate with Frontier Centre for Public Policy, and the owner of Keen Eyes Editing. Karen Selick received her law degree at the University of Toronto and spent 7 years as in-house counsel at CIBC, then 24 years in private practice until 2009. Karen went on to serve as Litigation Director for the Canadian Constitution Foundation until 2015. She has written widely about legal issues from a libertarian perspective. She has been a columnist for The Lawyers Weekly and Canadian Lawyer magazine. Her work has also appeared in the Globe and Mail, the National Post, Readers’ Digest, The Freeman, and many other newspapers and magazines.
••••
Notes: David Zarnett, in this recent article for Macleans magazine, says 273,000 small cells will probably have to be installed for Canada alone. The US has nine times the population, so they might well need over 2,457,000 antennae. What are small cells in 5G technology, What are small cells in 5G technology accessed 18 August 2020. See, for instance, this page from C4ST (a volunteer organization founded by Frank Clegg, the retired former president of Microsoft Canada): WHAT IS SAFETY CODE 6?
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-09-17--Soros Subsidizing the Jesuit Foundations to Overturn Doctrine

ER Editor : Just to add a little update on Soros goings-on , we couldn ’ t resist reposting this brief interview segment on Fox in which Newt Gingrich went off-MSM-script , discussing Soros ’ deep pockets in relation to putting ‘ progressive ’ DA ’ s in power in Democrat-run cities .
DA ’ s who are anti-police/pro-criminal , who are letting known criminals back out onto the streets .
In other words , the violence is being funded by him .
The reaction of the two female Fox presenters is priceless and utterly revealing .
Tweeted yesterday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the connections between the Bergoglian sphere and the globalists : Georges Soros subsidizes the Jesuit foundations .
Jesuit foundations have received more than one and a half million dollars from George Soros , and one of them counts him as a partner .
The Open Society Foundations campaign continues to condition the official and conciliar Church under the Bergoglian ( ER : Pope Francis ) pontificate and to modify its doctrine .
It was the online newspaper Aciprensa that unveiled the pot of roses on September 8 .
Without provoking any reaction from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Society of Jesus , or from the House of Saint Martha , where the Jesuit in white , Pope Francis , lives .
Yet George Soros is known worldwide as the benevolent philanthropist and benefactor of free abortion , euthanasia , drug liberalization , and the LGBTQI+ colonizing ideology .
But no one , from the Pope to the Jesuit General , finds anything wrong with him subsidizing foundations that call themselves “ Catholic.
” The discovery of Aciprensa in recent days tears yet another veil on the degree of Soros @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intentions ” towards the Holy See .
The Jesuit Refugee Service Foundation , a forty-year old work of education and assistance for the poor and needy of the world , received $ 176,452 in 2018 to “ support the rights of migrants ” in Latin America and the Caribbean .
As we know , Soros is not stingy , especially if he wants to “ infiltrate ” the charities of others .
In 2016 , he donated the trifle of $ 75,000 from the George Soros Foundation to the Jesuit Service for Migrants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , followed in 2018 by $ 151,125 .
For the American Jesuit Higher Education Program ( JWL ) , he donated $ 890,000 in 2016 and another $ 410,000 in 2018 .
This organization is the only one to attribute on its website the role of “ partner ” to the Open Society Foundations .
On the other official sites , some have preferred to hide the partners ’ page or not mention the Soros benevolent foundation .
In total , Jesuit foundations and charities have received a handsome $ 1,702,577 in loot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And this for charitable purposes only , for common purposes… Common purposes that are ideologically stamped left-wing , immigrationist , progressive , societal… Aciprensa interviewed three Jesuit foundations about their relationship with the magnificent ‘ philanthropist ’ .
Only those responsible for the Jesuit American University and Higher Education Program ( JWL ) responded on September 5 : nothing was stated about Soros ’ generous donations for “ reasons of confidentiality ” .
Confidentiality ” prevents students interested in the scholarships offered by the Jesuits from knowing their ‘ benefactor ’ .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ most obsessed with the liberalization of abortion and the rainbow ideology , that he is the main actor in the devastating relativist campaign that is eradicating its Christian roots from Ireland , and that he wants to implement the same program in Argentina , Mexico , Colombia , Brazil , Poland , Hungary , Malta and several African countries does not seem to worry the Jesuits , of which the present Pope is the most notable representative .
