thelibertybeacon--2020-06-08--State Aid for Immigration? There’s Always More

ER Editor : A recent report on mass immigration into France by the French Court of Audit , which is responsible for overseeing the use of public money and informing the public about it , shows a revealing mindset – that it considers mass immigration to be inevitable , that it can ’ t be controlled .
Further , the report shows that the auditors ( justices ) fail to recognize the quintessentially political nature of immigration policy , that they believe it to be just some disembodied notion of ‘ individual rights ’ enshrined in international law and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the increasing influx of migrants into France is not at all based on any need within the country , and that estimates of the financial cost to the country are being officially lowballed .
France is now at the top of the list of European countries in terms of the absolute number of asylum seekers , ‘ asylum ’ now being the channel by which illegals can enter .
Those at the top of French State administration seem to have capitulated .
Of how many other countries could the same be said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ More !
( Part 1 ) The Court of Auditors has just published a report on “ the entry , stay and first reception of foreigners in France ” .
The figures are indisputable : spending on immigration has been rising sharply for several years , as has the number of foreigners entering the country .
While the institution created by Napoleon is responsible for ensuring the proper use of public funds and helping the political authorities take decisions , the Court of Audit ’ s advisers consider mass immigration to be inevitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigration must be borne in mind .
The publication of a report by the Court of Auditors is often an event .
This institution has at its disposal a wide range of both quantitative and qualitative research resources which make it possible to assess the various state expenditure budgets .
In the report published on 5 May on the cost and effectiveness of France ’ s migration policy , the Court of Auditors ’ advisers do not confine themselves to checking the proper use of public money and proposing ways of making savings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deleterious ideology which considers that controlling the entry of non-European foreigners is a pipe dream .
This at a time when immigration is more costly than ever and endured in this period of economic stagnation .
Given the importance of the report both in terms of the themes covered and the recommendations , our critical analysis will be the subject of four articles , the themes of which are as follows : 1- General presentation of the report 2- Regular immigration 3- Illegal immigration 4- Measures of access to rights , integration measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Auditors The main mission of the Court of Auditors ( CoA ) is “ to ensure that public money is well spent and to inform citizens about it ” .
Some of its reports have had an important impact in the past .
The reasons are as much to do with the waste of public money that was pointed at as with the almost political recommendations made by the institution ’ s advisers ( 2 ) .
This time , the report made public on 5 May contains very few “ political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in France is essentially presented as a question of intangible individual rights that give any foreigner who meets the conditions the possibility of settling in our country .
The CoA ’ s advisers echo the widely shared ideology among the ruling elites that immigration in France is largely out of control .
For example , in the draft budget bill for 2020 , the government considers that “ the evolution of asylum demand is an exogenous factor ” ( ER : meaning the factor is external ) ( 3 ) .
The CoA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more generally about the legal entry of non-European foreigners into France ( excluding foreign students ) : This disembodied presentation of an immigration over which the public authorities have no control is not only totally erroneous , it is dangerous .
Readers of the various monographs on the great replacement in Europe , published on Polémia ’ s website , have been able to see that countries ’ migration policies are neither set in stone nor inevitable ( 4 ) .
Several factors condition its importance : – national legislation and international treaties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their more or less restrictive application ; – the material and financial conditions of the reception of foreigners , quickly compared by the latter , who carry out a real “ benchmarking ” ( a comparison of conditions ) between countries ( 5 ) .
As a result , migrant flows are directed towards countries offering the most advantageous reception conditions .
It is for this reason , for example , that Portugal is staying away from mass arrivals of non-Europeans ( 6 ) .
Irrespective of the international treaties they have signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Child , Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees ) , several European countries put a brutal brake on extra-European immigration after the migrant crisis in 2015 ( Denmark , Austria , etc. )
.
These examples show that the scale of migration flows depends on highly political decisions and not only on the corpus of rights , as suggested by the CoA advisors .
Decisions that require courage and realism , qualities that the ruling class singularly lacks .
The scope of the report The CoA advisers specify in the introduction that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entry , residence and first reception of foreigners in France ” concerned the procedures and measures provided for by the Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners ( CESEDA ) .
It is nevertheless surprising that the report does not mention certain expenses borne by the State .
To cite just one example , the reception of “ foreign minors ” is not limited to their care by the departments ( cost estimated at two billion per year , 50,000 euros per young person per year ) .
The State participates financially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this “ public ” , which continues to grow completely out of control .
Faced with financially asphyxiated departments , the State has provided financial assistance to the departments , which amounted to 34 million in 2019 ( 7 ) .
The general assessment of the State ’ s immigration , asylum and integration policy The CoA advisors note that despite eight laws since 2000 , whose objective is to control immigration , the number of non-European foreigners entering France in 2019 has increased compared to 2010 .
To put this increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compare , independently of all social , cultural and economic considerations , the annual entries of extra-Europeans into France ( legal immigration , asylum ) with those of the countries with the largest entry flows .
The number of residence permits issued per 1,000 inhabitants would thus be 3.7 in France , 14.5 in Sweden and 12.1 in Germany in 2016 .
This comparison is totally biased : the year 2016 coincided not only with the regularisation of large numbers of asylum seekers in Sweden and Germany , but also in 2017 with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flows into these countries .
More seriously , it leads to a minimisation of the growing flows of non-Europeans arriving in France each year , which correspond neither to a need in the economy nor to a demographic emergency .
Both the number of job seekers ( 5.4 million in the 1st quarter of 2020 ) , the number of households benefiting from the RSA ( 1.88 million at the end of 2019 ) , the number of young people neither in employment nor in training ( 963,000 in 2018 ) , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level of immigration in France .
In the midst of the activity restrictions imposed by the government , the young people who will enter the labour market in September 2020 risk being a real sacrificed generation .
Under these conditions , do we need new entrants to the labour market or to the social benefit counters ?
!
The CoA ’ s advisors also totally dismiss the large immigrant and Muslim population present in France , as well as the accelerated partition of French territory , with lawless zones where the order of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balance .
Another manipulation by the CoA advisors was the emphasis on the number of asylum seekers received per country per 1,000 inhabitants , which placed France in third place in Europe in 2018 .
However , at the time of writing their report , the CoA advisers had the first figures for 2019 , which now place France at the top of the list of European countries in terms of the absolute number of asylum seekers ( 8 ) .
The time is long gone when CoA advisers unofficially “ leaked ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of illegal immigration , “ unsustainable in the long term ” , before officially denying this politically incorrect but so realistic comparison ( 9 ) .
In 2020 , the Cambon Street institution ( Court of Audit ) has become more mellow .
The authors of the report draw inspiration in their observations and recommendations from several recent reports that are part of the dominant immigrationist ideological trend .
These include the following : – the report , produced by eleven “ experts ” , addressed to the government on 21 January 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ opening up ” the right of residence for people “ who are neither regularizable nor expulsible ” ( 10 ) ; – the parliamentary report delivered in June 2019 by two centrist MPs , which recommends developing assisted returns of illegal immigrants and putting the soft pedal on forced returns ( 11 ) ; – the report by an LR and an LREM deputy , delivered on 22 January 2020 , which recommends cleaning up the list of jobs under stress and developing labour immigration ( 12 ) .
