21stcenturywire--2020-12-11--How a COVID-19 Vaccine Can Destroy Your Immune System

NOTE : It ’ s important to know that if healthcare professionals are respecting a patient ’ s right of informed consent , then there is a substantial body of critical medical and scientific literature and information which should be made available to anyone prior to the administration of any drug or pharmaceutical product , especially if the product is a new or experimental technology .
Readers should be aware that during the current mobilization effort to fast-track various products meant to treat COVID-19 , they should still exercise their right of informed consent recognized under international law and seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ information pertaining to any possible long-term health risks associated these products .
According to a study that examined how informed consent is given to COVID-19 vaccine trial participants , disclosure forms fail to inform volunteers that the vaccine might make them susceptible to more severe disease if they ’ re exposed to the virus .
The study,1 “ Informed Consent Disclosure to Vaccine Trial Subjects of Risk of COVID-19 Vaccine Worsening Clinical Disease , ” published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice , October 28 , 2020 , points out that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may sensitize vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.
” As noted by the authors of that International Journal of Clinical Practice paper , previous coronavirus vaccine efforts — for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus ( SARS-CoV ) , Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus ( MERS-CoV ) and respiratory syncytial virus ( RSV ) — have revealed a serious concern : The vaccines have a tendency to trigger antibody-dependent enhancement .
What exactly does that mean ?
In a nutshell , it means that rather than enhance your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually enhances the virus ’ ability to enter and infect your cells , resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.2 This is the exact opposite of what a vaccine is supposed to do , and a significant problem that has been pointed out from the very beginning of this push for a COVID-19 vaccine .
The 2003 review paper “ Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of Virus Infection and Disease ” explains it this way:3 In my May 2020 interview above with Robert Kennedy Jr , he summarized the history of coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , following three consecutive SARS outbreaks .
By 2012 , Chinese , American and European scientists were working on SARS vaccine development , and had about 30 promising candidates .
Of those , the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets , which are the closest analogue to human lung infections .
In the video below , which is a select outtake from my full interview , Kennedy explains what happened next .
While the ferrets displayed robust antibody response , which is the metric used for vaccine licensing , once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they all became severely ill and died .
The same thing happened when they tried to develop an RSV vaccine in the 1960s .
RSV is an upper respiratory illness that is very similar to that caused by coronaviruses .
At that time , they had decided to skip animal trials and go directly to human trials .
Coronaviruses produce not just one but two different types of antibodies : • Neutralizing antibodies,4 also referred to as immunoglobulin G ( IgG ) antibodies , that fight the infection • Binding antibodies5 ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can not prevent viral infection Instead of preventing viral infection , binding antibodies trigger an abnormal immune response known as “ paradoxical immune enhancement.
” Another way to look at this is your immune system is actually backfiring and not functioning to protect you but actually making you worse .
Many of the COVID-19 vaccines currently in the running are using mRNA to instruct your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein ( S protein ) .
The spike protein , which is what attaches to the ACE2 receptor of the cell , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process viruses use to gain entry into cells .
The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein , your immune system will commence production of antibodies , without making you sick in the process .
The key question is , which of the two types of antibodies are being produced through this process ?
In an April 2020 Twitter thread,6 The Immunologist noted : “ While developing vaccines … and considering immunity passports , we must first understand the complex role of antibodies in SARS , MERS and COVID-19.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ studies that have raised concerns about ADE .
The first is a 2017 study7 in PLOS Pathogens , “ Enhanced Inflammation in New Zealand White Rabbits When MERS-CoV Reinfection Occurs in the Absence of Neutralizing Antibody , ” which investigated whether getting infected with MERS would protect the subject against reinfection , as is typically the case with many viral illnesses .
( Meaning , once you recover from a viral infection , say measles , you ’ re immune and won ’ t contract the illness again . )
To determine how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ researchers infected white rabbits with the virus .
The rabbits got sick and developed antibodies , but those antibodies were not the neutralizing kind , meaning the kind of antibodies that block infection .
As a result , they were not protected from reinfection , and when exposed to MERS for a second time , they became ill again , and more severely so .
“ In fact , reinfection resulted in enhanced pulmonary inflammation , without an associated increase in viral RNA titers , ” the authors noted .
Interestingly , neutralizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , preventing the animals from being infected a third time .
According to the authors : In other words , if the vaccine does not result in a robust response in neutralizing antibodies , you might be at risk for more severe lung disease if you ’ re infected with the virus .
And here ’ s an important point : COVID-19 vaccines are NOT designed to prevent infection .
As detailed in “ How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged , ” a “ successful ” vaccine merely needs to reduce the severity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not even looking at reducing infection , hospitalization or death rates .
The Dengue virus is also known to cause ADE .
As explained in a Swiss Medical Weekly paper published in April 2020:8 The paper goes on to detail results from follow-up investigations into the Dengue vaccine , which revealed the hospitalization rate for Dengue among vaccinated children under the age of 9 was greater than the rate among controls .
The explanation for this appears to be that the vaccine mimicked a primary infection , and as that immunity waned , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they encountered the virus a second time .
The author explains : This could end up being important for the COVID-19 vaccine .
Hypothetically speaking , if SARS-CoV-2 works like Dengue , which is also caused by an RNA virus , then anyone who has not tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 might actually be at increased risk for severe COVID-19 after vaccination , and only those who have already recovered from a bout of COVID-19 would be protected against severe illness by the vaccine .
To be clear , we do not know whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but these are important areas of inquiry and the current vaccine trials will simply not be able to answer this important question .
The Swiss Medical Weekly paper9 also reviews the evidence of ADE in coronavirus infections , citing research showing inoculating cats against the feline infectious peritonitis virus ( FIPV ) — a feline coronavirus — increases the severity of the disease when challenged with the same FIPV serotype as that in the vaccine .
The paper also cites research showing “ Antibodies elicited by a SARS-CoV vaccine enhanced infection of B @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the hamster model.
” Another paper,10 “ Antibody-Dependent SARS Coronavirus Infection Is Mediated by Antibodies Against Spike Proteins , ” published in 2014 , found that : A study11 that ties into this was published in the journal JCI Insight in 2019 .
Here , macaques vaccinated with a modified vaccinia Ankara ( MVA ) virus encoding full-length SARS-CoV spike protein ended up with more severe lung pathology when the animals were exposed to the SARS virus .
And , when they transferred anti-spike IgG antibodies into unvaccinated macaques , they developed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ skewing the inflammation-resolving response.
” An interesting 2012 paper12 with the telling title , “ Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS Virus , ” demonstrates what many researchers now fear , namely that COVID-19 vaccines may end up making people more prone to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection .
The paper reviews experiments showing immunization with a variety of SARS vaccines resulted in pulmonary immunopathology once challenged with the SARS virus .
As noted by the authors:13 Inactivated whole virus vaccines whether inactivated with formalin or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without alum adjuvant exhibited a Th2-type immunopathologic in lungs after challenge .
As indicated , two reports attributed the immunopathology to presence of the N protein in the vaccine ; however , we found the same immunopathologic reaction in animals given S protein vaccine only , although it appeared to be of lesser intensity .
Thus , a Th2-type immunopathologic reaction on challenge of vaccinated animals has occurred in three of four animal models ( not in hamsters ) including two different inbred mouse strains with four different types of SARS-CoV vaccines with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccine preparation that does not induce this result in mice , ferrets and nonhuman primates has not been reported .
This combined experience provides concern for trials with SARS-CoV vaccines in humans .
Clinical trials with SARS coronavirus vaccines have been conducted and reported to induce antibody responses and to be ‘ safe.
’ However , the evidence for safety is for a short period of observation .
The concern arising from the present report is for an immunopathologic reaction occurring among vaccinated individuals on exposure to infectious SARS-CoV , the basis for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety concerns relate to effectiveness and safety against antigenic variants of SARS-CoV and for safety of vaccinated persons exposed to other coronaviruses , particularly those of the type 2 group.
” The Elderly Are Most Vulnerable to ADE On top of all of these concerns , there ’ s evidence showing the elderly — who are most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 — are also the most vulnerable to ADE .
Preliminary research findings14 posted on the preprint server medRxiv at the end of March 2020 reported that middle-aged and elderly COVID-19 patients have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which , again , increase infectivity — than younger patients .
Immune Enhancement Is a Serious Concern Another paper worth mentioning is the May 2020 mini review15 “ Impact of Immune Enhancement on COVID-19 Polyclonal Hyperimmune Globulin Therapy and Vaccine Development.
” As in many other papers , the authors point out that:16 Currently , there are multiple SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV vaccine candidates in pre-clinical or early phase clinical trials .
Animal studies on these CoVs have shown that the spike ( S ) protein-based vaccines ( specifically the receptor binding domain , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against wild-type CoV challenge .