The facts presented by Aciprensa show that there is indeed a de facto alliance between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ totally modernist and progressive , and this great “ benefactor ” of humanity who , thanks to the attention Pope Francis paid to his fellow members of the Society , can influence the official Church ’ s doctrine on the themes of life , marriage , education and morals , and thus influence the so-called Catholic world .
Everybody knows how much money Soros spent trying to condition the already highly progressive , but not yet sufficient , doctrine of the conciliar Church and to change its doctrinal sensibility through donations .
Two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support the Catholic for Choices and $ 650,000 donated to the two American Jesuit groups , PICO and Faith in Public Life , in order to influence Pope Francis ’ visit to the United States in 2015 .
One may wonder , moreover , why the current pope censors , interrupts and prohibits processions or mafia donations ( because the mafia kills and extorts innocent people ) and silently accepts Soros ’ pretences .
Would the latter be less guilty when he promotes abortion than the mafia who kill innocent people ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a smell than that of the mafia ?
In Catholic doctrine , it is forbidden to belong to Freemasonry .
But this grave sin is also committed by those who collaborate with those who “ plot against the Church , ” and Soros is explicitly one of them .
Even if Pope Francis and his Jesuit companions do not recognize it as such .
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

ER Editor: Just to add a little update on Soros goings-on, we couldn’t resist reposting this brief interview segment on Fox in which Newt Gingrich went off-MSM-script, discussing Soros’ deep pockets in relation to putting ‘progressive’ DA’s in power in Democrat-run cities. DA’s who are anti-police/pro-criminal, who are letting known criminals back out onto the streets. In other words, the violence is being funded by him.
The reaction of the two female Fox presenters is priceless and utterly revealing. Tweeted yesterday, September 16.
********
Quite a symbol on the connections between the Bergoglian sphere and the globalists: Georges Soros subsidizes the Jesuit foundations.
FRANCESCA de VILLASMUNDO
Jesuit foundations have received more than one and a half million dollars from George Soros, and one of them counts him as a partner.
The Open Society Foundations campaign continues to condition the official and conciliar Church under the Bergoglian (ER: Pope Francis) pontificate and to modify its doctrine.
It was the online newspaper Aciprensa that unveiled the pot of roses on September 8. Without provoking any reaction from Piazza del Gesù, the general headquarters of the Society of Jesus, or from the House of Saint Martha, where the Jesuit in white, Pope Francis, lives.
Yet George Soros is known worldwide as the benevolent philanthropist and benefactor of free abortion, euthanasia, drug liberalization, and the LGBTQI+ colonizing ideology. But no one, from the Pope to the Jesuit General, finds anything wrong with him subsidizing foundations that call themselves “Catholic.”
The discovery of Aciprensa in recent days tears yet another veil on the degree of Soros’ effective penetration and his “good intentions” towards the Holy See.
The Jesuit Refugee Service Foundation, a forty-year old work of education and assistance for the poor and needy of the world, received $176,452 in 2018 to “support the rights of migrants” in Latin America and the Caribbean.
As we know, Soros is not stingy, especially if he wants to “infiltrate” the charities of others. In 2016, he donated the trifle of $75,000 from the George Soros Foundation to the Jesuit Service for Migrants in Spain (SJM – Spain), followed in 2018 by $151,125. For the American Jesuit Higher Education Program (JWL), he donated $890,000 in 2016 and another $410,000 in 2018. This organization is the only one to attribute on its website the role of “partner” to the Open Society Foundations. On the other official sites, some have preferred to hide the partners’ page or not mention the Soros benevolent foundation.
In total, Jesuit foundations and charities have received a handsome $1,702,577 in loot over the past four years from Soros. And this for charitable purposes only, for common purposes… Common purposes that are ideologically stamped left-wing, immigrationist, progressive, societal…
Aciprensa interviewed three Jesuit foundations about their relationship with the magnificent ‘philanthropist’. Only those responsible for the Jesuit American University and Higher Education Program (JWL) responded on September 5: nothing was stated about Soros’ generous donations for “reasons of confidentiality”. Confidentiality” prevents students interested in the scholarships offered by the Jesuits from knowing their ‘benefactor’.