What these widely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the current migratory invasion must be smoothed out without tension .
A refrain that the Court of Auditors takes on board 100 % .
The Immigration , Asylum and Integration mission would represent , according to the CoA , “ a modest but increasing share of government spending ” .
CoA advisors also point to a “ chronic under-budgeting ” of this mission , particularly with regard to the allocation for asylum seekers .
This is a modest way of noting that , faced with increasing migratory flows , the government does not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that it allows them to increase each year a little more .
In order to minimise the cost of State expenditure in this area , the CoA , never short of biased presentations of the figures , uses one indicator : the share of these in the gross expenditure of the general State budget .
State expenditure on immigration and integration is estimated by the CoA at 6.57 billion euros in 2019 , i.e .
1.41 % of the gross expenditure of the general budget .
However , councillors can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 48 % higher than in 2012 .
Asylum would account for a third of this increase and state medical aid for a fifth .
The assessment provided by the CoA advisers of the cost to the State of migration policy is greatly underestimated .
The method used to arrive at the result of €6.57 billion in fact overlooks many expenses .
There are two reasons for this : the scope used to arrive at this figure and the underestimation of certain costs .
Scope chosen : as Paul Tremblais recently pointed out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Auditors to quantify the cost of migration policy for the French State , called “ Document de politique transversale – Politique française de l ’ immigration et de l ’ intégration ” , is singularly restrictive ( 13 ) .
It ignores many direct and indirect expenses , which contributes to a better acceptance of the massive immigration that we are experiencing .
Underestimation of certain costs : many studies have highlighted the underestimation by public authorities of the cost of immigration , particularly in terms of maintaining law and order and justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school system , the reception of foreign students , etc .
( 14 ) .
( 14 ) .
It is therefore important not to be fooled by the €6.57 billion figure on the cost of immigration , which was highlighted by the media on the occasion of the publication of the Court of Auditors ’ report .
Moreover , the cost of immigration is not limited to the State budget alone .
As Jean-Yves Le Gallou recently pointed out on Sud Radio , it is much higher : the communes , departments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Education , prison administration , etc.
, each contribute , to varying degrees , to subsidising the stay of foreigners in France ( 15 ) .
There are also hidden expenses linked to fraud , such as the 11.9 million people born abroad who are recipients of social benefits… whereas the INSEE only counts a maximum of 9.5 million ( 16 ) .
By extending the scope of spending on immigration to other administrations , several reports have resulted in a figure that ranges from 40 billion euros per year according to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Prime Minister , in 2018 to 85 billion according to the Posokhow report in 2014 ( 17 ) .
This is better said in this period of budgetary scarcity .
It is therefore with many precautions that one must read the report of the Court of Auditors .
Its advisers are a thousand miles away from the “ zero-based budget ” approach , which aims to allocate resources as efficiently as possible by “ rethinking ” each expenditure .
If , as we shall see both in terms of legal and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other measures relating to the reception of foreigners , a few avenues for savings are outlined , the questioning by the CoA ’ s advisers of the ratchet effect of immigration , with each year bringing a greater flow of foreigners than the previous one , which is always more costly , is not for tomorrow… Unless the Court of Auditors ’ team is diversified .
But above all , a radical change in migration policy is urgently needed , if the French are not to be driven into the wall .

ER Editor: A recent report on mass immigration into France by the French Court of Audit, which is responsible for overseeing the use of public money and informing the public about it, shows a revealing mindset – that it considers mass immigration to be inevitable, that it can’t be controlled. Further, the report shows that the auditors (justices) fail to recognize the quintessentially political nature of immigration policy, that they believe it to be just some disembodied notion of ‘individual rights’ enshrined in international law and the French constitution.
The report also shows that the increasing influx of migrants into France is not at all based on any need within the country, and that estimates of the financial cost to the country are being officially lowballed.
France is now at the top of the list of European countries in terms of the absolute number of asylum seekers, ‘asylum’ now being the channel by which illegals can enter.
Those at the top of French State administration seem to have capitulated. Of how many other countries could the same be said?
********
State Aid for Immigration: Always More! (Part 1)
PAUL TORMENEN, JURIST
The Court of Auditors has just published a report on “the entry, stay and first reception of foreigners in France”. The figures are indisputable: spending on immigration has been rising sharply for several years, as has the number of foreigners entering the country.
While the institution created by Napoleon is responsible for ensuring the proper use of public funds and helping the political authorities take decisions, the Court of Audit’s advisers consider mass immigration to be inevitable, and the increasing cost of such immigration must be borne in mind.
The publication of a report by the Court of Auditors is often an event. This institution has at its disposal a wide range of both quantitative and qualitative research resources which make it possible to assess the various state expenditure budgets. In the report published on 5 May on the cost and effectiveness of France’s migration policy, the Court of Auditors’ advisers do not confine themselves to checking the proper use of public money and proposing ways of making savings (1). They maintain a deleterious ideology which considers that controlling the entry of non-European foreigners is a pipe dream. This at a time when immigration is more costly than ever and endured in this period of economic stagnation.
Given the importance of the report both in terms of the themes covered and the recommendations, our critical analysis will be the subject of four articles, the themes of which are as follows:
1- General presentation of the report
2- Regular immigration
3- Illegal immigration
4- Measures of access to rights, integration measures and naturalization
1- General presentation of the report
The mission of the Court of Auditors
The main mission of the Court of Auditors (CoA) is “to ensure that public money is well spent and to inform citizens about it”. Some of its reports have had an important impact in the past. The reasons are as much to do with the waste of public money that was pointed at as with the almost political recommendations made by the institution’s advisers (2).
This time, the report made public on 5 May contains very few “political” recommendations on migration flows. Immigration in France is essentially presented as a question of intangible individual rights that give any foreigner who meets the conditions the possibility of settling in our country. The CoA’s advisers echo the widely shared ideology among the ruling elites that immigration in France is largely out of control.
For example, in the draft budget bill for 2020, the government considers that “the evolution of asylum demand is an exogenous factor” (ER: meaning the factor is external) (3). The CoA reporters go even further when they state more generally about the legal entry of non-European foreigners into France (excluding foreign students) :
“… only a quarter of the first [residence] permits [editor’s note] granted are the result of a decision entirely controlled by the public authorities, the rest being the counterpart of individual rights protected by the Constitution and the international legal order, which the State can neither foresee nor restrict.“
This disembodied presentation of an immigration over which the public authorities have no control is not only totally erroneous, it is dangerous. Readers of the various monographs on the great replacement in Europe, published on Polémia’s website, have been able to see that countries’ migration policies are neither set in stone nor inevitable (4). Several factors condition its importance:
– national legislation and international treaties ratified by countries, as well as their more or less restrictive application;
– the material and financial conditions of the reception of foreigners, quickly compared by the latter, who carry out a real “benchmarking” (a comparison of conditions) between countries (5).
As a result, migrant flows are directed towards countries offering the most advantageous reception conditions. It is for this reason, for example, that Portugal is staying away from mass arrivals of non-Europeans (6 ).
Irrespective of the international treaties they have signed (Convention on the Rights of the Child, Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees), several European countries put a brutal brake on extra-European immigration after the migrant crisis in 2015 (Denmark, Austria, etc.). These examples show that the scale of migration flows depends on highly political decisions and not only on the corpus of rights, as suggested by the CoA advisors. Decisions that require courage and realism, qualities that the ruling class singularly lacks.