Vaccines that target other parts of the virus , such as the nucleocapsid , without the S protein , have shown no protection against CoV infection and increased lung pathology .
However , immunization with some S protein based CoV vaccines have also displayed signs of enhanced lung pathology following challenge .
Hence , besides the choice of antigen target , vaccine efficacy and risk of immunopathology may be dependent on other ancillary factors , including adjuvant formulation , age at vaccination … and route of immunization.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Your Mind In all likelihood , regardless of how effective ( or ineffective ) the COVID-19 vaccines end up being , they ’ ll be released to the public in relatively short order .
Most predict one or more vaccines will be ready sometime in 2021 .
Ironically , the data17,18,19 we now have no longer support a mass vaccination mandate , considering the lethality of COVID-19 is lower than the flu for those under the age of 60.20 If you ’ re under the age of 40 , your risk of dying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaning you have a 99.99 % chance of surviving the infection .
And you could improve that to 99.999 % if you ’ re metabolically flexible and vitamin D replete .
So , really , what are we protecting against with a COVID-19 vaccine ?
As mentioned , the vaccines aren ’ t even designed to prevent infection , only reduce the severity of symptoms .
Meanwhile , they could potentially make you sicker once you ’ re exposed to the virus .
That seems like a lot of risk for a truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where we started , participants in current COVID-19 vaccine trials are not being told of this risk — that by getting the vaccine they may end up with more severe COVID-19 once they ’ re infected with the virus .
Lethal Th2 Immunopathology Is Another Potential Risk In closing , consider what this PNAS news feature states about the risk of vaccine-induced immune enhancement and dysfunction , particularly for the elderly , the very people who would need the protection a vaccine might offer the most:21 • 18 YouTube , SARS-CoV-2 and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , MD , aprox 8 minutes in ( Lie No .
1 : Death Risk ) This article was originally published at Mercola.com SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
NOTE: It’s important to know that if healthcare professionals are respecting a patient’s right of informed consent, then there is a substantial body of critical medical and scientific literature and information which should be made available to anyone prior to the administration of any drug or pharmaceutical product, especially if the product is a new or experimental technology. Readers should be aware that during the current mobilization effort to fast-track various products meant to treat COVID-19, they should still exercise their right of informed consent recognized under international law and seek both ethical medical counsel and any relevant information pertaining to any possible long-term health risks associated these products.
By Dr. Joseph Mercola
According to a study that examined how informed consent is given to COVID-19 vaccine trial participants, disclosure forms fail to inform volunteers that the vaccine might make them susceptible to more severe disease if they’re exposed to the virus.
The study,1 “Informed Consent Disclosure to Vaccine Trial Subjects of Risk of COVID-19 Vaccine Worsening Clinical Disease,” published in the International Journal of Clinical Practice, October 28, 2020, points out that “COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralizing antibodies may sensitize vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated.”
“Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern: that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralizing antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE),” the paper states.
“This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.
The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.”
What Is Antibody-Dependent Enhancement?
As noted by the authors of that International Journal of Clinical Practice paper, previous coronavirus vaccine efforts — for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) — have revealed a serious concern: The vaccines have a tendency to trigger antibody-dependent enhancement.
What exactly does that mean? In a nutshell, it means that rather than enhance your immunity against the infection, the vaccine actually enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.2
This is the exact opposite of what a vaccine is supposed to do, and a significant problem that has been pointed out from the very beginning of this push for a COVID-19 vaccine. The 2003 review paper “Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of Virus Infection and Disease” explains it this way:3
“In general, virus-specific antibodies are considered antiviral and play an important role in the control of virus infections in a number of ways. However, in some instances, the presence of specific antibodies can be beneficial to the virus. This activity is known as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of virus infection.
The ADE of virus infection is a phenomenon in which virus-specific antibodies enhance the entry of virus, and in some cases the replication of virus, into monocytes/macrophages and granulocytic cells through interaction with Fc and/or complement receptors.
This phenomenon has been reported in vitro and in vivo for viruses representing numerous families and genera of public health and veterinary importance. These viruses share some common features such as preferential replication in macrophages, ability to establish persistence, and antigenic diversity. For some viruses, ADE of infection has become a great concern to disease control by vaccination.”
Previous Coronavirus Vaccine Efforts Have All Failed
In my May 2020 interview above with Robert Kennedy Jr, he summarized the history of coronavirus vaccine development, which began in 2002, following three consecutive SARS outbreaks. By 2012, Chinese, American and European scientists were working on SARS vaccine development, and had about 30 promising candidates.
Of those, the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets, which are the closest analogue to human lung infections. In the video below, which is a select outtake from my full interview, Kennedy explains what happened next. While the ferrets displayed robust antibody response, which is the metric used for vaccine licensing, once they were challenged with the wild virus, they all became severely ill and died.
The same thing happened when they tried to develop an RSV vaccine in the 1960s. RSV is an upper respiratory illness that is very similar to that caused by coronaviruses. At that time, they had decided to skip animal trials and go directly to human trials.
“They tested it on I think about 35 children, and the same thing happened,” Kennedy said. “The children developed a champion antibody response — robust, durable. It looked perfect [but when] the children were exposed to the wild virus, they all became sick. Two of them died. They abandoned the vaccine. It was a big embarrassment to FDA and NIH.”
Neutralizing Versus Binding Antibodies
Coronaviruses produce not just one but two different types of antibodies:
Neutralizing antibodies, 4 also referred to as immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, that fight the infection
also referred to as immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, that fight the infection Binding antibodies5 (also known as non-neutralizing antibodies) that cannot prevent viral infection
Instead of preventing viral infection, binding antibodies trigger an abnormal immune response known as “paradoxical immune enhancement.” Another way to look at this is your immune system is actually backfiring and not functioning to protect you but actually making you worse.
Many of the COVID-19 vaccines currently in the running are using mRNA to instruct your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S protein). The spike protein, which is what attaches to the ACE2 receptor of the cell, is the first stage of the two-stage process viruses use to gain entry into cells.
The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will commence production of antibodies, without making you sick in the process. The key question is, which of the two types of antibodies are being produced through this process?
Without Neutralizing Antibodies, Expect More Severe Illness
In an April 2020 Twitter thread,6 The Immunologist noted: “While developing vaccines … and considering immunity passports, we must first understand the complex role of antibodies in SARS, MERS and COVID-19.” He goes on to list several coronavirus vaccine studies that have raised concerns about ADE.
The first is a 2017 study7 in PLOS Pathogens, “Enhanced Inflammation in New Zealand White Rabbits When MERS-CoV Reinfection Occurs in the Absence of Neutralizing Antibody,” which investigated whether getting infected with MERS would protect the subject against reinfection, as is typically the case with many viral illnesses. (Meaning, once you recover from a viral infection, say measles, you’re immune and won’t contract the illness again.)
To determine how MERS affects the immune system, the researchers infected white rabbits with the virus. The rabbits got sick and developed antibodies, but those antibodies were not the neutralizing kind, meaning the kind of antibodies that block infection. As a result, they were not protected from reinfection, and when exposed to MERS for a second time, they became ill again, and more severely so.
“In fact, reinfection resulted in enhanced pulmonary inflammation, without an associated increase in viral RNA titers,” the authors noted. Interestingly, neutralizing antibodies were elicited during this second infection, preventing the animals from being infected a third time. According to the authors:
“Our data from the rabbit model suggests that people exposed to MERS-CoV who fail to develop a neutralizing antibody response, or persons whose neutralizing antibody titers have waned, may be at risk for severe lung disease on re-exposure to MERS-CoV.”
In other words, if the vaccine does not result in a robust response in neutralizing antibodies, you might be at risk for more severe lung disease if you’re infected with the virus.
And here’s an important point: COVID-19 vaccines are NOT designed to prevent infection. As detailed in “How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged,” a “successful” vaccine merely needs to reduce the severity of the symptoms. They’re not even looking at reducing infection, hospitalization or death rates.
ADE in Dengue Infections
The Dengue virus is also known to cause ADE. As explained in a Swiss Medical Weekly paper published in April 2020:8
“The pathogenesis of COVID-19 is currently believed to proceed via both directly cytotoxic and immune-mediated mechanisms. An additional mechanism facilitating viral cell entry and subsequent damage may involve the so-called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).
ADE is a very well-known cascade of events whereby viruses may infect susceptible cells via interaction between virions complexed with antibodies or complement components and, respectively, Fc or complement receptors, leading to the amplification of their replication.
This phenomenon is of enormous relevance not only for the understanding of viral pathogenesis, but also for developing antiviral strategies, notably vaccines …
There are four serotypes of Dengue virus, all eliciting protective immunity. However, although homotypic protection is long-lasting, cross-neutralizing antibodies against different serotypes are short-lived and may last only up to 2 years.
In Dengue fever, reinfection with a different serotype runs a more severe course when the protective antibody titer wanes. Here, non-neutralizing antibodies take over neutralizing ones, bind to Dengue virions, and these complexes mediate the infection of phagocytic cells via interaction with the Fc receptor, in a typical ADE.