That Soros is one of the financiers most obsessed with the liberalization of abortion and the rainbow ideology, that he is the main actor in the devastating relativist campaign that is eradicating its Christian roots from Ireland, and that he wants to implement the same program in Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Poland, Hungary, Malta and several African countries does not seem to worry the Jesuits, of which the present Pope is the most notable representative. The facts presented by Aciprensa show that there is indeed a de facto alliance between the Society of Jesus, which is totally modernist and progressive, and this great “benefactor” of humanity who, thanks to the attention Pope Francis paid to his fellow members of the Society, can influence the official Church’s doctrine on the themes of life, marriage, education and morals, and thus influence the so-called Catholic world. Everybody knows how much money Soros spent trying to condition the already highly progressive, but not yet sufficient, doctrine of the conciliar Church and to change its doctrinal sensibility through donations. Two examples: $200,000 in 2018 donated to support the Catholic for Choices and $650,000 donated to the two American Jesuit groups, PICO and Faith in Public Life, in order to influence Pope Francis’ visit to the United States in 2015.
One may wonder, moreover, why the current pope censors, interrupts and prohibits processions or mafia donations (because the mafia kills and extorts innocent people) and silently accepts Soros’ pretences. Would the latter be less guilty when he promotes abortion than the mafia who kill innocent people? Would Soros’ money have less of a smell than that of the mafia?
In Catholic doctrine, it is forbidden to belong to Freemasonry. But this grave sin is also committed by those who collaborate with those who “plot against the Church,” and Soros is explicitly one of them. Even if Pope Francis and his Jesuit companions do not recognize it as such.
************
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-09-17--French Police Angry at the Absurd Requirement to Wear Masks

ER Editor : This truly incredible letter written by as yet unidentified members of the French police force is dated September 1 , 2020 and can be found in its original form here ( it is translated into English below ) .
The letter became public on September 8 when famous French lawyer , Carlo Alberto Brusa discussed it in a deleted Youtube video ( which now can be found here ) .
The website ‘ Profession Gendarme ‘ ( the horse ’ s mouth ? )
describes the letter in a post as of yesterday , September 16 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civile qui ne doit pas nous laisser indifférents.
’ ( It is a call to civil disobedience that must not leave us indifferent . )
Their page says that this letter is just one way of several that police have used to protest the management of the pandemic .
We also recommend this piece we ran yesterday on the topic of parents fighting back against the mask mandate , a movement which shows itself to be highly aware of the bigger agenda at play .
See For the Kids , Against the Masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this be a sign that French cops , some of whom have brutalized the Gilets Jaunes at the government ’ s behest over many months , are arriving at a point of understanding and rapprochement ?
We sincerely hope so .
Police officers angry at the absurd requirement to wear masks : “ We demand the repeal of the texts obliging the wearing of masks ” Open Letter from the Indignant Police Open letter from the Indignant Police .
Act 1 – September 1 , 2020 To the attention of Mr. Emmanuel MACRON @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his government , in the person of Jean CASTEX Prime Minister and Gerald DARMANIN Minister of the Interior .
Copy to politicians , press ; radios ; media personalities .
Referral to trade unions , occupational medicine , administrative court .
Object : Police officers angry against the obligation to wear masks , WE demand the repeal of the texts obliging the wearing of masks .
Mr. President of the Republic , Mr. Prime Minister , Mr. Minister of the Interior , following the latest decrees and orders making the wearing of masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandatory in the public space but also in professional premises , we share with you our deep indignation for the following reasons : • According to the public statements of eminent Professors of Medicine ( listed in appendix ) no serious study validates the use of masks in the fight against the spread of a virus .
• On the contrary , various scientific voices , more numerous every day , publicly question the effectiveness of these masks , and even more worryingly , warn about the dangerousness of such a practice generalized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them evoke a proven risk of hypoxia .