The scope of the report
The CoA advisers specify in the introduction that their mission on “policy on the entry, residence and first reception of foreigners in France” concerned the procedures and measures provided for by the Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreigners (CESEDA). It is nevertheless surprising that the report does not mention certain expenses borne by the State.
To cite just one example, the reception of “foreign minors” is not limited to their care by the departments (cost estimated at two billion per year, 50,000 euros per young person per year). The State participates financially in the sheltering and assessment of part of this “public”, which continues to grow completely out of control. Faced with financially asphyxiated departments, the State has provided financial assistance to the departments, which amounted to 34 million in 2019 (7 ).
The general assessment of the State’s immigration, asylum and integration policy
The CoA advisors note that despite eight laws since 2000, whose objective is to control immigration, the number of non-European foreigners entering France in 2019 has increased compared to 2010. To put this increase in immigration into perspective, the advisors compare, independently of all social, cultural and economic considerations, the annual entries of extra-Europeans into France (legal immigration, asylum) with those of the countries with the largest entry flows. The number of residence permits issued per 1,000 inhabitants would thus be 3.7 in France, 14.5 in Sweden and 12.1 in Germany in 2016.
This comparison is totally biased: the year 2016 coincided not only with the regularisation of large numbers of asylum seekers in Sweden and Germany, but also in 2017 with the beginning of a reduction in migration flows into these countries. More seriously, it leads to a minimisation of the growing flows of non-Europeans arriving in France each year, which correspond neither to a need in the economy nor to a demographic emergency.
Both the number of job seekers (5.4 million in the 1st quarter of 2020), the number of households benefiting from the RSA (1.88 million at the end of 2019), the number of young people neither in employment nor in training (963,000 in 2018), and the birth rate do not justify the level of immigration in France. In the midst of the activity restrictions imposed by the government, the young people who will enter the labour market in September 2020 risk being a real sacrificed generation. Under these conditions, do we need new entrants to the labour market or to the social benefit counters?!
The CoA’s advisors also totally dismiss the large immigrant and Muslim population present in France, as well as the accelerated partition of French territory, with lawless zones where the order of thugs or imams reigns in a subtle balance.
Another manipulation by the CoA advisors was the emphasis on the number of asylum seekers received per country per 1,000 inhabitants, which placed France in third place in Europe in 2018. However, at the time of writing their report, the CoA advisers had the first figures for 2019, which now place France at the top of the list of European countries in terms of the absolute number of asylum seekers (8).
The time is long gone when CoA advisers unofficially “leaked” that asylum had become a new channel of illegal immigration, “unsustainable in the long term”, before officially denying this politically incorrect but so realistic comparison (9).
In 2020, the Cambon Street institution (Court of Audit) has become more mellow. The authors of the report draw inspiration in their observations and recommendations from several recent reports that are part of the dominant immigrationist ideological trend. These include the following:
– the report, produced by eleven “experts”, addressed to the government on 21 January 2020, which recommends “simplifying” and “opening up” the right of residence for people “who are neither regularizable nor expulsible” (10);
– the parliamentary report delivered in June 2019 by two centrist MPs, which recommends developing assisted returns of illegal immigrants and putting the soft pedal on forced returns (11);
– the report by an LR and an LREM deputy, delivered on 22 January 2020, which recommends cleaning up the list of jobs under stress and developing labour immigration (12).
What these widely publicised documents have in common is that the current migratory invasion must be smoothed out without tension. A refrain that the Court of Auditors takes on board 100%.
The cost of immigration policy
The Immigration, Asylum and Integration mission would represent, according to the CoA, “a modest but increasing share of government spending”. CoA advisors also point to a “chronic under-budgeting” of this mission, particularly with regard to the allocation for asylum seekers.
This is a modest way of noting that, faced with increasing migratory flows, the government does not give itself the means to control them, and that it allows them to increase each year a little more.
In order to minimise the cost of State expenditure in this area, the CoA, never short of biased presentations of the figures, uses one indicator: the share of these in the gross expenditure of the general State budget. State expenditure on immigration and integration is estimated by the CoA at 6.57 billion euros in 2019, i.e. 1.41% of the gross expenditure of the general budget. However, councillors cannot ignore the fact that this expenditure is 48% higher than in 2012. Asylum would account for a third of this increase and state medical aid for a fifth.
The assessment provided by the CoA advisers of the cost to the State of migration policy is greatly underestimated. The method used to arrive at the result of €6.57 billion in fact overlooks many expenses. There are two reasons for this: the scope used to arrive at this figure and the underestimation of certain costs.
Scope chosen: as Paul Tremblais recently pointed out, the document used by the Court of Auditors to quantify the cost of migration policy for the French State, called “Document de politique transversale – Politique française de l’immigration et de l’intégration”, is singularly restrictive (13). It ignores many direct and indirect expenses, which contributes to a better acceptance of the massive immigration that we are experiencing.
Underestimation of certain costs: many studies have highlighted the underestimation by public authorities of the cost of immigration, particularly in terms of maintaining law and order and justice, the lack of efficiency in the school system, the reception of foreign students, etc. (14). (14).
It is therefore important not to be fooled by the €6.57 billion figure on the cost of immigration, which was highlighted by the media on the occasion of the publication of the Court of Auditors’ report.
Moreover, the cost of immigration is not limited to the State budget alone. As Jean-Yves Le Gallou recently pointed out on Sud Radio, it is much higher: the communes, departments, regions, Social Security, National Education, prison administration, etc., each contribute, to varying degrees, to subsidising the stay of foreigners in France (15 ). There are also hidden expenses linked to fraud, such as the 11.9 million people born abroad who are recipients of social benefits… whereas the INSEE only counts a maximum of 9.5 million (16 ).
By extending the scope of spending on immigration to other administrations, several reports have resulted in a figure that ranges from 40 billion euros per year according to the CEPII, the economic research service attached to the Prime Minister, in 2018 to 85 billion according to the Posokhow report in 2014 (17). This is better said in this period of budgetary scarcity.
It is therefore with many precautions that one must read the report of the Court of Auditors. Its advisers are a thousand miles away from the “zero-based budget” approach, which aims to allocate resources as efficiently as possible by “rethinking” each expenditure.
If, as we shall see both in terms of legal and illegal immigration and in terms of the other measures relating to the reception of foreigners, a few avenues for savings are outlined, the questioning by the CoA’s advisers of the ratchet effect of immigration, with each year bringing a greater flow of foreigners than the previous one, which is always more costly, is not for tomorrow… Unless the Court of Auditors’ team is diversified.
But above all, a radical change in migration policy is urgently needed, if the French are not to be driven into the wall.
************
Les dépenses pour l’immigration selon la Cour des comptes : toujours plus ! [Partie 1]


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-09--When Profits and Politics Drive Science: Rushing a Vaccine to Market for a Vanishing Virus

When Profits and Politics Drive Science : Rushing a Vaccine to Market for a Vanishing Virus More than 100 companies are competing to be first in the race to get a COVID-19 vaccine to market .