In other words, heterotypic antibodies at subneutralizing titres account for ADE in persons infected with a serotype of Dengue virus that is different from the first infection.
Cross-reactive neutralizing antibodies are associated with decreased odds of symptomatic secondary infection, and the higher the titer of such antibodies following the primary infection, the longer the delay to symptomatic secondary infection …”
The paper goes on to detail results from follow-up investigations into the Dengue vaccine, which revealed the hospitalization rate for Dengue among vaccinated children under the age of 9 was greater than the rate among controls. The explanation for this appears to be that the vaccine mimicked a primary infection, and as that immunity waned, the children became susceptible to ADE when they encountered the virus a second time. The author explains:
“A post hoc analysis of efficacy trials, using an anti-nonstructural protein 1 immunoglobulin G (IgG) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to distinguish antibodies elicited by wild-type infection from those following vaccination, showed that the vaccine was able to protect against severe Dengue [in] those who had been exposed to the natural infection before vaccination, and that the risk of severe clinical outcome was increased among seronegative persons.
Based on this, a Strategic Advisor Group of Experts convened by World Health Organization (WHO) concluded that only Dengue seropositive persons should be vaccinated whenever Dengue control programs are planned that include vaccination.”
ADE in Coronavirus Infections
This could end up being important for the COVID-19 vaccine. Hypothetically speaking, if SARS-CoV-2 works like Dengue, which is also caused by an RNA virus, then anyone who has not tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 might actually be at increased risk for severe COVID-19 after vaccination, and only those who have already recovered from a bout of COVID-19 would be protected against severe illness by the vaccine.
To be clear, we do not know whether that is the case or not, but these are important areas of inquiry and the current vaccine trials will simply not be able to answer this important question.
The Swiss Medical Weekly paper9 also reviews the evidence of ADE in coronavirus infections, citing research showing inoculating cats against the feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) — a feline coronavirus — increases the severity of the disease when challenged with the same FIPV serotype as that in the vaccine.
Experiments have shown immunization with a variety of SARS vaccines resulted in pulmonary immunopathology once challenged with the SARS virus.
The paper also cites research showing “Antibodies elicited by a SARS-CoV vaccine enhanced infection of B cell lines in spite of protective responses in the hamster model.” Another paper,10 “Antibody-Dependent SARS Coronavirus Infection Is Mediated by Antibodies Against Spike Proteins,” published in 2014, found that:
“… higher concentrations of anti-sera against SARS-CoV neutralized SARS-CoV infection, while highly diluted anti-sera significantly increased SARS-CoV infection and induced higher levels of apoptosis. Results from infectivity assays indicate that SARS-CoV ADE is primarily mediated by diluted antibodies against envelope spike proteins rather than nucleocapsid proteins. We also generated monoclonal antibodies against SARS-CoV spike proteins and observed that most of them promoted SARS-CoV infection. Combined, our results suggest that antibodies against SARS-CoV spike proteins may trigger ADE effects. The data raise new questions regarding a potential SARS-CoV vaccine …”
A study11 that ties into this was published in the journal JCI Insight in 2019. Here, macaques vaccinated with a modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) virus encoding full-length SARS-CoV spike protein ended up with more severe lung pathology when the animals were exposed to the SARS virus. And, when they transferred anti-spike IgG antibodies into unvaccinated macaques, they developed acute diffuse alveolar damage, likely by “skewing the inflammation-resolving response.”
SARS Vaccine Worsens Infection After Challenge With SARS-CoV
An interesting 2012 paper12 with the telling title, “Immunization with SARS Coronavirus Vaccines Leads to Pulmonary Immunopathology on Challenge with the SARS Virus,” demonstrates what many researchers now fear, namely that COVID-19 vaccines may end up making people more prone to severe SARS-CoV-2 infection.
The paper reviews experiments showing immunization with a variety of SARS vaccines resulted in pulmonary immunopathology once challenged with the SARS virus. As noted by the authors:13
Inactivated whole virus vaccines whether inactivated with formalin or beta propiolactone and whether given with our without alum adjuvant exhibited a Th2-type immunopathologic in lungs after challenge. As indicated, two reports attributed the immunopathology to presence of the N protein in the vaccine; however, we found the same immunopathologic reaction in animals given S protein vaccine only, although it appeared to be of lesser intensity. Thus, a Th2-type immunopathologic reaction on challenge of vaccinated animals has occurred in three of four animal models (not in hamsters) including two different inbred mouse strains with four different types of SARS-CoV vaccines with and without alum adjuvant. An inactivated vaccine preparation that does not induce this result in mice, ferrets and nonhuman primates has not been reported. This combined experience provides concern for trials with SARS-CoV vaccines in humans. Clinical trials with SARS coronavirus vaccines have been conducted and reported to induce antibody responses and to be ‘safe.’ However, the evidence for safety is for a short period of observation. The concern arising from the present report is for an immunopathologic reaction occurring among vaccinated individuals on exposure to infectious SARS-CoV, the basis for developing a vaccine for SARS. Additional safety concerns relate to effectiveness and safety against antigenic variants of SARS-CoV and for safety of vaccinated persons exposed to other coronaviruses, particularly those of the type 2 group.”
The Elderly Are Most Vulnerable to ADE
On top of all of these concerns, there’s evidence showing the elderly — who are most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 — are also the most vulnerable to ADE. Preliminary research findings14 posted on the preprint server medRxiv at the end of March 2020 reported that middle-aged and elderly COVID-19 patients have far higher levels of anti-spike antibodies — which, again, increase infectivity — than younger patients.
Immune Enhancement Is a Serious Concern
Another paper worth mentioning is the May 2020 mini review15 “Impact of Immune Enhancement on COVID-19 Polyclonal Hyperimmune Globulin Therapy and Vaccine Development.” As in many other papers, the authors point out that:16
“While development of both hyperimmune globulin therapy and vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 are promising, they both pose a common theoretical safety concern. Experimental studies have suggested the possibility of immune-enhanced disease of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infections, which may thus similarly occur with SARS-CoV-2 infection …
Immune enhancement of disease can theoretically occur in two ways. Firstly, non-neutralizing or sub-neutralizing levels of antibodies can enhance SARS-CoV-2 infection into target cells.
Secondly, antibodies could enhance inflammation and hence severity of pulmonary disease. An overview of these antibody dependent infection and immunopathology enhancement effects are summarized in Fig. 1 …
Currently, there are multiple SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV vaccine candidates in pre-clinical or early phase clinical trials. Animal studies on these CoVs have shown that the spike (S) protein-based vaccines (specifically the receptor binding domain, RBD) are highly immunogenic and protective against wild-type CoV challenge.
Vaccines that target other parts of the virus, such as the nucleocapsid, without the S protein, have shown no protection against CoV infection and increased lung pathology. However, immunization with some S protein based CoV vaccines have also displayed signs of enhanced lung pathology following challenge.
Hence, besides the choice of antigen target, vaccine efficacy and risk of immunopathology may be dependent on other ancillary factors, including adjuvant formulation, age at vaccination … and route of immunization.”
(Image Source: Mercola.com via The Lancet)
Do a Risk-Benefit Analysis Before Making Up Your Mind
In all likelihood, regardless of how effective (or ineffective) the COVID-19 vaccines end up being, they’ll be released to the public in relatively short order. Most predict one or more vaccines will be ready sometime in 2021.
Ironically, the data17,18,19 we now have no longer support a mass vaccination mandate, considering the lethality of COVID-19 is lower than the flu for those under the age of 60.20 If you’re under the age of 40, your risk of dying from COVID-19 is just 0.01%, meaning you have a 99.99% chance of surviving the infection. And you could improve that to 99.999% if you’re metabolically flexible and vitamin D replete.
So, really, what are we protecting against with a COVID-19 vaccine? As mentioned, the vaccines aren’t even designed to prevent infection, only reduce the severity of symptoms. Meanwhile, they could potentially make you sicker once you’re exposed to the virus. That seems like a lot of risk for a truly questionable benefit.
To circle back to where we started, participants in current COVID-19 vaccine trials are not being told of this risk — that by getting the vaccine they may end up with more severe COVID-19 once they’re infected with the virus.
Lethal Th2 Immunopathology Is Another Potential Risk
In closing, consider what this PNAS news feature states about the risk of vaccine-induced immune enhancement and dysfunction, particularly for the elderly, the very people who would need the protection a vaccine might offer the most:21
“Since the 1960s, tests of vaccine candidates for diseases such as dengue, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) have shown a paradoxical phenomenon:
Some animals or people who received the vaccine and were later exposed to the virus developed more severe disease than those who had not been vaccinated. The vaccine-primed immune system, in certain cases, seemed to launch a shoddy response to the natural infection …
This immune backfiring, or so-called immune enhancement, may manifest in different ways such as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a process in which a virus leverages antibodies to aid infection; or cell-based enhancement, a category that includes allergic inflammation caused by Th2 immunopathology. In some cases, the enhancement processes might overlap …
Some researchers argue that although ADE has received the most attention to date, it is less likely than the other immune enhancement pathways to cause a dysregulated response to COVID-19, given what is known about the epidemiology of the virus and its behavior in the human body.
‘There is the potential for ADE, but the bigger problem is probably Th2 immunopathology,’ says Ralph Baric, an epidemiologist and expert in coronaviruses … at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
In previous studies of SARS, aged mice were found to have particularly high risks of life-threatening Th2 immunopathology … in which a faulty T cell response triggers allergic inflammation, and poorly functional antibodies that form immune complexes, activating the complement system and potentially damaging the airways.”
Sources and References
This article was originally published at Mercola.com
READ MORE VACCINE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire VACCINE Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-12--Dangerous Provocations Ahead for Iran