Let ’ s think for a moment : how can it be harmless to breathe one ’ s own polluted air every day for several hours at a time , sometimes for more than 8 hours , as they would like to impose on us today ?
It thus appears a major public health risk by this obligation to wear a mask , which is why we urge the trade unions to seize the occupational medicine and the competent administrative tribunals in order to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • The decrees obliging the wearing of masks are based on the recommendations of the WHO and the High Council of Public Health .
However , the WHO has already demonstrated its incompetence in this matter in 2009 , declaring the H1N1 influenza a global pandemic , which turned out to be false .
The High Council of Public Health , for its part , is composed of members who have connections of interest , ( for some of them this can be counted in hundreds of thousands of euros , see appendix @ @ @ @ @ @ @ objectivity of their opinions is therefore widely questioned , because we know that private interests , guided by the blind quest for profitability , too often oppose the general interest and the common good .
Under these conditions , these decrees represent a serious infringement of individual liberties and a health hazard .
We demand for ourselves and for our fellow citizens the freedom for everyone to decide whether to wear masks or not , and we firmly denounce these arbitrary decrees as illegal with the support of several legal personalities .
.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that by scrupulously respecting the recommendations ( change your mask every 4 hours ) , the purchase of FFP1 masks represents an additional cost of 350 €/month on average for a family .
However , as we can see , many people already have financial difficulties , have difficulty obtaining even a transport ticket , eating with dignity , and making ends meet .
In practice , this means that these people inevitably wear the same mask for several days in a row , a mask that becomes a veritable nest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appendix ) In this context , it seems to us really unbearable to harass this same population with 135 euros in fines .
For apart from the financial difficulties , our fellow citizens are waiting for us above all to solve their problems of insecurity .
Precisely the very reason for our commitment , We , Forces of Order , whether it is National Police , Gendarmes , Municipal Police , we have at heart to fight against crimes and misdemeanors , sometimes at the risk of our lives , in a society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always more violent .
Mr. President , we officially ask you to repeal these decrees and orders that do not honor France or our vocation .
Indeed , with our limited means of action ( we are cruelly short of manpower and equipment ) and the public safety issues that are ours , we guarantee you : we have better things to do than to hunt for paper masks , especially since they are useless in the fight against covid !
In one of your televised speeches , Mr. President , you pointed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war against an invisible , elusive but advancing enemy … Today , in spite of a deafening media din and terrorizing the population , we can make a first assessment of this crisis thanks to the official figures of INSEE : the mortality curve in France is not much bigger than in previous years .
( And this is not thanks to the wearing of masks , since according to INSEE , the peak of mortality was in March-April 2020 , precisely when your government said the exact opposite about masks ; namely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to INSEE , it is cancer ( and not covid ) that remains the leading cause of mortality in France ( 150,000 deaths in France per year , cancer kills 5 times more than covid… ) .
Curiously , you have not been heard on this subject , you who are so concerned about the health of the French , you who are so quick to declare war on invisible enemies .
We are surprised by the absence of decrees banning tobacco or the use of pesticides in agriculture .
We have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against this scourge that is not elusive , and which is decimating hundreds of thousands of lives every year .
Curiously , too , there has been no macabre daily countdown on the “ news ” channels for these forgotten people .
How troubling… Why this double standard ?
Mr. President , as you know , We too , the Forces of Law and Order , are waging a relentless war .
We are waging this war against a very real crime and delinquency that is increasingly visible , that no longer even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more and more formidable .
It is a war against individuals who are ever more determined and “ enslaved ” .
So , Mr. President , we ask you : is it really reasonable to force them to hide their faces in the public space at the expense of the victims who expect us to identify the perpetrators ?
Because if masks are useless against the virus , on the other hand they are very useful to the offenders .
In conclusion , Mr. President , whatever follow-up you give to this open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sake of history , for the honor of the Forces of Order , but also for our freedom .
Let our fellow citizens know that there are Policemen , Gendarmes who are scandalized by these liberticidal measures .
We Indignant Police Officers will not collaborate in this sinister project that would gag the French to the point of denying them the right to breathe normally .