It ’ s a race against time , not because the death rate is climbing but because it is falling – to the point where there will soon be too few subjects to prove the effectiveness of the drug .
Pascal Soriot is chief executive of AstraZeneca , a British-Swedish pharmaceutical company that is challenging biotech company Moderna , the U.S. frontrunner in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , COVID-19 , like other coronaviruses , is expected to mutate at least every season , raising serious questions about claims that any vaccine will work .
A successful vaccine has never been developed for any of the many strains of coronaviruses , due to the nature of the virus itself ; and vaccinated people can have a higher chance of serious illness and death when later exposed to another strain of the virus , a phenomenon known as “ virus interference.
” An earlier SARS vaccine never made it to market because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contracted more serious symptoms on re-infection , and most of them died .
Researchers working with the AstraZeneca vaccine claimed success in preliminary studies because its lab monkeys all survived and formed antibodies to the virus , but data reported later showed that the animals all became infected when challenged , raising serious questions about the vaccine ’ s effectiveness .
Moderna has gotten fast-track approval from the FDA and managed to skip animal trials altogether before rushing to human trials .
Its candidate is a “ messenger RNA ” vaccine , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carries genetic information controlling the synthesis of proteins .
No mRNA vaccine has ever been approved for marketing or proven in a large-scale clinical trial .
As explained in Science Magazine , RNA that invades from outside the cell is the hallmark of a virus , and our immune systems have evolved ways to recognize and destroy it .
To avoid that , Moderna ’ s mRNA vaccine sneaks into cells encapsulated in nanoparticles , which aren ’ t easily degraded and can cause toxic buildup in the liver .
These concerns , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department of Health and Human Services ( HHS ) , which is proceeding at “ Warp Speed ” to get the new technologies tested on the American population before the virus disappears through mutation and natural herd immunity .
HHS has already agreed to provide up to $ 1.2 billion to AstraZeneca and $ 483 million to Moderna to develop their experimental candidates .
“ As American taxpayers , we are justified in asking why , ” writes William Haseltine in Forbes .
Both companies have attracted billions from private investors and don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government ’ s speculative bets are being made on unproven technologies in the early stages of testing .
The argument at one time was that the magnitude of the crisis justified the risk , but the virus is now disappearing of its own accord .
The computer-modeled projection of 2.2 million U.S. deaths issued by Imperial College London ( a business partner of AstraZeneca ) , triggering shutdowns across the United States , was subsequently found to be “ wildly ” overblown .
The model was described in the UK Telegraph on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ software mistake of all time.
” The researchers wrote that “ we would fire anyone for developing code like this ” and that the question was “ why our Government did not get a second opinion before swallowing Imperial ’ s prescription.
” The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has also revised its projections .
Experts disagree on what the new data means , but according to an expert at the Montreal Economic Institute , In other news from the CDC , on May 23rd the agency reported that the antibody tests used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immunity to the virus are too unreliable to be used .
But none of this seems to be dimming the hype and the deluge of investment money being thrown at the latest experimental vaccines .
And perhaps that is the point of the exercise – to extract as much money as possible from gullible investors , including the US government , before the public discovers that the fundamentals of these stocks do not support the media hype .
Moderna : A Multibillion-Dollar “ Unicorn ” That Has Never Brought a Product to Market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pumping its stock price with unreliable preliminary test data .
On May 18th , Moderna ’ s stock jumped by as much as 30 % , after it issued a press release announcing positive results from a small preliminary trial of its coronavirus vaccine .
After the market closed , the company announced a stock offering aimed at raising $ 1 billion ; and on May 18th and 19th , Moderna executives dumped nearly $ 30 million worth of stock for a profit of $ 25 million .
On May 19th , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after STAT News questioned the company ’ s test results .
An antibody response was reported for only eight of the 45 patients , not enough for statistical analysis .
Was the response significant enough to create immunity ?
And what about the other 37 patients ?
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called the results a “ catastrophe ” for the company .
He wrote on May 20th : A volunteer named Ian Haydon buoyed the markets when he appeared on CNBC to say he felt fine after getting the vaccine .
But he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he got chills and a fever of over 103° , lost consciousness , and “ felt more sick than he ever has before.
” Those were just the short-term adverse effects .
Long-term systemic effects including cancer , Alzheimer ’ s disease , autoimmune disease , and infertility can take decades to develop .
But the stage is already being set for mandatory vaccinations that will be “ deployed ” by the U.S. military as soon as the end of the year .
The HHS in conjunction with the Department of Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 600 million syringes prefilled with coronavirus vaccine , individually marked with trackable RFID chips .
That ’ s enough for two doses for nearly the entire U.S. population .
One hundred million are to be supplied by year ’ s end .
Fortunately for vaccine manufacturers and investors , they do not have to worry about the drugs ’ side effects , since the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the 2005 PREP Act protect them from liability for vaccine injuries .
Damages are imposed instead on the US government and US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worry about , however , is criminal action by the Securities Exchange Commission .
By May 22nd , Moderna ’ s stock was down by 26 % from its earlier high , making its 30 % rise on a misleading press release look like a “ pump and dump ” scheme .
On CNBC on May 19th , former SEC lawyer Jacob Frankel said its stock offering on the heels of hyped news was the type of action that would draw scrutiny by the SEC , and that it could have a criminal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moderna ’ s mRNA Vaccine It wasn ’ t the first time Moderna ’ s stock had skyrocketed on a well-timed press release .
On February 24th , the World Health Organization said to prepare for a global pandemic , collapsing stock markets around the world .
Most stocks collapsed , but Moderna ’ s shot up by nearly 30 % , after it reported on February 25th that testing on humans would begin in March .
Mega-investors made tens of millions of dollars in a single day , including BlackRock , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which made $ 68 million just on February 25th .
BlackRock was called “ the fourth branch of government ” after it was tasked in March with dispensing up to $ 4.5 trillion in Federal Reserve credit through “ special purpose vehicles ” established by the Treasury and the Fed .
Moderna has other friends in high places , including the Pentagon .
Several years ago , Moderna received millions of dollars from the Pentagon ’ s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ( DARPA ) , as well as from the Bill and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stock has more than tripled this year , taking it to a market cap of over $ 22 billion .
STAT News called it “ an astonishing feat for a company that currently sells zero products.
” Many of the companies actively developing COVID-19 vaccines have longer and more impressive track records .
Why all the investor interest in this “ unicorn ” startup that went public only in 2018 and has no record of market success ?
The major advantage of mRNA vaccines is the speed with which they can be deployed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from a real virus , they can be mass-produced cost-effectively on a large scale and do not require uninterrupted cold storage .
But this speed comes at the risk of major side effects .
In a 2017 TED talk called “ Rewriting the Genetic Code , ” Moderna ’ s current chief medical officer Dr. Tal Zaks said , “ We ’ re actually hacking the software of life ….
” As explained by a medical doctor writing in The UK Independent on May 20th : A lab-created self-amplifying virus encapsulated in nanoparticles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by stealth sounds a lot like the “ stealth viruses ” that are classified as “ bioweapons , ” and that could explain DARPA ’ s interest in the technology .
In a 2010 document titled “ Biotechnology : Genetically Engineered Pathogens , ” the US Air Force acknowledged that it was studying “ genetically engineered pathogens that could pose serious threats to society , ” including “ binary biological weapons , designer genes , gene therapy as a weapon , stealth viruses , host-swapping diseases , and designer diseases.