Dangerous Provocations Ahead for Iran

The recent assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh has been framed by an almost gleeful Western media as an attempt to ensure incoming US President Joe Biden does not return to the so-called “ Iran Nuclear Deal ” signed while he was Vice President in 2015 .
The story goes that Biden had hoped to return the US back to a prominent leadership role upon the global stage and that making peace with Iran was among his priorities .
There was a rush by the Western media to blame the Israeli government – who in turn appears to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these accusations .
The purpose of this is to make the US appear uninvolved in the recent escalation .
The race to shape public opinion and depict the US as helpless amid growing tensions between Israel and Iran is meant to make any possible US involvement in the near future look uninvited , unplanned , and reluctant on Washington ’ s part .
However , the goal of undermining and overthrowing the Iranian government has been an obsession for US foreign policy for decades – spanning multiple presidencies including that of Barack Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since as early as 2009 – specifically laid out plans to use these sort of tactics to move the US and its allies further toward conflict with Iran – and to do so in a way to minimize to make Iran – not the US – look like the aggressor .
Those holding their breath , waiting for President-elect Joe Biden to reverse the dangerous course US foreign policy is on forget who – for 8 years as Vice President – helped steer it in this direction in the first place .
While @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action ( JCPOA ) – or the Iran Nuclear Deal – at the same time the US instigated the still-ongoing proxy war against Syria – Iran ’ s closest regional ally – and a proxy war designed specifically to remove one of Iran ’ s key allies from the equation before more directly confronting Iran itself .
In many ways the US presence in Iraq and its role in the ongoing Saudi war with Yemen also serve this purpose .
The “ Iran Nuclear Deal ” Was Doomed Years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration ’ s seemingly enthusiastic desire for peace with Iran , the JCPOA was doomed before it was ever signed .
The peace overtures made by the US government at that time were purely for show – part of a plan devised years before the deal was even publicly discussed and long before it was ever signed .
The Brookings Institution – funded by the largest Western corporate interests on Earth – in a 2009 paper ( PDF ) titled , “ Which Path to Persia ?
Options for a New American Strategy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called for the US to disingenuously offer Iran an opportunity to escape from under US sanctions , but admitted that the offer would be deliberately sabotaged by the US and used as a pretext toward further escalation .
The document included statements like this ( emphasis added ) : …it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them .
Clearly , the more outrageous , the more deadly , and the more unprovoked the Iranian action , the better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Of course , it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game , which would then undermine it .
( One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly , or even semi-overtly , which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression . )
In a similar vein , any military operation against Iran will likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ require the proper international context—both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it .
The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support ( however , grudging or covert ) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down .
Under those circumstances , the United States ( or Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in sorrow , not anger , and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “ brought it on themselves ” by refusing a very good deal .
Creating the deal , sabotaging it , and using it as a pretext to pursue military aggression against Iran was always the plan – long before the JCPOA was ever signed .
The 2009 Brookings document – at over 200 pages long – also laid out the framework one can clearly see the US and its allies followed ever since it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran ’ s allies – Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon from the equation – before more direct action could be taken on Iran itself as well as the use of Israel to carry out aspects of the plan the US could not afford to do politically .
In one way or another – virtually everything laid out in the Brookings document has been implemented or at least attempted .
This most recent escalation was predictable .
Recently , articles like “ “ Biden ’ s America ” Will Continue Pressure on Iran , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never part of America ’ s foreign policy – whether it was “ Trump ’ s ” America or “ Biden ’ s ” America .
All that was required was a provocation and escalation that would appear to “ drag ” the US “ reluctantly ” away from allegedly desired “ peace ” the Western media had claimed Biden prioritized upon coming to office .
With the killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh , the dominoes have already begun to fall to that end .
Dangerous times lay ahead for Iran and for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being dragged into another disastrous war – proxy or otherwise – in the Middle East .
All that ’ s left to move this policy forward is a provocation from Iran – a provocation real or staged – the US can cite to involve itself more directly with a compliant Western media eagerly waiting to once again play its role in supporting that involvement .
*** Author Tony Cartalucci , Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher , writer and special contributor to 21st Century Wire .
See more of his work at Tony ’ s archive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work has been published on a number of popular news and analysis websites , and also on the online magazine “ New Eastern Outlook ” .
Also , you can follow him on VK here .
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE

By
Tony Cartalucci
21st Century Wire
The recent assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (pictured above) has been framed by an almost gleeful Western media as an attempt to ensure incoming US President Joe Biden does not return to the so-called “Iran Nuclear Deal” signed while he was Vice President in 2015.
The story goes that Biden had hoped to return the US back to a prominent leadership role upon the global stage and that making peace with Iran was among his priorities.
There was a rush by the Western media to blame the Israeli government – who in turn appears to be in no rush to discount or disprove these accusations. The purpose of this is to make the US appear uninvolved in the recent escalation. The race to shape public opinion and depict the US as helpless amid growing tensions between Israel and Iran is meant to make any possible US involvement in the near future look uninvited, unplanned, and reluctant on Washington’s part.
However, the goal of undermining and overthrowing the Iranian government has been an obsession for US foreign policy for decades – spanning multiple presidencies including that of Barack Obama’s.
US policymakers have – since as early as 2009 – specifically laid out plans to use these sort of tactics to move the US and its allies further toward conflict with Iran – and to do so in a way to minimize to make Iran – not the US – look like the aggressor.
Those holding their breath, waiting for President-elect Joe Biden to reverse the dangerous course US foreign policy is on forget who, for 8 years as Vice President, helped steer it in this direction in the first place.
While the Obama-Biden administration did indeed sign the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – or the Iran Nuclear Deal – at the same time the US instigated the still-ongoing proxy war against Syria – Iran’s closest regional ally – and a proxy war designed specifically to remove one of Iran’s key allies from the equation before more directly confronting Iran itself. In many ways the US presence in Iraq and its role in the ongoing Saudi war with Yemen also serve this purpose.
The “Iran Nuclear Deal” Was Doomed Years Before it was Signed
Despite the Obama-Biden administration’s seemingly enthusiastic desire for peace with Iran, the JCPOA was doomed before it was ever signed.
The peace overtures made by the US government at that time were purely for show – part of a plan devised years before the deal was even publicly discussed and long before it was ever signed.
The Brookings Institution – funded by the largest Western corporate interests on Earth – in a 2009 paper (PDF) titled, “Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran,” had not only called for the US to disingenuously offer Iran an opportunity to escape from under US sanctions, but admitted that the offer would be deliberately sabotaged by the US and used as a pretext toward further escalation.
The document included statements like this (emphasis added):
…it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.)
The Brookings document also proposed:
In a similar vein, any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context—both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.
Creating the deal, sabotaging it, and using it as a pretext to pursue military aggression against Iran was always the plan – long before the JCPOA was ever signed.
The 2009 Brookings document – at over 200 pages long – also laid out the framework one can clearly see the US and its allies followed ever since it was published – including attempts to remove Iran’s allies – Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon from the equation – before more direct action could be taken on Iran itself as well as the use of Israel to carry out aspects of the plan the US could not afford to do politically.
In one way or another – virtually everything laid out in the Brookings document has been implemented or at least attempted.
This most recent escalation was predictable. Recently, articles like ““Biden’s America” Will Continue Pressure on Iran,” noted that peace with Iran was never part of America’s foreign policy – whether it was “Trump’s” America or “Biden’s” America.
All that was required was a provocation and escalation that would appear to “drag” the US “reluctantly” away from allegedly desired “peace” the Western media had claimed Biden prioritized upon coming to office.
With the killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the dominoes have already begun to fall to that end. Dangerous times lay ahead for Iran and for the Western public who face the possibility of being dragged into another disastrous war – proxy or otherwise – in the Middle East. All that’s left to move this policy forward is a provocation from Iran – a provocation real or staged – the US can cite to involve itself more directly with a compliant Western media eagerly waiting to once again play its role in supporting that involvement.
***
Author Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher, writer and special contributor to 21st Century Wire. See more of his work at Tony’s archive. Over the last decade, his work has been published on a number of popular news and analysis websites, and also on the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. Also, you can follow him on VK here.
READ MORE IRAN NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Iran Files
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE


21stcenturywire--2020-12-12--Corporate Media’s Election Interference on Behalf of Biden Exposed

It ’ s now been proven beyond any doubt that Silicon Valley giants like Google , Twitter and Facebook were @ @ @ @ @ and censorship , whilst simultaneously virtue-signalling ahead of the election about ‘ fighting election disinformation.
@ @ @ @ @ was one of the most egregious examples of this – an active cover-up by a @ @ @ @ @ criminal matter ( with grave national security implications for the Democratic Party nominee ) during @ @ @ @ @ , but it ’ s not the only disturbing aspect of the open corruption which @ @ @ @ @ politics .
Ironically for the Democratic media machine , what the recent revelations of a @ @ @ @ @ ’ s own criminal activity and overseas ‘ pay-to-play ’ graft and money laundering shows @ @ @ @ @ t any pro-Trump partisan leaking out of the DOJ – which directly benefited the Biden @ @ @ @ @ .
Host Laura Ingrahm looks back at four-year battle waged by Democrats and Media to @ @ @ @ @ .
Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
It’s now been proven beyond any doubt that Silicon Valley giants like Google, Twitter and Facebook were blatantly involved in partisan electioneering and censorship, whilst simultaneously virtue-signalling ahead of the election about ‘fighting election disinformation.’ The Hunter Biden story was one of the most egregious examples of this – an active cover-up by a partisan mainstream media of a criminal matter (with grave national security implications for the Democratic Party nominee) during a heated presidential election cycle, but it’s not the only disturbing aspect of the open corruption which is now dominating US electoral politics.
Ironically for the Democratic media machine, what the recent revelations of a DOJ investigation into Hunter Biden’s own criminal activity and overseas ‘pay-to-play’ graft and money laundering shows is that there wasn’t any pro-Trump partisan leaking out of the DOJ – which directly benefited the Biden campaign during this election cycle.
Host Laura Ingrahm looks back at four-year battle waged by Democrats and Media to drive Trump out of office. Watch:
Visit 2020 Election Edge LIVE Blog Here
READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-12--New Virus Strains Means That ‘Containing COVID-19 is Impossible’