We are also thinking of our fellow RATP drivers ( ER : public buses ) who have been forced to do this for weeks , our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking of our children !
Shame on you , shame on this government !
When orders are manifestly illegitimate , it is an imperious duty for any police officer not to obey , but to resist the rogue laws !
Therefore , we now urge all competent authorities : health ; judicial ; trade union ; political ; intellectuals , to take up this issue .
For beyond the mask , it is a question of individual liberties that are threatened for the benefit of a tiny unelected minority .
We will not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you to account .
Enough is enough !
Dear colleagues , dear fellow citizens , dear French people , you are not alone !
Let us resist with all our strength against what appears to be bullying and a real danger to our health , the health of our children and especially the most fragile people , our elderly .
If nothing is done today – now – other , more liberticidal and arbitrary measures will come into being , it is inevitable .
This is why we call on all our colleagues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health , transport , associations , the private sector , citizens , comrades , all people of good will to join our movement , to resist by printing this message , spreading it , and above all by putting up a barrier to this health dictatorship that would like to become more and more insidious every day .
Let us stand together for a free France .
Fight the Muzzle , so that VIVE LA FRANCE !
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com

ER Editor: This truly incredible letter written by as yet unidentified members of the French police force is dated September 1, 2020 and can be found in its original form here (it is translated into English below). The letter became public on September 8 when famous French lawyer, Carlo Alberto Brusa discussed it in a deleted Youtube video (which now can be found here).
The website ‘Profession Gendarme‘ (the horse’s mouth?) describes the letter in a post as of yesterday, September 16, as ‘un appel à la désobéissance civile qui ne doit pas nous laisser indifférents.’ (It is a call to civil disobedience that must not leave us indifferent.) Their page says that this letter is just one way of several that police have used to protest the management of the pandemic.
We also recommend this piece we ran yesterday on the topic of parents fighting back against the mask mandate, a movement which shows itself to be highly aware of the bigger agenda at play. See For the Kids, Against the Masks and Against a Tyrannical State.
Could this be a sign that French cops, some of whom have brutalized the Gilets Jaunes at the government’s behest over many months, are arriving at a point of understanding and rapprochement? We sincerely hope so.
********
Police officers angry at the absurd requirement to wear masks: “We demand the repeal of the texts obliging the wearing of masks”
Open Letter from the Indignant Police
Open letter from the Indignant Police. Act 1 – September 1, 2020
To the attention of Mr. Emmanuel MACRON, President of the French Republic and his government, in the person of Jean CASTEX Prime Minister and Gerald DARMANIN Minister of the Interior. Copy to politicians, press; radios; media personalities. Referral to trade unions, occupational medicine, administrative court.
Object: Police officers angry against the obligation to wear masks, WE demand the repeal of the texts obliging the wearing of masks.
Mr. President of the Republic, Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Minister of the Interior, following the latest decrees and orders making the wearing of masks (FFP1 known as surgical masks) mandatory in the public space but also in professional premises, we share with you our deep indignation for the following reasons:
According to the public statements of eminent Professors of Medicine (listed in appendix) no serious study validates the use of masks in the fight against the spread of a virus. On the contrary, various scientific voices, more numerous every day, publicly question the effectiveness of these masks, and even more worryingly, warn about the dangerousness of such a practice generalized to the entire population. Some of them evoke a proven risk of hypoxia. Let’s think for a moment: how can it be harmless to breathe one’s own polluted air every day for several hours at a time, sometimes for more than 8 hours, as they would like to impose on us today? It thus appears a major public health risk by this obligation to wear a mask, which is why we urge the trade unions to seize the occupational medicine and the competent administrative tribunals in order to put an immediate end to this obligation. The decrees obliging the wearing of masks are based on the recommendations of the WHO and the High Council of Public Health. However, the WHO has already demonstrated its incompetence in this matter in 2009, declaring the H1N1 influenza a global pandemic, which turned out to be false. The High Council of Public Health, for its part, is composed of members who have connections of interest, (for some of them this can be counted in hundreds of thousands of euros, see appendix) with private pharmaceutical companies. The objectivity of their opinions is therefore widely questioned, because we know that private interests, guided by the blind quest for profitability, too often oppose the general interest and the common good.