” DARPA was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RNA vaccines , funding their early research and development by Moderna as well as by Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc .
In December 2017 , over 1,200 emails released under open records requests revealed that the U.S. military is now the top funder behind the controversial “ genetic extinction ” technology known as “ gene drives.
” As investigative reporter Whitney Webb observed in a May 4th article , “ these genetic ‘ kill switches ’ could also be inserted into actual humans through artificial chromosomes , which – just as they have the potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential to cut it short.
” Biowarfare is forbidden under international treaty , but the army ’ s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick says its investigations are to “ protect the warfighter from biological threats ” and to protect civilians from threats to public health .
Even assuming that is true , are the army ’ s technicians proficient enough to tinker with the human genetic code without hitting a kill switch or two by mistake ?
The military is thinking about war , the pharmaceutical companies and investors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are thinking about getting the country back to work , and even the regulators are bypassing proper safety tests in the rush to get the entire global population vaccinated before the virus disappears .
It is left to us , the recipients of these novel untested GMO vaccines , to demand some serious vetting before the military shows up at our doors with their prefilled RFID-chipped syringes some time later this year .
Ellen Brown is an attorney , chair of the Public Banking Institute , and author of thirteen books including Web @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Banking on the People : Democratizing Money in the Digital Age .
She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “ It ’ s Our Money.
” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com .
She is a frequent contributor to Global Research .

When Profits and Politics Drive Science: Rushing a Vaccine to Market for a Vanishing Virus ELLEN BROWN
More than 100 companies are competing to be first in the race to get a COVID-19 vaccine to market. It’s a race against time, not because the death rate is climbing but because it is falling – to the point where there will soon be too few subjects to prove the effectiveness of the drug.
Pascal Soriot is chief executive of AstraZeneca, a British-Swedish pharmaceutical company that is challenging biotech company Moderna, the U.S. frontrunner in the race. Soriot said on May 24th,
“The vaccine has to work and that’s one question, and the other question is, even if it works, we have to be able to demonstrate it. We have to run as fast as possible before the disease disappears so we can demonstrate that the vaccine is effective.”
COVID-19, like other coronaviruses, is expected to mutate at least every season, raising serious questions about claims that any vaccine will work. A successful vaccine has never been developed for any of the many strains of coronaviruses, due to the nature of the virus itself; and vaccinated people can have a higher chance of serious illness and death when later exposed to another strain of the virus, a phenomenon known as “virus interference.” An earlier SARS vaccine never made it to market because the laboratory animals it was tested on contracted more serious symptoms on re-infection, and most of them died.
Researchers working with the AstraZeneca vaccine claimed success in preliminary studies because its lab monkeys all survived and formed antibodies to the virus, but data reported later showed that the animals all became infected when challenged, raising serious questions about the vaccine’s effectiveness.
Moderna has gotten fast-track approval from the FDA and managed to skip animal trials altogether before rushing to human trials. Its candidate is a “messenger RNA” vaccine, a computer-generated replica of an RNA component that carries genetic information controlling the synthesis of proteins. No mRNA vaccine has ever been approved for marketing or proven in a large-scale clinical trial. As explained in Science Magazine, RNA that invades from outside the cell is the hallmark of a virus, and our immune systems have evolved ways to recognize and destroy it. To avoid that, Moderna’s mRNA vaccine sneaks into cells encapsulated in nanoparticles, which aren’t easily degraded and can cause toxic buildup in the liver.
These concerns, however, have not deterred the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is proceeding at “Warp Speed” to get the new technologies tested on the American population before the virus disappears through mutation and natural herd immunity. HHS has already agreed to provide up to $1.2 billion to AstraZeneca and $483 million to Moderna to develop their experimental candidates. “As American taxpayers, we are justified in asking why,” writes William Haseltine in Forbes. Both companies have attracted billions from private investors and don’t need taxpayer money, and the government’s speculative bets are being made on unproven technologies in the early stages of testing.
The argument at one time was that the magnitude of the crisis justified the risk, but the virus is now disappearing of its own accord. The computer-modeled projection of 2.2 million U.S. deaths issued by Imperial College London (a business partner of AstraZeneca), triggering shutdowns across the United States, was subsequently found to be “wildly” overblown. The model was described in the UK Telegraph on May 16th as “the most devastating software mistake of all time.” The researchers wrote that “we would fire anyone for developing code like this” and that the question was “why our Government did not get a second opinion before swallowing Imperial’s prescription.”
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control has also revised its projections. Experts disagree on what the new data means, but according to an expert at the Montreal Economic Institute,
“The most likely CDC scenario now estimates that the coronavirus mortality rate for infected people is between 0.2% and 0.3%. This is a far cry from the 3.4% figure that had been put forward by the WHO at the start of the pandemic.”
In other news from the CDC, on May 23rd the agency reported that the antibody tests used to determine whether people have developed an immunity to the virus are too unreliable to be used.
But none of this seems to be dimming the hype and the deluge of investment money being thrown at the latest experimental vaccines. And perhaps that is the point of the exercise – to extract as much money as possible from gullible investors, including the US government, before the public discovers that the fundamentals of these stocks do not support the media hype.
Moderna: A Multibillion-Dollar “Unicorn” That Has Never Brought a Product to Market
Moderna in particular has been suspected of pumping its stock price with unreliable preliminary test data. On May 18th, Moderna’s stock jumped by as much as 30%, after it issued a press release announcing positive results from a small preliminary trial of its coronavirus vaccine. After the market closed, the company announced a stock offering aimed at raising $1 billion; and on May 18th and 19th, Moderna executives dumped nearly $30 million worth of stock for a profit of $25 million.
On May 19th, however, the stock rocketed back down, after STAT News questioned the company’s test results. An antibody response was reported for only eight of the 45 patients, not enough for statistical analysis. Was the response significant enough to create immunity? And what about the other 37 patients?
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called the results a “catastrophe” for the company. He wrote on May 20th:
Three of the 15 human guinea pigs in the high dose cohort (250 mcg) suffered a “serious adverse event” within 43 days of receiving Moderna’s jab. Moderna … acknowledged that three volunteers developed Grade 3 systemic events, defined by the FDA as “Preventing daily activity and requiring medical intervention.” Moderna allowed only exceptionally healthy volunteers to participate in the study. A vaccine with those reaction rates could cause grave injuries in 1.5 billion humans if administered to “every person on earth”.
A volunteer named Ian Haydon buoyed the markets when he appeared on CNBC to say he felt fine after getting the vaccine. But he later revealed that after the second jab, he got chills and a fever of over 103°, lost consciousness, and “felt more sick than he ever has before.”
Those were just the short-term adverse effects. Long-term systemic effects including cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, autoimmune disease, and infertility can take decades to develop. But the stage is already being set for mandatory vaccinations that will be “deployed” by the U.S. military as soon as the end of the year. The HHS in conjunction with the Department of Defense has awarded a $138 million contract for 600 million syringes prefilled with coronavirus vaccine, individually marked with trackable RFID chips. That’s enough for two doses for nearly the entire U.S. population. One hundred million are to be supplied by year’s end.
Fortunately for vaccine manufacturers and investors, they do not have to worry about the drugs’ side effects, since the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the 2005 PREP Act protect them from liability for vaccine injuries. Damages are imposed instead on the US government and US taxpayers.
What Moderna could have to worry about, however, is criminal action by the Securities Exchange Commission. By May 22nd, Moderna’s stock was down by 26% from its earlier high, making its 30% rise on a misleading press release look like a “pump and dump” scheme. On CNBC on May 19th, former SEC lawyer Jacob Frankel said its stock offering on the heels of hyped news was the type of action that would draw scrutiny by the SEC, and that it could have a criminal component.
Why All the Hype? Moderna’s mRNA Vaccine
It wasn’t the first time Moderna’s stock had skyrocketed on a well-timed press release. On February 24th, the World Health Organization said to prepare for a global pandemic, collapsing stock markets around the world. Most stocks collapsed, but Moderna’s shot up by nearly 30%, after it reported on February 25th that testing on humans would begin in March. Mega-investors made tens of millions of dollars in a single day, including BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, which made $68 million just on February 25th. BlackRock was called “the fourth branch of government” after it was tasked in March with dispensing up to $4.5 trillion in Federal Reserve credit through “special purpose vehicles” established by the Treasury and the Fed.
Moderna has other friends in high places, including the Pentagon. Several years ago, Moderna received millions of dollars from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), as well as from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Moderna’s stock has more than tripled this year, taking it to a market cap of over $22 billion. STAT News called it “an astonishing feat for a company that currently sells zero products.” Many of the companies actively developing COVID-19 vaccines have longer and more impressive track records. Why all the investor interest in this “unicorn” startup that went public only in 2018 and has no record of market success?
The major advantage of mRNA vaccines is the speed with which they can be deployed. Created in a lab rather than from a real virus, they can be mass-produced cost-effectively on a large scale and do not require uninterrupted cold storage. But this speed comes at the risk of major side effects. In a 2017 TED talk called “Rewriting the Genetic Code,” Moderna’s current chief medical officer Dr. Tal Zaks said, “We’re actually hacking the software of life ….”
As explained by a medical doctor writing in The UK Independent on May 20th:
Moderna’s messenger RNA vaccine … uses a sequence of genetic RNA material produced in a lab that, when injected into your body, must invade your cells and hijack your cells’ protein-making machinery called ribosomes to produce the viral components that subsequently train your immune system to fight the virus. … In many ways, the vaccine almost behaves like an RNA virus itself except that it hijacks your cells to produce the parts of the virus, like the spike protein, rather than the whole virus. Some messenger RNA vaccines are even self-amplifying…. There are unique and unknown risks to messenger RNA vaccines, including the possibility that they generate strong type I interferon responses that could lead to inflammation and autoimmune conditions.
A lab-created self-amplifying virus encapsulated in nanoparticles that evade the cell’s defenses by stealth sounds a lot like the “stealth viruses” that are classified as “bioweapons,” and that could explain DARPA’s interest in the technology. In a 2010 document titled “Biotechnology: Genetically Engineered Pathogens,” the US Air Force acknowledged that it was studying “genetically engineered pathogens that could pose serious threats to society,” including “binary biological weapons, designer genes, gene therapy as a weapon, stealth viruses, host-swapping diseases, and designer diseases.” DARPA was behind the creation of both DNA and RNA vaccines, funding their early research and development by Moderna as well as by Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc.
In December 2017, over 1,200 emails released under open records requests revealed that the U.S. military is now the top funder behind the controversial “genetic extinction” technology known as “gene drives.” As investigative reporter Whitney Webb observed in a May 4th article, “these genetic ‘kill switches’ could also be inserted into actual humans through artificial chromosomes, which – just as they have the potential to extend life – also have the potential to cut it short.” Biowarfare is forbidden under international treaty, but the army’s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick says its investigations are to “protect the warfighter from biological threats” and to protect civilians from threats to public health. Even assuming that is true, are the army’s technicians proficient enough to tinker with the human genetic code without hitting a kill switch or two by mistake?
The military is thinking about war, the pharmaceutical companies and investors are thinking about profits, the politicians are thinking about getting the country back to work, and even the regulators are bypassing proper safety tests in the rush to get the entire global population vaccinated before the virus disappears. It is left to us, the recipients of these novel untested GMO vaccines, to demand some serious vetting before the military shows up at our doors with their prefilled RFID-chipped syringes some time later this year.
************
Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of Debt, The Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com. She is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from Natural News


thelibertybeacon--2020-06-09--5G: 500 Environmental Activists Take Legal Action Against French Telecom Giants

ER Editor : Although France seems somewhat behind in its rollout of 5G , thank goodness , Marseille has been chosen as the pilot city .
During the lockdown – convenient timing – up to 52 antennae were activated , despite a petition of 17,000 names submitted against it .
Electromagnetic installations can be found for France on this website , cartoradio.fr , which lists the locations of the Marseille deployments .
5G : 500 environmental activists take legal action against Orange , Bouygues , SFR and Free Environmental activists request forensic expertise on 5G .
They have summoned the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to justify to an expert the measures they have taken to prevent any risk to health or the environment .
Environmentalists are continuing their legal guerrilla warfare against 5G , the mobile phone standard that is to succeed 4G and whose frequencies are due to be allocated this year .
The latest action to date is a summary procedure before the Paris Court of Justice .
Five hundred activists are asking the court to order an expert opinion on 5G .
They filed their summons on 26 May , and are requesting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the lawyer Jean-Marc Descoubes , the group is led by the founder of the Young Ambassadors for the Climate , Côme Girschig , and includes a number of VIPs such as the film director Liza Azuelos , the writer Hermine de Clermont-Tonnerre and the singer Alma Higelin .
According to their assignment , the expert will have to investigate “ the implementation by mobile operators of effective measures on the prevention of risk to human health and the environment , and the establishment of the safety of this technology “ .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the sites of the 5G experiments conducted by the four operators .
The expert will also have to “ give an opinion on the risk of encroachment on individual freedoms , and the technical means to be put in place to prevent , remedy and prevent the occurrence of these risks ” .
The main argument of environmental activists is that the precautionary principle should be applied to 5G : “ the precautionary principle should be applied when risks to health or the environment are not certain , but merely probable , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , legal action may be taken against the four operators : Activists explain that the health and environmental effects of 5G are not known , as this new technology will use more antennas than existing mobile networks , but also higher frequency bands ( 3.5 and 26 gigahertz ) .
They are mainly based on the pre-report issued at the end of 2019 by the ANSES ( National Agency for Food , Environmental and Occupational Health Safety ) .
This pre-report deplores the fact that “ research data is still scarce ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an environmental point of view , 5G will be more energy consuming according to them .
On the other hand , the assignment does not mention the reassuring report on the dangers of 5G issued in April by the National Frequencies Agency .
Two other associations , Agir pour l ’ environnement and Priartem , have lodged appeals on the merits and in summary proceedings before the Conseil d ’ Etat against the decrees launching the allocation of 5G frequencies .
They consider that this allocation ( and in particular the absence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ environmental protection provisions , starting with the precautionary principle .
On 5 March , the High Court promised to render its verdict on the merits ” before the summer of 2020 ” , and therefore considered that there was no need to take summary measures .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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: Although France seems somewhat behind in its rollout of 5G, thank goodness, Marseille has been chosen as the pilot city. During the lockdown – convenient timing – up to 52 antennae were activated, despite a petition of 17,000 names submitted against it.
Electromagnetic installations can be found for France on this website, cartoradio.fr, which lists the locations of the Marseille deployments.
********
5G: 500 environmental activists take legal action against Orange, Bouygues, SFR and Free
Environmental activists request forensic expertise on 5G. They have summoned the four mobile operators, who will have to justify to an expert the measures they have taken to prevent any risk to health or the environment.
JAMAL HENNI
Environmentalists are continuing their legal guerrilla warfare against 5G, the mobile phone standard that is to succeed 4G and whose frequencies are due to be allocated this year.
The latest action to date is a summary procedure before the Paris Court of Justice. Five hundred activists are asking the court to order an expert opinion on 5G. They filed their summons on 26 May, and are requesting a first hearing on 30 June. Defended by the lawyer Jean-Marc Descoubes, the group is led by the founder of the Young Ambassadors for the Climate, Côme Girschig, and includes a number of VIPs such as the film director Liza Azuelos, the writer Hermine de Clermont-Tonnerre and the singer Alma Higelin.
According to their assignment, the expert will have to investigate “the implementation by mobile operators of effective measures on the prevention of risk to human health and the environment, and the establishment of the safety of this technology“. In particular, he will have to visit the sites of the 5G experiments conducted by the four operators. The expert will also have to “give an opinion on the risk of encroachment on individual freedoms, and the technical means to be put in place to prevent, remedy and prevent the occurrence of these risks”.
The main argument of environmental activists is that the precautionary principle should be applied to 5G: “the precautionary principle should be applied when risks to health or the environment are not certain, but merely probable, or at least not excluded”. Failing this, legal action may be taken against the four operators:
“By their experiments and applications, the operators are exposing the population to a future risk, which is currently not certain, but cannot be excluded. If this risk materialises, then the operators’ civil liability may be engaged. Their fault will have consisted in having disregarded the precautionary principle.”
Activists explain that the health and environmental effects of 5G are not known, as this new technology will use more antennas than existing mobile networks, but also higher frequency bands (3.5 and 26 gigahertz). They are mainly based on the pre-report issued at the end of 2019 by the ANSES (National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health Safety). This pre-report deplores the fact that “research data is still scarce” on these new frequencies. And from an environmental point of view, 5G will be more energy consuming according to them. On the other hand, the assignment does not mention the reassuring report on the dangers of 5G issued in April by the National Frequencies Agency .
Two other associations, Agir pour l’environnement and Priartem, have lodged appeals on the merits and in summary proceedings before the Conseil d’Etat against the decrees launching the allocation of 5G frequencies. They consider that this allocation (and in particular the absence of a prior environmental study) violates several environmental protection provisions, starting with the precautionary principle. On 5 March, the High Court promised to render its verdict on the merits ”before the summer of 2020”, and therefore considered that there was no need to take summary measures.
********
5G: 500 militants écologistes assignent Orange, Bouygues, SFR et Free en justice
INFO CAPITAL. Des militants écologistes demandent une expertise judiciaire sur la 5G. Ils ont assigné les quatres opérateurs mobiles, qui devront justifier auprès d’un expert les mesures qu’ils ont prises pour prévenir tout risque pour la santé ou l’environnement.
JAMAL HENNI
Les écologistes poursuivent leur guérilla judiciaire contre la 5G, la norme de téléphonie mobile qui doit succéder à la 4G et dont les fréquences doivent être attribuées cette année. Dernière action en date : une procédure en référé devant le tribunal judiciaire de Paris. Cinq cents militants y demandent d’ordonner une expertise sur la 5G. Ils ont déposé leur assignation le 26 mai, et demandent une première audience le 30 juin. Défendus par Me Jean-Marc Descoubes, ce collectif est mené par le fondateur de Jeunes ambassadeurs pour le climat Côme Girschig, et comprend quelques VIP, comme la réalisatrice Liza Azuelos, l’écrivaine Hermine de Clermont-Tonnerre, ou la chanteuse Alma Higelin. … ************ 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--2020-06-09--Black activist says those calling to defund police should offer own zip codes as trial areas

Black activist says those calling to defund police should offer own zip codes as trial areas Those now calling for defunding police “ should demonstrate by example by getting together and offering zip codes and then declaring themselves a police-free zone , ” black economic empowerment advocate and community activist Robert Woodson told Just the News .
“ And then watch how all the criminals will line up to go there.
” Cities nationwide , including Los Angeles and New York City , have contemplated cutting police funding amid violent social unrest and widespread protests demanding an end to police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Council announced it would vote to disband the cities ’ police force altogether after the death of George Floyd , an African-American , in Minneapolis police custody last month .
Woodson told Just the News that he was troubled by the disproportionately negative media coverage of police and noted that while Floyd ’ s death was prominently covered by the media , there was comparatively little media coverage of the death of David Dorn , a retired St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department captain who was killed while reportedly defending a friend ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media really hypes what a minority of black elites advocate , ” Woodson said .
“ I never believed that upper-income blacks who live in gated communities and send their kids to private schools presume to be speaking for low-income blacks in public housing , who rely on the police.
” “ We won ’ t be defunding our police , ” President Trump said Monday .
“ We won ’ t be dismantling our police.
” The president spoke at a roundtable with law enforcement officials , where he effusively praised the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ finest law enforcement anywhere in the world ” while acknowledging there was room for reform .
Attorney General Barr said law enforcement understands that African-Americans have “ distrust ” for police and that U.S. laws did not provide equal protection to African-Americans until the 1960s .
Barr said he is hearing much interest from police leaders on clarifying the standards and training on use of force , and “ we look forward to working with you to get that done.
” Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden ’ s campaign said Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defunding the police .
“ As his criminal justice proposal made clear months ago , [ former ] Vice President Biden does not believe that police should be defunded , ” campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told reporters .
“ He hears and shares the deep grief and frustration of those calling out for change , and is driven to ensure that justice is done and that we put a stop to this terrible pain.
” Bates said Biden nevertheless supports the “ urgent need ” for reform , including more funding for public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment programs — so that officers can focus on policing .
A forthcoming study by Harvard economists found that many more black Americans die as a result of police drawdowns following high-profile , police brutality protests .
Police become skittish following viral , racially-charged police misconduct investigations , leading to reluctance to protect black neighborhoods , according to the academic paper by Harvard economist Roland Fryer and co-author Tanaya Devi , reported on by The Wall Street Journal ’ s Jason Riley .
Even in the midst of heightened racial tensions after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands of Minneapolis police , 72 % of American voters , including 51 % of black voters , have a favorable view of their local police department , according to a new Just the News Daily Poll with Scott Rasmussen released Monday .
Majorities of black and Latino New Yorkers supported “ broken windows ” policing , according to a 2015 Quinnipiac University poll looking at how the city viewed crimefighting policies implemented by former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani during the 1990s .
The poll was taken after the high-profile deaths @ @ @ @ @ @ @ males Trayvon Martin , Michael Brown , and Eric Garner .