We now know that there are multiple strains of the ‘ novel ’ Coronavirus , which may in part explain varying epidemiological outcomes in regions .
The New York Times recently reported that , in the early months of the pandemic , a particular genetic strain of Covid-19 known as D14G was shown to be more prevalent in Italy than any Asian countries .
This may have helped explain why the disease spread so fast in that country , and elsewhere in Europe and America .
David Engelthaler has been investigating this idea .
His view is that there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this strain replicates faster than earlier strains , which “ likely ” came out of China and through to Europe .
“ It ’ s really quickly dominated all of the other strains that were seen in Europe at the time , it became the predominant strain that came into the Americas , spread throughout the United States and is now spread to pretty much every corner of the planet ” .
In his own state of Arizona , Engelthaler witnessed several of the early introductions to Arizona , coming from the Pacific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out quickly , with less effective transmission .
“ And then all of a sudden we started having explosive outbreaks .
When we go back and look genomically , the vast majority of those cases where we had very large outbreaks were being driven by the strains that were coming from the East Coast out of Europe , which all seemed to have this particular mutation in the spike protein.
” This doesn ’ t mean that the mutation is more deadly , simply that it may be more faster at transmitting , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our arms around the virus ” .
As such , Engelthaler argues that trying to eliminate the virus was not the right approach and instead we should have been trying to slow its spread : “ What we ’ re really seeing is a SARS-like infection that spreads like the common cold .
And with there ’ s no way that we could put in mitigation strategies to stop the common cold ” .
So were uniform national lockdowns the right solution with this newer mutation that potentially spread more effectively ?
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has just been devastating in a way that we haven ’ t even properly appropriately characterised yet ” .
He says that the “ vast majority ” of at-risk people “ could have been prevented if the focus was on protecting them , rather than on trying to prevent any spread of this virus , which is pretty much is un-containable ” .
Engelthaler is also one of the few epidemiologists to have publicly spoken out against school closures , for which there is “ no scientific evidence ” .
“ Privately , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ definitely been a lot of discussion from the very beginning that there ’ s no scientific evidence that shutting down schools actually helps to stop a pandemic… Epidemiologists knew that from the beginning , but that was not a popular opinion to take publicly and seems to have been kind of left to the side ” .
Ultimately , Engelthaler believes that human agency in the midst of a pandemic has been over-emphasised : “ I do think that one thing that does seem to get lost in all of this is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in this pandemic , and it ’ s the virus , it ’ s not just people ’ s policies and people ’ s behaviours ” .
That is especially true when there are “ different strains that are acting differently in different parts of the world , leading to different outcomes , at least in some part because of that virus , not just based off of public policies in response , no matter what you do ” .
UnHerd host Freddie Sayers speaks with David Engelthaler , co-director of the T-Gen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona .
Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
We now know that there are multiple strains of the ‘novel’ Coronavirus, which may in part explain varying epidemiological outcomes in regions.
UnHerd reports….
The New York Times recently reported that, in the early months of the pandemic, a particular genetic strain of Covid-19 known as D14G was shown to be more prevalent in Italy than any Asian countries. This may have helped explain why the disease spread so fast in that country, and elsewhere in Europe and America.
David Engelthaler has been investigating this idea. His view is that there is now “really compelling evidence” that this strain replicates faster than earlier strains, which “likely” came out of China and through to Europe.
“It’s really quickly dominated all of the other strains that were seen in Europe at the time, it became the predominant strain that came into the Americas, spread throughout the United States and is now spread to pretty much every corner of the planet”.
In his own state of Arizona, Engelthaler witnessed several of the early introductions to Arizona, coming from the Pacific coast straight from China, but fizzled out quickly, with less effective transmission.
“And then all of a sudden we started having explosive outbreaks. When we go back and look genomically, the vast majority of those cases where we had very large outbreaks were being driven by the strains that were coming from the East Coast out of Europe, which all seemed to have this particular mutation in the spike protein.”
This doesn’t mean that the mutation is more deadly, simply that it may be more faster at transmitting, and therefore it harder to “get our arms around the virus”.
As such, Engelthaler argues that trying to eliminate the virus was not the right approach and instead we should have been trying to slow its spread: “What we’re really seeing is a SARS-like infection that spreads like the common cold. And with there’s no way that we could put in mitigation strategies to stop the common cold”.
So were uniform national lockdowns the right solution with this newer mutation that potentially spread more effectively? “As an epidemiologist I think they have has just been devastating in a way that we haven’t even properly appropriately characterised yet”. He says that the “vast majority” of at-risk people “could have been prevented if the focus was on protecting them, rather than on trying to prevent any spread of this virus, which is pretty much is un-containable”. Engelthaler is also one of the few epidemiologists to have publicly spoken out against school closures, for which there is “no scientific evidence”.
“Privately, behind closed doors, there’s definitely been a lot of discussion from the very beginning that there’s no scientific evidence that shutting down schools actually helps to stop a pandemic… Epidemiologists knew that from the beginning, but that was not a popular opinion to take publicly and seems to have been kind of left to the side”.
Ultimately, Engelthaler believes that human agency in the midst of a pandemic has been over-emphasised: “I do think that one thing that does seem to get lost in all of this is that there’s a really important factor in this pandemic, and it’s the virus, it’s not just people’s policies and people’s behaviours”.
That is especially true when there are “different strains that are acting differently in different parts of the world, leading to different outcomes, at least in some part because of that virus, not just based off of public policies in response, no matter what you do”.
UnHerd host Freddie Sayers speaks with David Engelthaler, co-director of the T-Gen Research Institute and former state epidemiologist of Arizona. Watch:
READ MORE COVID-19 NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-13--Episode #353 – ‘Evolution or Revolution?’ with guest Freddie Ponton, Basil Valentine

Episode # 353 of SUNDAY WIRE SHOW resumes on this week , December 13 , 2020 with host Patrick Henningsen , broadcasting LIVE on the Alternate Current Radio Network ( ACR ) … 5pm-8pm UK Time | 12pm-3pm EST ( US ) | 9am-12pm PST ( US ) This week the SUNDAY WIRE broadcasts LIVE on ACR this week with host Patrick Henningsen , covering the top stories in the US , Europe and internationally .
As Government become more intoxicated with their newfound pandemic superpowers of social and economic control , rather than pause and pull back , many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abject policy failures – which means the plebs are becoming more restless .
2021 will likely see an explosion in protests , but will the numbers and the impact be enough to pushback the current trend towards totalitarianism ?
Do millennials really care about inalienable rights , republics and democracy , or are we heading into Brzezinski ’ s banal and dystopic ‘ Technetronic Revolution ‘ era ?
Is western society heading towards evolution , or revolution ?
In the first hour , we ’ ll be joined by investigative researcher Freddie Ponton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened to the Yellow Vest ( Gilet Jaunes ) protest movement in France and how this is transitioning into anti Lockdown/anti Authoritarian movements in Europe , and where the arch of dissent may be heading in Europe and beyond .
In the final hour , we ’ ll connect with our Roving Correspondent for Culture & Sport , Basil Valentine , for more intrigue and outlandish media bombshells this week .
All this and much , more .
Enjoy the show… PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR HERE AND ALSO BECOME A TEAM MEMBER @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ STRONG LANGUAGE AND MATURE THEMES*

By
Episode #353 of SUNDAY WIRE SHOW resumes on this week, December 13, 2020 with host Patrick Henningsen, broadcasting LIVE on the Alternate Current Radio Network (ACR)…
LISTEN LIVE ON THIS PAGE – START TIMES:
5pm-8pm UK Time | 12pm-3pm EST (US) | 9am-12pm PST (US)
This week the SUNDAY WIRE broadcasts LIVE on ACR this week with host Patrick Henningsen, covering the top stories in the US, Europe and internationally. As Government become more intoxicated with their newfound pandemic superpowers of social and economic control, rather than pause and pull back, many seem to be doubling down their own abject policy failures – which means the plebs are becoming more restless. 2021 will likely see an explosion in protests, but will the numbers and the impact be enough to pushback the current trend towards totalitarianism? Do millennials really care about inalienable rights, republics and democracy, or are we heading into Brzezinski’s banal and dystopic ‘Technetronic Revolution‘ era ? Is western society heading towards evolution, or revolution? In the first hour, we’ll be joined by investigative researcher Freddie Ponton from La French ConAction to discuss what happened to the Yellow Vest (Gilet Jaunes) protest movement in France and how this is transitioning into anti Lockdown/anti Authoritarian movements in Europe, and where the arch of dissent may be heading in Europe and beyond. In the final hour, we’ll connect with our Roving Correspondent for Culture & Sport, Basil Valentine, for more intrigue and outlandish media bombshells this week. All this and much, more. Enjoy the show…
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR
WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE
AND ALSO BECOME A TEAM MEMBER @21WIRE.TV
*NOTE: THIS EPISODE MAY CONTAIN STRONG LANGUAGE AND MATURE THEMES*
Download the most recent Episode #353
Sunday Wire Radio Show Archives


21stcenturywire--2020-12-14--‘YOU CAN’T SHUT US DOWN’ – New York City Bar Owners Defy Lockdown Orders

STATEN ISLAND , NY – This week New York bar owners held a press conference to reaffirm their commitment to defy the city and state ’ s unlawful lockdown orders .
Danny Presti and Keith McAlarney , the co-owners of Mac ’ s Public House , recently gained national headlines by breaking COVID curfew , and for serving patrons indoors , and by lampooning the radical left and Antifa by declaring their bar to be an ‘ Autonomous Zone ’ .
Despite harassment from police , they have continued to defy New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo ’ s ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arrested twice in the last two weeks .
The struggling owners , along with their customers , were made fun of by the elite cast of Saturday Night Live ( SNL ) for daring to protest Cuomo ’ s draconian lockdown orders .
The swipe by SNL appears to have backfired though , as working class New Yorkers have voiced their dismay at the mainstream media ’ s attack on the city ’ s small businesses being devastated by lockdowns .
In their sidewalk presser event , Presti and McAlarney were joined by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawyer Lou Gelormino , who remarked , “ Maybe Saturday Night Live should be mocking the people that looted and rioted our great city of Manhattan and the rest of the great cities of this country.
” Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
STATEN ISLAND, NY – This week New York bar owners held a press conference to reaffirm their commitment to defy the city and state’s unlawful lockdown orders.
Danny Presti and Keith McAlarney, the co-owners of Mac’s Public House, recently gained national headlines by breaking COVID curfew, and for serving patrons indoors, and by lampooning the radical left and Antifa by declaring their bar to be an ‘Autonomous Zone’.
Despite harassment from police, they have continued to defy New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s ‘pandemic’ restrictions, and have been arrested twice in the last two weeks.
The struggling owners, along with their customers, were made fun of by the elite cast of Saturday Night Live (SNL) for daring to protest Cuomo’s draconian lockdown orders. The swipe by SNL appears to have backfired though, as working class New Yorkers have voiced their dismay at the mainstream media’s attack on the city’s small businesses being devastated by lockdowns.
In their sidewalk presser event, Presti and McAlarney were joined by community activists, and also by their lawyer Lou Gelormino, who remarked, “Maybe Saturday Night Live should be mocking the people that looted and rioted our great city of Manhattan and the rest of the great cities of this country.” Watch:
READ MORE COVID-19 NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID Files
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE


21stcenturywire--2020-12-14--Dr Kory Exposes Gov-Pharma Complex Suppressing Effective COVID Treatments

The following testimony is by Dr. Pierre Kory , M.D.
, Associate Professor of Medicine at St. Luke ’ s Aurora Medical Center , delivering a passionate testimony to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on “ Early Outpatient Treatment : An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution , Part II ” , chaired by Sen. Ron Johnson on Dec 8th .
Dr Kory is telling the government that the low cost drug Ivermectin , widely used as an anti-parasite medicine and is known to have strong anti-viral properties .
It is both safe and effective – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and not patented – which is exactly why this and other similar drugs are currently being suppressed by Democratic Party lawmakers , US regulators and corrupt pharmaceutical industry gatekeepers like Dr Anthony Fauci at the National Institute for Health ( NIH ) , as well as similarly corrupted officials at the FDA , the CDC and others .
Watch this stunning testimony by Dr Kory ’ s and key panel discussion afterward : Watch more : Dr. Pierre Kory talks after emotional Senate hearing on COVID-19 .
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING @ @

By
The following testimony is by Dr. Pierre Kory, M.D., Associate Professor of Medicine at St. Luke’s Aurora Medical Center, delivering a passionate testimony to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing on “Early Outpatient Treatment: An Essential Part of a COVID-19 Solution, Part II”, chaired by Sen. Ron Johnson on Dec 8th.
Dr Kory is telling the government that the low cost drug Ivermectin, widely used as an anti-parasite medicine and is known to have strong anti-viral properties. It is both safe and effective – and most importantly it’s inexpensive and not patented – which is exactly why this and other similar drugs are currently being suppressed by Democratic Party lawmakers, US regulators and corrupt pharmaceutical industry gatekeepers like Dr Anthony Fauci at the National Institute for Health (NIH), as well as similarly corrupted officials at the FDA, the CDC and others.
Watch this stunning testimony by Dr Kory’s and key panel discussion afterward:
Watch more: Dr. Pierre Kory talks after emotional Senate hearing on COVID-19.
READ MORE COVID NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID Files
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE


21stcenturywire--2020-12-14--YouTube Now Removing Videos That Question a Biden Victory

The censorship team at Google ’ s YouTube video service has recently announced they will begin removing content that questions Joe Biden as the “ President-Elect ” or that alleges election fraud .
The new censorship rules take effect on any video content posted on or after December 9th because , according to YouTube , enough states have certified their election results : YouTube is also adding their signature “ information panels ” feature to videos that contain election-related content .
This feature became de rigueur on the platform shortly after the 2016 election ’ s crazed ‘ Russia-gate ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media channels , and is now the default on virtually every piece of COVID-related video content posted .
The info panels link to Google ’ s “ official ” election resources , including The Associated Press and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency ’ s ( CISA ) “ Rumor Control ” page .
Here ’ s a screenshot of how the new info panel looks underneath videos that are allowed to remain on YouTube – this one is from a local Atlanta news station , 11Alive : It ’ s still unclear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election-related content that is either to be removed or allowed on YouTube .
One obvious clue is that the video service , and its owner , Google , will continue to favor only “ authoritative news sources ” and their channels as referenced in this latest announcement .
We hope you are enjoying our 2020 Election coverage… Now more than ever , independent voices are critical as media outlets like ours continue to get ‘ shadow banned ’ on social media and ‘ disappeared ’ in search engine results on Google .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Brave browser .
You can also help us by liking/sharing our content , donating or becoming member .
Thank you for your support !
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE

By
The censorship team at Google’s YouTube video service has recently announced they will begin removing content that questions Joe Biden as the “President-Elect” or that alleges election fraud.
The new censorship rules take effect on any video content posted on or after December 9th because, according to YouTube, enough states have certified their election results:
“We will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 US Presidential election.”
YouTube is also adding their signature “information panels” feature to videos that contain election-related content.
This feature became de rigueur on the platform shortly after the 2016 election’s crazed ‘Russia-gate’ conspiracy theory that was legitimized by mainstream media channels, and is now the default on virtually every piece of COVID-related video content posted.
The info panels link to Google’s “official” election resources, including The Associated Press and the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency’s (CISA) “Rumor Control” page.
Here’s a screenshot of how the new info panel looks underneath videos that are allowed to remain on YouTube – this one is from a local Atlanta news station, 11Alive:
It’s still unclear where the line will be drawn for election-related content that is either to be removed or allowed on YouTube.
One obvious clue is that the video service, and its owner, Google, will continue to favor only “authoritative news sources” and their channels as referenced in this latest announcement.
We hope you are enjoying our 2020 Election coverage… Now more than ever, independent voices are critical as media outlets like ours continue to get ‘shadow banned’ on social media and ‘disappeared’ in search engine results on Google. We highly recommend using tools like DuckDuckGo search and Brave browser. You can also help us by liking/sharing our content, donating or becoming member. Thank you for your support!
READ MORE CENSORSHIP NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Censorship Files
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE


21stcenturywire--2020-12-15--Cynical US Policy on Syria Revealed: Block the Russians and Iranians, Destroy the Economy, to Hell w

Cynical US Policy on Syria Revealed: Block the Russians and Iranians, Destroy the Economy, to Hell with the People