Under these conditions, these decrees represent a serious infringement of individual liberties and a health hazard.
We demand for ourselves and for our fellow citizens the freedom for everyone to decide whether to wear masks or not, and we firmly denounce these arbitrary decrees as illegal with the support of several legal personalities.
.
Furthermore, Mr. President, you should know that by scrupulously respecting the recommendations (change your mask every 4 hours), the purchase of FFP1 masks represents an additional cost of 350 €/month on average for a family.
However, as we can see, many people already have financial difficulties, have difficulty obtaining even a transport ticket, eating with dignity, and making ends meet.
In practice, this means that these people inevitably wear the same mask for several days in a row, a mask that becomes a veritable nest of bacteria and becomes infected. (See appendix)
In this context, it seems to us really unbearable to harass this same population with 135 euros in fines. For apart from the financial difficulties, our fellow citizens are waiting for us above all to solve their problems of insecurity. Precisely the very reason for our commitment,
We, Forces of Order, whether it is National Police, Gendarmes, Municipal Police, we have at heart to fight against crimes and misdemeanors, sometimes at the risk of our lives, in a society, as you know, that is always more violent.
Mr. President, we officially ask you to repeal these decrees and orders that do not honor France or our vocation.
Indeed, with our limited means of action (we are cruelly short of manpower and equipment) and the public safety issues that are ours, we guarantee you: we have better things to do than to hunt for paper masks, especially since they are useless in the fight against covid!
In one of your televised speeches, Mr. President, you pointed out that we were in a health war against an invisible, elusive but advancing enemy …
Today, in spite of a deafening media din and terrorizing the population, we can make a first assessment of this crisis thanks to the official figures of INSEE: the mortality curve in France is not much bigger than in previous years. (And this is not thanks to the wearing of masks, since according to INSEE, the peak of mortality was in March-April 2020, precisely when your government said the exact opposite about masks; namely that they were useless…).
Still according to INSEE, it is cancer (and not covid) that remains the leading cause of mortality in France (150,000 deaths in France per year, cancer kills 5 times more than covid…).
Curiously, you have not been heard on this subject, you who are so concerned about the health of the French, you who are so quick to declare war on invisible enemies.
We are surprised by the absence of decrees banning tobacco or the use of pesticides in agriculture.
We have not heard you declare a national mobilization against this scourge that is not elusive, and which is decimating hundreds of thousands of lives every year.
Curiously, too, there has been no macabre daily countdown on the “news” channels for these forgotten people.
How troubling… Why this double standard?
Mr. President, as you know,
We too, the Forces of Law and Order, are waging a relentless war.
We are waging this war against a very real crime and delinquency that is increasingly visible, that no longer even hides, and that every day becomes more and more formidable.
It is a war against individuals who are ever more determined and “enslaved”.
So, Mr. President, we ask you: is it really reasonable to force them to hide their faces in the public space at the expense of the victims who expect us to identify the perpetrators?
Because if masks are useless against the virus, on the other hand they are very useful to the offenders.
In conclusion, Mr. President, whatever follow-up you give to this open letter, it is above all for the sake of history, for the honor of the Forces of Order, but also for our freedom. Let our fellow citizens know that there are Policemen, Gendarmes who are scandalized by these liberticidal measures.
We Indignant Police Officers will not collaborate in this sinister project that would gag the French to the point of denying them the right to breathe normally.
We are also thinking of our fellow RATP drivers (ER: public buses) who have been forced to do this for weeks, our soldiers, our teachers, we are thinking of our children! Shame on you, shame on this government!
When orders are manifestly illegitimate, it is an imperious duty for any police officer not to obey, but to resist the rogue laws!
Therefore, we now urge all competent authorities: health; judicial; trade union; political; intellectuals, to take up this issue.
For beyond the mask, it is a question of individual liberties that are threatened for the benefit of a tiny unelected minority.
We will not let this happen and we will hold you to account. Enough is enough!
Dear colleagues, dear fellow citizens, dear French people, you are not alone!
Let us resist with all our strength against what appears to be bullying and a real danger to our health, the health of our children and especially the most fragile people, our elderly.
If nothing is done today – now – other, more liberticidal and arbitrary measures will come into being, it is inevitable.
This is why we call on all our colleagues, and those of other corporations, health, transport, associations, the private sector, citizens, comrades, all people of good will to join our movement, to resist by printing this message, spreading it, and above all by putting up a barrier to this health dictatorship that would like to become more and more insidious every day.
Let us stand together for a free France.
Fight the Muzzle, so that VIVE LA FRANCE!
The Outraged Policemen.
************
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-09-17--Antidepressant Warnings on World Suicide Prevention Day

Psychiatrists gratuitously promote themselves as the custodians of mental health .
However , when witnessing their ‘ work ’ and analysing their results , it would be more accurate to call them the custodians of mental illness .
Psychiatric treatment has the potential of making people into life-long patients and can even result in death .
So , in a week that includes World Suicide Prevention Day ( 10 September ) , it ’ s a time to remember those who have been lost to psychiatric drugs , especially antidepressants .
The very drugs that are marketed as the accepted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aggression as well as suicidal thoughts and suicidal behaviour .
Prescribed for everything from learning and behavioural problems , bedwetting , juvenile delinquency , criminality , drug addiction and smoking , to handling the fears of the elderly , antidepressants are among the most widely prescribed drugs on Earth .
There are many people however , including parents , who have spoken of their grief and frustration which then turned to anger at not knowing the effects of antidepressants prior to their loved ones or their children taking their own lives .
Unlike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or cure disease or improve health , psychiatric drugs are only designed to suppress symptoms that return once the drug wears off .
Meanwhile , physical illnesses that may be causing the symptoms go unrecognised and may get worse , but the person continues to be bombarded with psychiatric drugs .
This is one of the ways that people become prolonged or even life-long psychiatric patients .
There ’ s a big difference between medical disease and psychiatric ‘ disorders.
’ Unlike medical disease which can be seen under a microscope , there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disorder .
In an attempt to appear scientific , psychiatrists claim that their ‘ disorders ’ come from a chemical imbalance in the brain .
This claim has never been proven true as there are no tests to assess the chemical status of a living person ’ s brain or how to determine what a correct chemical balance looks like .
Mental problems however can be resolved , and thankfully so .
According to top experts , a large number of people having mental problems are actually suffering from nonpsychiatric disease which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can conduct thorough medical examinations to rule out if an untreated medical condition may be causing depression .
On World Suicide Prevention Day , be fully informed about the effects of psychiatric drugs .
It may even save your life .
Brian Daniels is the Director of the UK Chapter of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights ( CCHR ) Find out more about CCHR UK The above article is from UK Reloaded The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a privately owned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators .
Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

by UK Reloaded Columnist Brian Daniels
11th September 2020
Psychiatrists gratuitously promote themselves as the custodians of mental health. However, when witnessing their ‘work’ and analysing their results, it would be more accurate to call them the custodians of mental illness. Psychiatric treatment has the potential of making people into life-long patients and can even result in death.
So, in a week that includes World Suicide Prevention Day (10 September), it’s a time to remember those who have been lost to psychiatric drugs, especially antidepressants. The very drugs that are marketed as the accepted treatment have been linked to violence and aggression as well as suicidal thoughts and suicidal behaviour.
Prescribed for everything from learning and behavioural problems, bedwetting, juvenile delinquency, criminality, drug addiction and smoking, to handling the fears of the elderly, antidepressants are among the most widely prescribed drugs on Earth.
There are many people however, including parents, who have spoken of their grief and frustration which then turned to anger at not knowing the effects of antidepressants prior to their loved ones or their children taking their own lives.
Unlike medical drugs, which commonly may prevent or cure disease or improve health, psychiatric drugs are only designed to suppress symptoms that return once the drug wears off. Meanwhile, physical illnesses that may be causing the symptoms go unrecognised and may get worse, but the person continues to be bombarded with psychiatric drugs. This is one of the ways that people become prolonged or even life-long psychiatric patients.
There’s a big difference between medical disease and psychiatric ‘disorders.’ Unlike medical disease which can be seen under a microscope, there are no laboratory tests to identify a disorder. In an attempt to appear scientific, psychiatrists claim that their ‘disorders’ come from a chemical imbalance in the brain. This claim has never been proven true as there are no tests to assess the chemical status of a living person’s brain or how to determine what a correct chemical balance looks like.
Mental problems however can be resolved, and thankfully so. According to top experts, a large number of people having mental problems are actually suffering from nonpsychiatric disease which is causing emotional stress. Competent medical doctors can conduct thorough medical examinations to rule out if an untreated medical condition may be causing depression.
On World Suicide Prevention Day, be fully informed about the effects of psychiatric drugs.
It may even save your life.
Brian Daniels is the Director of the UK Chapter of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR)
The above article is from UK Reloaded
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-09-16--Video of Biden playing ‘Despacito’ to Latino voters, with song replaced by ‘F**k Tha Police’

Trump tweets video of Biden playing ‘ Despacito ’ to Latino voters with song replaced by ‘ F**k Tha Police ’ US President Donald Trump has joined countless netizens mocking Democratic 2020 candidate Joe Biden after he chose to serenade Latino voters with ‘ Despacito ’ at a campaign event , a move that was ridiculed as blatant “ pandering.
” ( RT-USA News ) Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden speaks at a Hispanic Heritage Month event at Osceola Heritage Park in Kissimmee , Florida , September 15 , 2020 .
“ I just have one thing to say .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ as he fumbled with his cell phone on stage during a campaign stop in Florida on Tuesday – an event to mark Hispanic Heritage Month – eventually playing a clip from the Spanish-language song ‘ Despacito.
’ While Biden had just been introduced by Luis Fonsi , who wrote the song , netizens couldn ’ t help but have fun with the awkward moment , some amazed that the scene “ really happened.
” Just after the stroke of midnight on Wednesday morning , President Trump also joined the fray , sharing a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Spot which replaced Fonsi ’ s hit track with NWA ’ s ‘ F**k Tha Police ’ ( WARNING : EXPLICIT LANGUAGE ) .
Other commenters labeled the incident as Biden ’ s “ hot sauce moment , ” referring to when failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that she carried a bottle of the stuff everywhere she went , which critics slammed as a flagrant attempt to pander to African American voters .
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the right to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators .
Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

Trump tweets video of Biden playing ‘Despacito’ to Latino voters with song replaced by ‘F**k Tha Police’
US President Donald Trump has joined countless netizens mocking Democratic 2020 candidate Joe Biden after he chose to serenade Latino voters with ‘Despacito’ at a campaign event, a move that was ridiculed as blatant “pandering.” (RT-USA News)
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden speaks at a Hispanic Heritage Month event at Osceola Heritage Park in Kissimmee, Florida, September 15, 2020. © Reuters / Leah Millis
“I just have one thing to say. Hang on here,” Biden said as he fumbled with his cell phone on stage during a campaign stop in Florida on Tuesday – an event to mark Hispanic Heritage Month – eventually playing a clip from the Spanish-language song ‘Despacito.’
While Biden had just been introduced by Luis Fonsi, who wrote the song, netizens couldn’t help but have fun with the awkward moment, some amazed that the scene “really happened.” Just after the stroke of midnight on Wednesday morning, President Trump also joined the fray, sharing a clip from conservative meme factory The United Spot which replaced Fonsi’s hit track with NWA’s ‘F**k Tha Police’ (WARNING: EXPLICIT LANGUAGE).
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
What is this all about?
Joe Biden has just ONE thing to say and it ain’t good. Listen to this pic.twitter.com/3nE1hHF1uS — The United Spot (@TheUnitedSpot1) September 16, 2020
Other commenters labeled the incident as Biden’s “hot sauce moment,” referring to when failed 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that she carried a bottle of the stuff everywhere she went, which critics slammed as a flagrant attempt to pander to African American voters.
Return to Reason @mymundanemind
Well there’s his @HillaryClinton “I always carry hot sauce in my purse” moment. Just embarrassing.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.