The “ broken windows ” policing , which included a robust police presence focused on smaller , non-violent crimes to prevent criminals escalating to more serious , violent crimes , resulted in plummeting homicides among black and brown neighborhoods .
A large , 62 % majority of New Yorkers in the poll “ supported police actively enforcing against quality of life offenses in their own neighborhood , and 34 % disagreed , ” reported the New York Daily News ’ Erin Durkin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar across racial groups — 61 % of black voters , 59 % of whites , and 68 % of Hispanics said they want enforcement in their neighborhood.
” NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea told Fox News on Monday he often receives requests for additional policemen and women to patrol neighborhoods .
“ The usual thing I get when I go to a community meeting is ‘ a lot more cops , ' ” Shea said .
“ Any calls to defund the police , I think is — Lord help us if that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re the bedrock , we ’ re the foundation , and we need to build on that.
” Shea added that he would support shifting some police funding internally toward youth programs like mentoring and internships .
“ I think it ’ s crimefighting , ” he said .
“ It ’ s just crimefighting in a better way .
• None Just the News : Biden campaign says the candidate does not support defunding the police • None JTN : Harvard study on effects of police drawdowns following high-profile police brutality protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Scott Rasmussen ( TLB ) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News Some emphasis and pictorial content added by ( TLB ) Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 )

Black activist says those calling to defund police should offer own zip codes as trial areas
‘And then watch how all the criminals will line up to go there,’ said veteran community activist and black economic empowerment advocate Robert Woodson
By Carrie Sheffield
Those now calling for defunding police “should demonstrate by example by getting together and offering zip codes and then declaring themselves a police-free zone,” black economic empowerment advocate and community activist Robert Woodson told Just the News. “And then watch how all the criminals will line up to go there.”
Cities nationwide, including Los Angeles and New York City, have contemplated cutting police funding amid violent social unrest and widespread protests demanding an end to police brutality against blacks. The Minneapolis City Council announced it would vote to disband the cities’ police force altogether after the death of George Floyd, an African-American, in Minneapolis police custody last month.
Woodson told Just the News that he was troubled by the disproportionately negative media coverage of police and noted that while Floyd’s death was prominently covered by the media, there was comparatively little media coverage of the death of David Dorn, a retired St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department captain who was killed while reportedly defending a friend’s pawn shop from looters.
“The media really hypes what a minority of black elites advocate,” Woodson said. “I never believed that upper-income blacks who live in gated communities and send their kids to private schools presume to be speaking for low-income blacks in public housing, who rely on the police.”
“We won’t be defunding our police,” President Trump said Monday. “We won’t be dismantling our police.”
The president spoke at a roundtable with law enforcement officials, where he effusively praised the work of law enforcement, calling them the “finest law enforcement anywhere in the world” while acknowledging there was room for reform.
Attorney General Barr said law enforcement understands that African-Americans have “distrust” for police and that U.S. laws did not provide equal protection to African-Americans until the 1960s. Barr said he is hearing much interest from police leaders on clarifying the standards and training on use of force, and “we look forward to working with you to get that done.”
Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s campaign said Monday said that the candidate does not support defunding the police. “As his criminal justice proposal made clear months ago, [former] Vice President Biden does not believe that police should be defunded,” campaign spokesman Andrew Bates told reporters. “He hears and shares the deep grief and frustration of those calling out for change, and is driven to ensure that justice is done and that we put a stop to this terrible pain.”
Bates said Biden nevertheless supports the “urgent need” for reform, including more funding for public schools, mental health and substance abuse treatment programs — so that officers can focus on policing.
A forthcoming study by Harvard economists found that many more black Americans die as a result of police drawdowns following high-profile, police brutality protests. Police become skittish following viral, racially-charged police misconduct investigations, leading to reluctance to protect black neighborhoods, according to the academic paper by Harvard economist Roland Fryer and co-author Tanaya Devi, reported on by The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley.
Minneapolis police officers salute during a 2015 event. Jerry Holt/Star Tribune via Getty Images
Even in the midst of heightened racial tensions after the death of African-American George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, 72% of American voters, including 51% of black voters, have a favorable view of their local police department, according to a new Just the News Daily Poll with Scott Rasmussen released Monday.
Majorities of black and Latino New Yorkers supported “broken windows” policing, according to a 2015 Quinnipiac University poll looking at how the city viewed crimefighting policies implemented by former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani during the 1990s. The poll was taken after the high-profile deaths at the hands of police of African-American males Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garner.
The “broken windows” policing, which included a robust police presence focused on smaller, non-violent crimes to prevent criminals escalating to more serious, violent crimes, resulted in plummeting homicides among black and brown neighborhoods.
A large, 62% majority of New Yorkers in the poll “supported police actively enforcing against quality of life offenses in their own neighborhood, and 34% disagreed,” reported the New York Daily News’ Erin Durkin. “The level of support was similar across racial groups — 61% of black voters, 59% of whites, and 68% of Hispanics said they want enforcement in their neighborhood.”
NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea told Fox News on Monday he often receives requests for additional policemen and women to patrol neighborhoods.
“The usual thing I get when I go to a community meeting is ‘a lot more cops,'” Shea said. “Any calls to defund the police, I think is — Lord help us if that ever came to pass. We’re the bedrock, we’re the foundation, and we need to build on that.”
Shea added that he would support shifting some police funding internally toward youth programs like mentoring and internships.
“I think it’s crimefighting,” he said. “It’s just crimefighting in a better way.
_________
THE FACTS INSIDE OUR REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK/LINKS
*********
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
••••
••••
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--2020-06-09--Incredible Disappearing Coronavirus – The Narrative Has Failed

Suddenly there is no talk about coronavirus .
Reputable doctors in Italy , the UK , and elsewhere are claiming the virus hardly exists any longer .
Just over a week ago much of America faced jail if they dared break the “ social distancing ” rules put in place by tyrannical governors and other public officials .
Now tens of thousands gather to protest a police killing with impunity .
And the spikes they warned about in areas where restrictions were eased are not happening .
So what is happening ?
Also , what to make of the Trump/Mattis/Esper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the US ?
Watch today ’ s Liberty Report : ( TLB ) published this video report with permission from Dr. Paul of The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity When Profits and Politics Drive Science : Rushing a Vaccine to Market for a Vanishing Virus Vaccination : how the West invades the World [ Jon Rappoport ] The UK Coronavirus Act 2020 is Null and Void !
Prof. Karl Friston : ‘ 80 % Not Even Susceptible to COVID-19 ’ The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 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 .

Incredible Disappearing Coronavirus – The Narrative Has Failed
The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity
Suddenly there is no talk about coronavirus.
Reputable doctors in Italy, the UK, and elsewhere are claiming the virus hardly exists any longer.
Just over a week ago much of America faced jail if they dared break the “social distancing” rules put in place by tyrannical governors and other public officials. Now tens of thousands gather to protest a police killing with impunity. And the spikes they warned about in areas where restrictions were eased are not happening. So what is happening?
Also, what to make of the Trump/Mattis/Esper spat over US troops deployed against rioters in the US? Watch today’s Liberty Report:
*********
(TLB) published this video report with permission from Dr. Paul of The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity
Related articles from The Liberty Beacon:
••••
••••
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.