The Rambo of the State Department is leaving .
James Jeffrey , the outgoing Syria envoy , boasts about his achievements in a recent candid interview with Al-Monitor which with no sense of shame opens up to public gaze the the cynicism , callousness and sheer power-crazedness of US policy on Syria , conducted as though it were a video game or a game of Monopoly .
You can read the Al-Monitor piece here : Outgoing Syria envoy reflects on Turkey , the Kurds and what everyone got wrong .
US Special Representative for Syria Engagement James Jeffrey at Syria-Turkish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jeffrey makes no bones about it .
It ’ s not about ending the Syrian conflict , it ’ s about prolonging it : Basically , first and foremost is denial of the [ Assad regime ] getting military victory….And of course , we ’ ve ratcheted up the isolation and sanctions pressure on Assad , we ’ ve held the line on no reconstruction assistance , and the country ’ s desperate for it .
You see what ’ s happened to the Syrian pound , you see what ’ s happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s been a very effective strategy… .
The point is , this [ preserving the SDF ] is our plan B .
We have a plan A .
Plan A doesn ’ t answer ‘ how does this all end ?
’ Plan A ’ s whole purpose [ is ] to ensure that the Russians and Assad and the Iranians don ’ t have a happy answer to how this all ends , and maybe that will someday get them to accept Plan B .
Meanwhile , they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t see Syria as a victory .
So , we don ’ t care a jot if Syrian people are suffering greatly , that ’ s part of the plan .
We are happy to prolong the suffering indefinitely as long as the Russians , Iranians and Assad can ’ t claim victory .
Plan B , by the way , requires implementation on US terms of UN resolution 2254 , which would amount effectively to a suicide note for Assad as under those terms it would allow millions of Syrians outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fate of those still inside .
At no point in this lengthy interview does Jeffrey even mention the Syrian people .
The only Syrians ( condescendingly ) mentioned are the Kurdish militia SDF : The SDF , they ’ re clean kids .
I ’ ve gotten to know them and their leadership very , very well .
They really are phenomenal , by Middle Eastern standards .
They ’ re a highly disciplined Marxist offshoot of the PKK .
So , let ’ s get this straight : the US is supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syria to stop Assad getting the much needed oil for the Syrian people and is indifferent to the fact that Idlib is controlled by a bunch of Islamist fanatics ?
Jeffrey in fact does not say a single word about the character of the opposition to acknowledge their Islamist extremism , or about the likely consequences if Plan B were to succeed and deliver the keys of Damascus to Islamist radicals .
In this game – and a game is clearly how callous power-crazed Washington policy makers see it – only preventing victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emerges as relatively sensible , which is saying a lot .
The president was uncomfortable with our presence in Syria .
He was very uncomfortable with what he saw as endless wars .
… Trump kept asking , “ Why do we have troops there ?
” The reason that Trump pulled the troops out was I think because he was just tired of us having come up with all these explanations for why we ’ re in there .
We at the State Department never provided any troop numbers to the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We didn ’ t try to deceive him .
He kept on publicly saying numbers that were way below what the actual numbers were , so in talking to the media and talking to Congress , we had to be very careful and dodge around .
But the Syria mission is the gift that keeps on giving .
We and the SDF are still the dominant force in [ northeast ] Syria .
‘ Not our job ?
’ The deviousness of this is breathtaking .
The US State Department deliberately withheld @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get their way on keeping their counters on the Monopoly board which for them is Syria .
It ’ s no surprise that someone of Jeffrey ’ s calibre boasts about helping Israel to pulverise Syria : We then also had the Israeli air campaign .
The US only began supporting that when I came on board .
I went out there and we saw Prime Minister Netanyahu and others , and they thought that they were not being supported enough by the US military , and not by intelligence .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US government , and we won the battle .
The argument [ against supporting Israel ’ s campaign ] was , again , this obsession with the counterterrorism mission .
People didn ’ t want to screw with it , either by worrying about Turkey or diverting resources to allow the Israelis to muck around in Syria , as maybe that will lead to some blow-back to our forces .
It hasn ’ t .
All that matters is ‘ stabilizing the situation ’ to US advantage : So that was how we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nestled under the overall Iran policy .
The result has been relative success because we — with a lot of help from the Turks in particular — have managed to stabilize the situation .
The only change on the ground to the benefit of Assad has been southern Idlib in two and a half years of attacks .
They are highly unlikely to continue , given the strength of the Turkish army there and the magnitude of the defeat of the Syrian army by the Turks back in March .
It would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As long as the US puts stymieing its adversaries ahead of any genuine concern for the suffering and prospects of the Syrian people , including the millions of refugees condemned by this policy to indefinite exile , no end is in sight .
It ’ s worth bearing in mind that Jeffrey worked with Obama long before he worked with Trump .
Anybody who expects the Biden administration to follow a different path on Syria must be seriously deluded , unless by ‘ different ’ is meant an even more reckless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ stabilising ’ .
And there is no Trump there now to apply the brakes .
*** Author Peter Ford is the former British Ambassador to Syria ( 2003-2006 ) and Bahrain ( 1999-2002 ) .
This article originally appeared at Lobelog .
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE

By
Peter Ford
21st Century Wire
The Rambo of the State Department is leaving. James Jeffrey, the outgoing Syria envoy, boasts about his achievements in a recent candid interview with Al-Monitor which with no sense of shame opens up to public gaze the the cynicism, callousness and sheer power-crazedness of US policy on Syria, conducted as though it were a video game or a game of Monopoly.
You can read the Al-Monitor piece here: Outgoing Syria envoy reflects on Turkey, the Kurds and what everyone got wrong.
US Special Representative for Syria Engagement James Jeffrey at Syria-Turkish border (March 2020 Syriac Press)
Jeffrey makes no bones about it. It’s not about ending the Syrian conflict, it’s about prolonging it:
Basically, first and foremost is denial of the [Assad regime] getting military victory….And of course, we’ve ratcheted up the isolation and sanctions pressure on Assad, we’ve held the line on no reconstruction assistance, and the country’s desperate for it. You see what’s happened to the Syrian pound, you see what’s happened to the entire economy. So, it’s been a very effective strategy….
The point is, this [preserving the SDF] is our plan B. We have a plan A. Plan A doesn’t answer ‘how does this all end?’ Plan A’s whole purpose [is] to ensure that the Russians and Assad and the Iranians don’t have a happy answer to how this all ends, and maybe that will someday get them to accept Plan B. Meanwhile, they’re tied up in knots. They don’t see Syria as a victory.
So, we don’t care a jot if Syrian people are suffering greatly, that’s part of the plan. We are happy to prolong the suffering indefinitely as long as the Russians, Iranians and Assad can’t claim victory.
Plan B, by the way, requires implementation on US terms of UN resolution 2254, which would amount effectively to a suicide note for Assad as under those terms it would allow millions of Syrians outside Syria to vote and thus decide the fate of those still inside.
At no point in this lengthy interview does Jeffrey even mention the Syrian people. The only Syrians (condescendingly) mentioned are the Kurdish militia SDF:
The SDF, they’re clean kids. I’ve gotten to know them and their leadership very, very well. They really are phenomenal, by Middle Eastern standards. They’re a highly disciplined Marxist offshoot of the PKK.
So, let’s get this straight: the US is supporting a bunch of Marxists in North East Syria to stop Assad getting the much needed oil for the Syrian people and is indifferent to the fact that Idlib is controlled by a bunch of Islamist fanatics?
Jeffrey in fact does not say a single word about the character of the opposition to acknowledge their Islamist extremism, or about the likely consequences if Plan B were to succeed and deliver the keys of Damascus to Islamist radicals. In this game – and a game is clearly how callous power-crazed Washington policy makers see it – only preventing victory by the other side matters.
Trump emerges as relatively sensible, which is saying a lot.
The president was uncomfortable with our presence in Syria. He was very uncomfortable with what he saw as endless wars. … Trump kept asking, “Why do we have troops there?”
The reason that Trump pulled the troops out was I think because he was just tired of us having come up with all these explanations for why we’re in there.
We at the State Department never provided any troop numbers to the president. That’s not our job. We didn’t try to deceive him. He kept on publicly saying numbers that were way below what the actual numbers were, so in talking to the media and talking to Congress, we had to be very careful and dodge around. But the Syria mission is the gift that keeps on giving. We and the SDF are still the dominant force in [northeast] Syria.
‘Not our job?’ The deviousness of this is breathtaking. The US State Department deliberately withheld crucial information from the President in order to get their way on keeping their counters on the Monopoly board which for them is Syria.
It’s no surprise that someone of Jeffrey’s calibre boasts about helping Israel to pulverise Syria:
We then also had the Israeli air campaign. The US only began supporting that when I came on board. I went out there and we saw Prime Minister Netanyahu and others, and they thought that they were not being supported enough by the US military, and not by intelligence. And there was a big battle within the US government, and we won the battle.
The argument [against supporting Israel’s campaign] was, again, this obsession with the counterterrorism mission. People didn’t want to screw with it, either by worrying about Turkey or diverting resources to allow the Israelis to muck around in Syria, as maybe that will lead to some blow-back to our forces. It hasn’t.
All that matters is ‘stabilizing the situation’ to US advantage:
So that was how we put together an integrated Syria policy that nestled under the overall Iran policy. The result has been relative success because we — with a lot of help from the Turks in particular — have managed to stabilize the situation.
The only change on the ground to the benefit of Assad has been southern Idlib in two and a half years of attacks. They are highly unlikely to continue, given the strength of the Turkish army there and the magnitude of the defeat of the Syrian army by the Turks back in March.
It would be hard to disagree with that pessimistic analysis. As long as the US puts stymieing its adversaries ahead of any genuine concern for the suffering and prospects of the Syrian people, including the millions of refugees condemned by this policy to indefinite exile, no end is in sight.
It’s worth bearing in mind that Jeffrey worked with Obama long before he worked with Trump. Anybody who expects the Biden administration to follow a different path on Syria must be seriously deluded, unless by ‘different’ is meant an even more reckless, activist, interventionist policy that goes beyond ‘stabilising’.
And there is no Trump there now to apply the brakes.
***
Author Peter Ford is a global affairs analyst and the former British Ambassador to Syria (2003-2006) and Bahrain (1999-2002). This article originally appeared at Lobelog.
READ MORE SYRIA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Syria Files
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE